Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves

404media.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 507 posts

Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves

#461

Post by embedding-shape »

mikkupikku wrote: post #455
embedding-shape wrote: post #445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For instance, in America the police don't take bribes, you can't bribe your way out of a traffic ticket. The cops will laugh at your attempt and pile on more charges. Sure, they might not take as many bribes as South American police tends to take (as someone who traveled that continent in car without a driving license, I'd say 90% are accepting of bribes for minor crimes), but American police also accept bribes fro…

I don't see anything about cops in that link. What I do see is that public officials were 49% of those charged but 45% were high-level elected officials. So that's what, maybe 4% that might be cops? In Mexico, cops will pull people over just to collect chump change cash bribes. In America, you have people like Epstein bribing state attorney generals, but nobody even thinks to slip a cop a $100 bill with their drivers…

> but nobody even thinks to slip a cop a $100 bill with their drivers license. This sort of casual everyday roadside bribery does not exist in America.

Obviously incorrect for both Southern and middle states in America. But sure, go on believing the US cops are somehow immune to corruption, which is something I never thought someone would honestly believe, even on the internet.

Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves

#462

Post by snowwrestler »

dghlsakjg wrote: post #363
mothballed wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They'd have not forced license plates to be displayed at all times to begin with, as they are a search of your papers without probable cause your vehicle is unregistered. Private ships in those days (probably the closest equivalent of something big and dangerous that could do tons of damage quickly on the public right of way) did not have required hull numbers or anything like that. Of course that doesn't totally sol…

Ships then, and now, don’t really need numbers for identification. There are various unique numbers that they can and do use occasionally for specific purposes(IMO numbers and hull numbers). However, a ship’s name and home port were, and are, more than sufficient to identify a ship for legal purposes. You don’t need a registration number on a ship, and certainly wouldn’t have needed one then. The authorities absolute…

Thanks for this level of detail. History is complex, which is why I tend to be skeptical of bare “what would the founders have thought about this” complaints.

Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves

#463

Post by tracker1 »

monkaiju wrote: post #297
tracker1 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think more importantly people need to recognize that cops are people, flawed and fallible as is the flock system in general. It should never be the whole solution and be used as evidence alone.

This totally misses the OCs point, which is that this data shouldn't be gathered at all, regardless of the competency (or lack there of) of the cops

It wasn't my intent to argue otherwise... I was only trying to add to the conversation.

Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves

#464

Post by kjkjadksj »

gnabgib wrote: post #353
kjkjadksj wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wasn’t the first edition of the TSA scanner straight up showing pretty much nude photos of people? I seem to remember something like that. Now a days at least it just flags a region on a generic human model for more investigation. The funniest part though is you pay $80 every five years and just bypass it entirely. I guess they assume terrorists are too stupid to figure out TSA precheck is available.

All my pre-check friends have to go through the nude scanner. And gave up bio-metrics. It's a two tiered security line - theirs is faster, but you need money to get into it (or fly business class+, or a flight crew, or know someone in the airport, or win the entrance-line direction lottery).

Most of the time they just send you through a standard metal detector. The state already has my prints from the dmv.

Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves

#465

Post by kjkjadksj »

mothballed wrote: post #354
kjkjadksj wrote: post #333

Flock cameras would be so easy to disable by motivated people. Dress in nondescript clothing, mask, sunglasses, and just spraypaint over the lenses. This is completely asymmetric warfare because it is trivial how long it would take for you to do this. You could hit dozens of cameras across an area overnight. Meanwhile, flock or the city, whoever maintains this stuff, needs to identify the vandalized cameras, flag the…

The initial disabling might be asymmetric but when/if you're caught you go to jail for years for something that cost the state maybe an hour tops to fix. Therefore if only say one of a thousand gets caught, it still costs the people doing it more than the state on average (unless their life/time is worth basically nothing for years on end).

They are making literal zero progress catching copper theft so I doubt flock would be any better. Yeah it takes them hours to fix but they still need to send out a technician and pay for a technician. Maybe you can do this well out of the pov of the camera with a paintball gun.

Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves

#467

Post by jrochkind1 »

> I think the one that affected me most was as playground. You could see unattended kids, and that’s something I want people to know about so they can understand how dangerous this is

So... you could also just walk or drive by the playground to see "unattended kids"?

Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves

#468

Post by mikkupikku »

embedding-shape wrote: post #461
mikkupikku wrote: post #455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see anything about cops in that link. What I do see is that public officials were 49% of those charged but 45% were high-level elected officials. So that's what, maybe 4% that might be cops? In Mexico, cops will pull people over just to collect chump change cash bribes. In America, you have people like Epstein bribing state attorney generals, but nobody even thinks to slip a cop a $100 bill with their drivers…

> but nobody even thinks to slip a cop a $100 bill with their drivers license. This sort of casual everyday roadside bribery does not exist in America. Obviously incorrect for both Southern and middle states in America. But sure, go on believing the US cops are somehow immune to corruption, which is something I never thought someone would honestly believe, even on the internet.

If you ever decide to visit America and learn what it's like firsthand, I encourage you to try this. Just make sure you know a good orthodontist first, and probably a good therapist too, because you're going to get thrown to the ground, handcuffed and sent to jail. There is no world in which trying to bribe your way out of an American traffic ticket makes more sense than just taking and paying the ticket. Even trying this is genuinely one of the stupidest things you could ever do.

Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves

#469

Post by chasd00 »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #466

Part of me says if there's going to be universal surveillance, it might as well be universally accessible to view, not just accessible to the state and the wealthy.

I agree, if we’re going have universal surveillance then the data must be universally accessible.

Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves

#470

Post by tonymet »

therobots927 wrote: post #167
tonymet wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do people avoid saying President Trump like he’s Voldemort?

Because he attained his current position by ragebaiting everyone. He’s just a puppet of the people who are really in charge (intelligence agencies and billionaires)

I appreciate the explanation.
Post reply on HN