Live data from Hacker News

US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

cnet.com

61–70 of 468 posts

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crime's been descending from the COVID blip for a while, everywhere, Flock or otherwise. My city saw zero murders in Q1; 2021 saw ~15 by now. In other words: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSVqLHghLpw

it's clearly not a covid effect https://www.sfchronicle.com/projects/sf-car-breakins/

The spike in your link's chart clearly starts in early 2020.

And "While our data extends only to 2018" is... important, yeah?

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's clearly not a covid effect https://www.sfchronicle.com/projects/sf-car-breakins/

The spike in your link's chart clearly starts in early 2020. And "While our data extends only to 2018" is... important, yeah?

i encourage other people reading to look at the chart so they can assess the veracity of ^ comment

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#63
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was over a decade ago. I wonder if it has gotten better or worse since.

It's gotten worse: I'm so tired of rampant crime that I'm up for a little surveillance. And I used to donate to the ACLU before they went crazy.

> And I used to donate to the ACLU before they went crazy.

When was that? Because in 1977 they defended Nazi's free speech to demonstrate in a town that had jewish people as half its population so it tried to block them, and I don't recall them doing anything nearly that controversial since.

https://www.aclu.org/news/free-speech/the-skokie-case-how-i-...

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#64

[flagged]

> The answer to that is the only one that matters.

This statement rests on the belief that absolute crime rate is the only thing that matters, and is a cousin to the "I have nothing to hide!" response from people who care little for intrusions to their privacy. Are you in favor of giving law enforcement authorities a way to unlock all private electronic devices?

I'm willing to tolerate the presence of some crime in the name of personal liberty. I do not think my whereabouts should be known on demand by government actors just because I drive a car.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#65
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm very in favor of speed & redlight cameras and don't have a particular problem with license plate trackers. I think we partisan-ize far too many things nowadays, unfortunately.

Maybe you're also in favor of some light reading https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-4/

you think speed cameras violate the 4th amendment?

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#66
post #7

I'm surprised Garrett Langley still has a job, he seems wildly out of touch. For instance he really believes that his Panopticon as a service is the reason crime is down in cities, conveniently ignoring crime rates prior to COVID.

He won’t for long. The backlash is just getting started. Left or right, no one wants their whereabouts subject to constant surveillance. His only advantage is that the cops are on his side and won’t let go of these cameras without a fight.

> no one wants their whereabouts subject to constant surveillance

But sadly lots of people want everyone else subject to it, and some are willing to submit to it themselves to get it. It's not a foregone conclusion.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#67

Musician-turning-tech anarchist (?) Benn Jordan is making a very interesting series of videos about Flock cameras, their poor safety, and their gray-area interfacing with local governments: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMIwNiwQewQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uB0gr7Fh6lY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vU1-uiUlHTo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pp9MwZkHiMQ I recommend them.

Someone complaining about local governments having data while directing them to YouTube, whose owner does surveillance at a scale far exceeding all local governments of all countries combined, is ironic. Why don’t these people use Peertube at least. Fact of the matter is they’d like to personally profit off the same nonsense they complain about. This person has a million subscribers, they aren’t some random whistlebl…

> Fact of the matter is they’d like to personally profit off the same nonsense they complain about.

Benn Jordan's YouTube channel is a registered Nonprofit https://www.patreon.com/posts/nonprofit-has-82858569

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The spike in your link's chart clearly starts in early 2020. And "While our data extends only to 2018" is... important, yeah?

i encourage other people reading to look at the chart so they can assess the veracity of ^ comment

Here it is.

https://imgur.com/a/FK3sfna

There's an enormous drop in edit: late 2019, and the second drop starts in 2023.

https://www.sanfranciscopolice.org/your-sfpd/policies/depart...

> Starting on March 19, 2024, Flock Safety began installing ALPR cameras in various strategic locations across San Francisco. This rollout is expected to take place over the next 90 days. Per 19B ALPR policy, the administration of the Flock ALPR system is the responsibility of the Investigations Bureau.

How did the Flock cameras cause two crime drops before their installation?

The article's note about 2018 is talking about extending backwards, not forwards. It's entirely accurate, and a direct quote from your link.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#69
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was over a decade ago. I wonder if it has gotten better or worse since.

It's gotten worse: I'm so tired of rampant crime that I'm up for a little surveillance. And I used to donate to the ACLU before they went crazy.

Ha ha ha, you think it'll be used to help you? A hit and run drived totaled my car at an intersection with cameras, the cops would not even show up even though it was all on camera. When I called insurance they didn't bat an eye, the claims person pretty obviously was used to this happening all the time and didn't even question why I wasn't able to get a police report.
Post reply on HN