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

Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

evanstonroundtable.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 277 posts

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#81

Post by saubeidl »

_cenw wrote: post #54

Aside the topic, but I wonder how HN, as a community, and as a moderation team, weighs this on the intellectual curiosity vs primarily politics scale. This seems politics to me. Very important politics that a lot of people in tech have a special interest for, but politics nonetheless, and much more pressing topics seem to be absent through the on-topic rule.

That rule is ... kind of nonsense anyways.

One can't be intellectually curious and not think about politics. Politics is applied intellectual curiosity.

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#82

Post by Wololooo »

trhway wrote: post #75
euroderf wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most likely the feds said they will tie up whoever challenges them in federal court. They can play jurisdiction fuck fuck games and then flip between it being a search, it being necessary for safety, that the city/county was obstruction a federal investigation, and all other nonsense. This sounds like some sort of legal procedures adopted from the USSR.

It isn't just USSR, it is the core Russian principle of "oprichnina" - you can violate any laws, human or God's, as long as you're serving the tzar, Secretary General or President Putin. We start to see a hint of it here with ICE, and i'm sure we'll see a bit more of it with the newly formed Domestic Terrorism Task Force.

And if I'd have to wager anyone that dare speaking out would be labelled antifa, therefore a terrorist, therefore free for all from a law enforcement perspective...

Things are going downhill at an impressive pace... Not going to lie watching the Trainwreck in slow motion is entertaining in a sort of morbid way. Though I wished that it wouldn't go that way...

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#84

Post by ljm »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #48
hdgvhicv wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Confiscate the shares. No compensation. Effectively nationalisation as punishment. Solves the “too big to fail” problem as the company continues to exist, the ceo ends up in jail and the owners end up broke, but the work still gets done.

> Confiscate the shares. No compensation This is better than corporate death penalties but still more complicated than fines. Massive fines are the answer. > Solves the “too big to fail” problem as the company continues to exist, the ceo ends up in jail and the owners end up broke So do fines and bankruptcy. CEO won’t go to jail, but they’ll spend the rest of their lives fighting shareholder lawsuits. Feed them to th…

I personally don't understand what makes executives so special that they are exempted from the same sort of criminal proceeding the average Joe is faced with. By all accounts they hold these lofty positions precisely because they can (and should) be held responsible for their company's dirty deeds.

A fine is low stakes because the company more likely than not will have a way to recoup that loss. There is an obvious calculus to that which is practically a cliché to mention. A lawsuit just puts it on the people to succeed in civil proceedings at their own expense, over a potentially lengthy period of time.

Western countries like the UK and US tend to be quite soft on businesses engaging in practices that would land an unremarkable working class person in prison if they were caught doing the same.

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#85

Post by SlightlyLeftPad »

Wololooo wrote: post #82
trhway wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't just USSR, it is the core Russian principle of "oprichnina" - you can violate any laws, human or God's, as long as you're serving the tzar, Secretary General or President Putin. We start to see a hint of it here with ICE, and i'm sure we'll see a bit more of it with the newly formed Domestic Terrorism Task Force.

And if I'd have to wager anyone that dare speaking out would be labelled antifa, therefore a terrorist, therefore free for all from a law enforcement perspective... Things are going downhill at an impressive pace... Not going to lie watching the Trainwreck in slow motion is entertaining in a sort of morbid way. Though I wished that it wouldn't go that way...

Send help.

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#86

Post by rs186 »

jbullock35 wrote: post #18

There is a larger issue that other commenters are missing: > The city has paid the first two years of that extension but would still owe $145,500 for the final three years if the contract is upheld. The city intends to terminate the contract on Sept. 26 under its notice to Flock, but the company is challenging that termination, and the dispute could escalate to litigation. The city is trying to terminate a contract w…

"Flock had allowed U.S. Customs and Border Protection to access Illinois cameras in a 'pilot program' against state law" they are already violating state law, aren't they?

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#87

Post by SlightlyLeftPad »

close04 wrote: post #70
forgotoldacc wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> CEO won’t go to jail, but they’ll spend the rest of their lives fighting shareholder lawsuits. One important lesson to be learned from the past 20 years: if you're sued, don't go to court. If you're dragged to court, say "fuck you, I'm not going and I'm not paying." If you have enough money, they literally will not do anything. They'll just have endless sham court cases that you're free to ignore and there will nev…

I think you're reading the wrong lesson from this. If someone cares enough to take you down, your strategy isn't just useless, it's actively harming you. It's a "for my friends everything, for my enemies the law" situation. A better lesson is that you can be "on the radar" but far enough from the central hotspot that you are not a priority. Alternatively you need someone to have your back and be your heatshield while…

The actual takeaway here is the newly formed Soviet United States of America.

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#88

Post by Frieren »

flanked-evergl wrote: post #77
donmcronald wrote: post #8

Even though it's become commonplace in the last 20 years, I'm still shocked to see how companies can pretty much ignore the law, do whatever they want, and have everyone involved shielded from any kind of significant consequences. In situations like this, I think the person at the top of the chain that told employees to perform the illegal installations should be arrested and charged. On top of that, the company shou…

If government fails to prosecute crime then laws are pointless, and in the west we have had a significant swing, especially in high population centres, towards electing governments and officials that refuse to prosecute crimes.

That is because we are moving away from Democracy and rule of law and towards Feudalism and aristocracy. In such a system, the law is not blind but it is applied depending on the accused social status.

Feudalism is not a good goverment system to produce wealth nor well-being. It is very good at concentrating the diminishing wealth in a few hands, thou.

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#89

Post by SlightlyLeftPad »

pyrale wrote: post #78
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The core of the debate is that Flock has "fixed the issue", and hence doesn't think the contract should be escapable, the services provided today are ostensibly legal. Definitely a question for lawyers on how the exact terms shake out, if the city has an out or if Flock met their obligations by fixing the access issue.

> Flock has "fixed the issue" Strong office space vibes in this one [1]. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUE0PPQI3is

It’ll just work itself out naturally.

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#90

Post by SlightlyLeftPad »

boston_clone wrote: post #50
Animats wrote: post #47

There's a Flock camera at the end of my driveway. I'm next to a city line, so it's a reasonable location. I wonder if I can file a CCPA request and get a list of my comings and goings.

…or someone could knock the damn thing offline.

No that’s vandalism, what you do is get a nice printout of the exact view the camera has and just plop it in front of the thing, like a for sale sign or something. Tape if you have to.
Post reply on HN