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

US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

cnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 468 posts

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#81

Post by oooyay »

whimsicalism wrote: post #51
therobots927 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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.

Both of these camera systems also usually come with a kangaroo civil court of sorts. Last time I looked at red light camera distribution in Texas it was also fairly obvious that they were only installing them in poorer areas.

These systems were largely disliked bipartisanly because of those factors.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#82

Post by mothballed »

nemomarx wrote: post #79
mothballed wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No but license plate requirements pretty clearly violate the 4th and/or 1st amendment, IMO. And without being required to have your license plate searched (registration 'papers' forced to be displayed) at all times without even an officer presenting RAS or PC of a crime, these cameras become a lot less useful. I don't see how removing the cameras is compatible with the first amendment, but if you have the right of "s…

It really doesn't seem like the courts agree that you have a right to travel via car without a visible plate.

The courts have been wrong about many things, sometimes for centuries before they've fixed it. Some things they think they've interpreted correctly now that they'll turn around and interpret some other way later.

Trying to interpret viewing and recording the plate as speech but not displaying it as speech is trying to have your cake and eat it too. If the camera can stalk my car everywhere and record it under auspices of 'speech', it's only logical I can hide it as 'speech.'

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#83

Post by dfxm12 »

maerF0x0 wrote: post #72

And switches to Axon - https://denverite.com/2026/02/24/denver-ends-flock-contract-... I have not done any research if that's out of the frying pan and into the fire or an improvement

Practically, axon cameras aren't nearly as ubiquitous as flock's, thus reducing the leo's dragnet capability. I'm sure the feds will successfully try to get access to this footage as well.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#84

Post by anthonypasq »

therobots927 wrote: post #8
jmuguy wrote: 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.

i think politicians have seriously underestimated how much people don't like crime, and most people would take constant surveillance if it could actually improve feelings of safety in urban environments.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#85

Post by anthonypasq »

gosub100 wrote: post #17

Someone in my hometown was arrested for vandalizing them. The media chose to say "city owned security camera". It's amazing how they will rush to defend private enterprise.

the alternative is to not punish vandalism? what are you even saying?

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#86

Post by energy123 »

anthonypasq wrote: post #84
therobots927 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

i think politicians have seriously underestimated how much people don't like crime, and most people would take constant surveillance if it could actually improve feelings of safety in urban environments.

Enforcing public safety effectively is one of the most pro-democracy things you can do. Otherwise people use democracy to elect public safety authoritarians like the wildly popular Bukele and Duterte.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#87

Post by gosub100 »

maerF0x0 wrote: post #72

And switches to Axon - https://denverite.com/2026/02/24/denver-ends-flock-contract-... I have not done any research if that's out of the frying pan and into the fire or an improvement

I don't know if axon does it, but the future is going to be mobile ALPRs. Uber drivers going around scanning every plate, selling to police, and helping predatory auto lenders repo cars. The latter is already being done, so it's just a matter of time.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#89

Post by Larrikin »

alex43578 wrote: post #46
phendrenad2 wrote: post #13

It's funny, if the company had just sold cameras to cities, they probably could have avoided this whole mess. But they just had to hit some keywords for Wall Street (like "AI" "cloud" and "SaaS"), which had the side-effect of making it appear (true or not) that they were part of a Palantir-style surveillance panopticon that tracks you everywhere.

A big part of the value is the network: track a stolen a car or a suspect in the next town over or across the country.

[flagged]

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#90

Post by deadbabe »

therobots927 wrote: post #26
ses1984 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one wants their whereabouts subject to constant surveillance, except everyone who carries a “normal” cell phone, in other words not a burner.

Yes but you can always leave your phone behind if you want to drop off the map. Flock makes that borderline impossible.

You can remove your license plate, you will get pretty far before it actually gets you pulled over.
Post reply on HN