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

91–100 of 277 posts

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#91

Post by wartywhoa23 »

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...

Trainwreck spotting is best conducted from outside of the train.

I think that most cases of seemingly unwarranted depression and apathy in people today in fact stem from their subconscious acknowledgement of this trainwreck in progress, and failure of consciousness to accept that and/or do anything about it.

In other words, mass cognitive dissonance.

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#92

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#93

Post by flanked-evergl »

Frieren wrote: post #88
flanked-evergl wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

[flagged]

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#94

Post by DonHopkins »

serbuvlad wrote: post #42
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…

First of all, I think that this instinct to fine-'em, screw-'em, etc. is profoundly authoritarian. It is extremely important for a civil society not only that predictable laws are put into place, but also that predictable enforcement of those laws exist. I jaywalk almost every day. I understand that if a cop sees me jaywalk, he will fine me. I also understand that if the cop wants to put me in jail for jaywalking, he…

[flagged]

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#95

Post by potato3732842 »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #72

I feel as if ALPRs are already a fact of life. Not thrilled about it, but that’s sort of what license plates are for (ALPRs are really just automated cop eyeballs). The most disturbing thing, is the behavior of the company. It’s pretty clear that they have a separate contract with the feds, and that contract is the one they care about more. It’s also an illustration of the faustian bargain that customers make, when e…

Licesne plates were never intended to be recorded all the time to create a data set of who went where when.

They were so that in the non-standard case where something other than "business as usual" has happened an owner could be identified.

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#96

Post by potato3732842 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #2

Is there a good public list of Flock Safety cities? Would be particularly interesting to see where they are in blue states.

>Would be particularly interesting to see where they are in blue states

The answer is going to be "the snooty inner ring suburbs and wealthy rural-ish commuter communities that already had overstaffed PDs harassing teenagers"

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#97

Post by potato3732842 »

SlightlyLeftPad wrote: post #90
boston_clone wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

…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.

Engaging official channels instantly gets you on a list. These institutions aren't stupid, they're evil. Easier to just back a trailer into it or something. And if some scrappers haul the downed pole off a week after that you didn't see them.

Furthermore, it's beyond naive to care about whether it's technically vandalism. You can't beat the establishment within the law because the establishment makes the law.

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#98

Post by DonHopkins »

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.

Or dress up in a gorilla suit, then paint it in festive Halloween colors.

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#99

Post by potato3732842 »

saubeidl wrote: post #80
fakedang wrote: post #13

https://www.ycombinator.com/companies/flock-safety

"Are we the baddies?"

Yes. Absolutely. We incrementally pushed society to this point by incrementally approving more and more surveillance and government intervention across a myriad of issue until it ultimately built up the institutions and precedents and honed the workflows that we're now seeing used for stuff that even the stupid are at least kinda uneasy about.

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#100

Post by sokoloff »

mschuster91 wrote: post #64
serbuvlad wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First of all, I think that this instinct to fine-'em, screw-'em, etc. is profoundly authoritarian. It is extremely important for a civil society not only that predictable laws are put into place, but also that predictable enforcement of those laws exist. I jaywalk almost every day. I understand that if a cop sees me jaywalk, he will fine me. I also understand that if the cop wants to put me in jail for jaywalking, he…

> It is extremely important for a civil society not only that predictable laws are put into place, but also that predictable enforcement of those laws exist. At the moment, this doesn't exist either. Particularly on the low end of offenses, selective enforcement and racial profiling run rampant , and not just in the US. Any decent developed society takes laws that have gone outdated off the books entirely - the excep…

> Particularly on the low end of offenses, selective enforcement and racial profiling run rampant

I think most people will agree to this. When they do, some will be thinking of disparate enforcement of traffic regulations and others lax enforcement of shoplifting/retail theft.

Post reply on HN