Flock Defense "No Expectation of Privacy in Public" Is Wrong
1–10 of 47 posts
Re: Flock Defense "No Expectation of Privacy in Public" Is Wrong
#2It's commercialized stalking. A group of people who physically stood in each park every day photographing children playing and sharing those images between each other would be run out of town so quick. Laws would be invented in a heartbeat to stop this.
Re: Flock Defense "No Expectation of Privacy in Public" Is Wrong
#3If Flock feels this way the executive team should record the entrances and exits of their homes and stream them live online 24/7.
Re: Flock Defense "No Expectation of Privacy in Public" Is Wrong
#4No person should be tracked by default.
There should not be any system that allows a person to be continuously tracked at all times short of as a consequence of criminal activity with a judge signing off on it.
It's so basic that a 3rd grader gets it.
Re: Flock Defense "No Expectation of Privacy in Public" Is Wrong
#5It's commercialized stalking. A group of people who physically stood in each park every day photographing children playing and sharing those images between each other would be run out of town so quick. Laws would be invented in a heartbeat to stop this.
I think its entirely reasonable that license plates are recorded on public roads and accessible to police in lawful requests, like tracking stolen vehicles or dangerous suspects.
Your hysterics about photographing children in a park is silly and no one but the most online ideologue would find it at all comparable. Find a better argument if you want to convince other reasonable people who just want to live in safe neighborhoods and don't care much about your verbal word games and stretched analogies
Re: Flock Defense "No Expectation of Privacy in Public" Is Wrong
#6It's commercialized stalking. A group of people who physically stood in each park every day photographing children playing and sharing those images between each other would be run out of town so quick. Laws would be invented in a heartbeat to stop this.
I think its entirely reasonable that license plates are recorded on public roads and accessible to police in lawful requests, like tracking stolen vehicles or dangerous suspects. Your hysterics about photographing children in a park is silly and no one but the most online ideologue would find it at all comparable. Find a better argument if you want to convince other reasonable people who just want to live in safe nei…
"Online" has become such a trite dismissal.
I'm calling out, specifically, that "A camera capturing an image of a license plate that is openly displayed on a vehicle is not searching for someone's private life. It is recording what anyone standing on the same street could already observe."
... implies that a very absurd and objectionable thing like folks standing around each playground recording children and comparing notes is actually also supported by that defense and that we should consider if that defense is objectionable or not based on what it enables as much as what it is defending.
On this very forum, you can find backlash against geofencing, and here, support for flock cameras? The contradiction is bananas. Automated logging of people in public places is dystopian. You can object with that claim, fine.
Re: Flock Defense "No Expectation of Privacy in Public" Is Wrong
#7It's commercialized stalking. A group of people who physically stood in each park every day photographing children playing and sharing those images between each other would be run out of town so quick. Laws would be invented in a heartbeat to stop this.
I think its entirely reasonable that license plates are recorded on public roads and accessible to police in lawful requests, like tracking stolen vehicles or dangerous suspects. Your hysterics about photographing children in a park is silly and no one but the most online ideologue would find it at all comparable. Find a better argument if you want to convince other reasonable people who just want to live in safe nei…
Yeah except flock is literally photographing children on playgrounds and inside gyms and showing those photos to random people in exactly the way being described.
But sure, "word games". Sure.
Re: Flock Defense "No Expectation of Privacy in Public" Is Wrong
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think its entirely reasonable that license plates are recorded on public roads and accessible to police in lawful requests, like tracking stolen vehicles or dangerous suspects. Your hysterics about photographing children in a park is silly and no one but the most online ideologue would find it at all comparable. Find a better argument if you want to convince other reasonable people who just want to live in safe nei…
Yeah except flock is literally photographing children on playgrounds and inside gyms and showing those photos to random people in exactly the way being described. But sure, "word games". Sure.
> showing those photos to random people in exactly the way being described.
Do you actually believe this?
Re: Flock Defense "No Expectation of Privacy in Public" Is Wrong
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think its entirely reasonable that license plates are recorded on public roads and accessible to police in lawful requests, like tracking stolen vehicles or dangerous suspects. Your hysterics about photographing children in a park is silly and no one but the most online ideologue would find it at all comparable. Find a better argument if you want to convince other reasonable people who just want to live in safe nei…
"Online" has become such a trite dismissal. I'm calling out, specifically, that "A camera capturing an image of a license plate that is openly displayed on a vehicle is not searching for someone's private life. It is recording what anyone standing on the same street could already observe." ... implies that a very absurd and objectionable thing like folks standing around each playground recording children and comparin…
> Automated logging of people in public places is dystopian
You went from recording license plates on public roads to logging people in public places.
If someone steals my car, I would want to be able to give police my license plate and have them track down the person very easily by all the cameras on public roads. This is not dystopian. This is what an orderly society should look like.
You're talking about children and random stuff that's completely irrelevant. If you can't or refuse to see that, I can't convince you.
Re: Flock Defense "No Expectation of Privacy in Public" Is Wrong
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think its entirely reasonable that license plates are recorded on public roads and accessible to police in lawful requests, like tracking stolen vehicles or dangerous suspects. Your hysterics about photographing children in a park is silly and no one but the most online ideologue would find it at all comparable. Find a better argument if you want to convince other reasonable people who just want to live in safe nei…
"Online" has become such a trite dismissal. I'm calling out, specifically, that "A camera capturing an image of a license plate that is openly displayed on a vehicle is not searching for someone's private life. It is recording what anyone standing on the same street could already observe." ... implies that a very absurd and objectionable thing like folks standing around each playground recording children and comparin…
> On this very forum, you can find backlash against geofencing, and here, support for flock cameras? The contradiction is bananas.
There's more than one person on this forum. Why do you expect consistency? Different people have different opinions. Different people comment on different articles. HN is not a hivemind; don't expect consistency.