Top
Best
New

Posted by latexr 6 hours ago

Across the US, people are dismantling and destroying Flock surveillance cameras(www.bloodinthemachine.com)
172 points | 60 commentspage 2
SilverElfin 3 hours ago||
Speed cameras next. Just another privacy violating device that is also a revenue source for irresponsible local leaders.
RickJWagner 4 hours ago||
I remember when mp3 music first became available and sharing sites like Limewire popped up.

So many people were sharing music ( depriving artists of their pay ) that it looked like a real problem. How could they possibly deter all those music takers?

It turns out they only needed to catch a few, and fine the living daylights out of them. A fine of $100,000 was sufficient to scare everybody back to honesty.

ImPleadThe5th 4 hours ago||
Hmm, I think it was more the rise of streaming services which were more convenient and offered a better experience with less risk than illegally downloading music or movies.
teg4n_ 4 hours ago|||
That's not remotely true.
mullingitover 4 hours ago||
No it definitely happened. There is famously no copyright infringement on the internet now.
Octoth0rpe 2 hours ago||
Would you like to claim a limited time license for a /s for your reply? The use of this /s can be revoked at any time. You may only view the /s on a limited number of your own devices. A public display of this /s without prior written consent immediately invalidates your license to this /s, and you may be subject to a lawsuit in a specific court in West Texas where you must show up in person at a particular date with 48 hours notice.
sidrag22 3 hours ago||
or you know... the rise of itunes/ipod at that exact time. present the public with an option that is not in a grey area and is not a massive inconvenience, and a large amount of them will happily go the legal route.

Its leaning that direction again, video streaming services are becoming a massive inconvenience, much like needing to buy a CD if you wanted 2 total songs off it. Doubt it will be as iconic of a moment in time as the limewire/napster era was, but who knows, im so bad at predicting the future i assumed nvidia was gonna be hard declining after the end of the crypto mining craze.

> sufficient to scare everybody back to honesty.

idk how you thought this would land here, but saying everybody was a rough choice of words.

tl2do 4 hours ago|
I have similar and deep privacy concerns. But I also know that cameras have helped find criminals and assist crime victims. I don't want to let fugitives go without punishment. In fact, I must admit that cameras are a realistic choice given the current technology.

Flock Safety must be under public evaluation. Tech companies tend to hide technical specs, calling them trade secrets. But most internet security standards are public. What should be private is the encryption key. The measure to protect development effort is patents, which are public in the registry.

lich_king 4 hours ago||
Why are tech specs relevant here? The problem with Flock is that once the data is collected, and once it's made accessible to law enforcement without any legal review, it's going to be used for solving heinous crimes, for keeping tabs on a vocal critic of the police commissioner, and for checking what the officer's ex-wife is up to.

If the cameras were installed and operated by the DHS or by the local PD, would that make you feel better? The data should not exist, or if it must, it shouldn't be accessible without court approval. The model you're proposing doesn't ensure that; in fact, it moves it closer to the parties most likely to misuse it.

tadfisher 3 hours ago|||
> I don't want to let fugitives go without punishment.

There is a famous quote about this that needs to be updated for the modern age.

"I'd rather let ten fugitives go unsurveilled, than to surveil one innocent person."

lm28469 4 hours ago|||
The cameras aren't the problem, it's the companies behind them.

Everybody wants murderers and rapists in jail, nobody wants to 24/7 share their location and upload their every thoughts to palantir and other companies operated by degenerates like Thiel

loeg 1 hour ago|||
A significant number of people do not seem to want copper thieves, porch pirates, and organized retail thieves in jail.
DangitBobby 1 hour ago||
If it requires constant public surveillance to catch them then yeah they can stay out of jail.
plagiarist 3 hours ago|||
> 24/7 share their location and upload their every thoughts to palantir and other companies operated by degenerates like Thiel

It's so funny though that the majority of all people are doing exactly this, 24/7.

vorpalhex 2 hours ago|||
Follow the money.

There's no money to be made arresting criminals. Sure you get a few police contracts, and you need to show enough results to keep them.. but your moat is mostly how hard it is to even submit bids.

There's a lot more money to be made knowing that Accountant Mary's Lexis is looking kind of banged up and she could be sold on a new one.

fzeroracer 4 hours ago||
This has nothing to do with the actual problem, which is Flock itself.

The fact that Flock controls all of the cameras, all of the data and said data is easily accessible means police and the state have access to information that they should only get with a warrant. A business having a camera storing video data that's completely local isn't an issue. A business having a camera which is connected to every other business that has a camera is.