Been quite a bit of discussion recently in my area about flock cameras. Looks like there are quite a few. My little city government has 4 or 5 at the entrance/exits of our city, we are small enough that pretty much covers it. But there are more and more going in at businesses. I voted in favor when on the city council but am now wondering if that was the right thing.
1 Like
Their license reading has reportedly over a 30% false result rate. Some report it much higher. So relying on a system like that (especially as police departments have show a history of trusting the technology and ignoring everything else) is a really bad idea imo. Even if you think Big Brother is a good idea.
I figured I’d check out where the 30% comes from and the examples out there are not from some criminal-loving radical-left organizations or media. They’re from police audits.
1 Like
I am against these things on principle.
There are not sufficient safeguards built into such a system to prevent abuse.
1 Like
Well, a trusted member of the police force wouldn’t use it to spy on an ex-gf or ex-wife or separated-from wife. Only used against (not by) the forces of evil.
Big old “nay” in every way.
I’ve stopped shopping at Lowe’s because they’ve posted Flock cameras, but I assume it’s a matter of time before an army of drones is doing the same thing in most cities.
1 Like
I see nothing redeeming about flock cameras. It’s a major violation of our privacy and calls into question the concept of the level of evidence needed to put a person’s movements under surveillance. We are all under surveillance and can retroactively be tracked.
Not to mention the data is already being misused by cops.
3 Likes
One interesting upside here, we did this in Iraq with Project Angelfire. At the time with a plane, a drone would work. Circle the skies taking pics every second or whatever, very high resolution.
Somebody shows up at your house, breaks in, steals stuff. You can now see their car in your driveway during the robbery. Roll the tape back and you can see where they came from.
I’m still generally opposed, but there ya go.
I keep a scanner running as background noise in my office at home. Local police and inter-town police frequencies haven’t (yet) been encrypted, so I’ve heard Flock being used to track carjacked vehicles, suspects in violent crime…and for pursuits to be waived off because Flock coverage reduces the marginal benefit of pursuit enough to make the risk of such to the general public not worthwhile.
There are real benefits to Flock.
I think the potential risks of abuse of the technology as currently implemented are still too great to justify those benefits…but there are benefits.
Something having a benefit doesn’t necessarily redeem it, though. There are benefits to fascism, but nothing that would tip the ethics scale.
Living in a state of constant supervision is a threat to freedom. I’m not typically a doomsayer, but this is one thing that really freaks me out. Particularly given the current political temperature. Today it’s catching criminals, tomorrow it’s monitoring the movements of political dissidents.
2 Likes
What’s the difference between this and doorbell cameras? Public surveillance vs private surveillance?
Same question.
There are maps where you can find the locations of them nearby. I see them at many of the nearby shopping centers. Lowes/Home Depot both have them, but it looks like they are focued on their outdoor garden areas.
Might be nice if they all had some sort of bright indicator on them.
Anyway, TIL.
Coverage and current capabilities of the software.
Really, any collection of networked cameras with adequate resolution could be used to build massive databases relying on facial recognition, or recognition of vehicles, or…
Flock has the “advantage” of being intentionally set up to monitor movements of vehicles, and of having software geared to facilitate querying the data collected. The doorbell cameras aren’t as well-positioned, and as far as we know don’t have the centralized database that can be queried by anyone with access.
…although there have been worrying noises about Ring cameras.
Doorbell cameras are distributed, not all on the same network. For the police to track you via doorbell cameras they need to either get buy in from all the neighbors or a search warrant.
Ah, makes sense. That being the case, I’m not sure what the balance looks like between “just don’t commit crimes” and “just don’t shit on the 4th Amendment.” 
Definitely concerning.
Ring and blink cameras have cloud based services. Blink has ai plans you can purchase that will provide descriptions of activities caught on camera. This all seems very similar?
They aren’t centrally processed by authorities but that seems like a pretty minor config change.
1 Like
That’s why our Blink camera doorbell is now just a doorbell.
The camera is on it, which doesn’t bother me to have some illusion of security, but until I get my shit together enough to set up a camera that records only locally, the camera doesn’t do anything. If I hear any hint of Blink hijacking unused cameras for a network, it’s getting removed that day. I might still just get rid of it soon.
I feel like most peers in my social sphere are on similar pages… some of them still have video doorbells/Alexas/etc., but some of them are entirely getting rid of personal surveillance devices and even most with such things acknowledge their surrender of privacy.
\color{red}{\text{I guess they are only used for good.}}
Even as someone who doesn’t like abortion, I can confidently say that that’s fucked. 
(Ever since a couple years ago when TN tried to give baby daddies veto power over abortions, I’ve recognized that it’s not healthy to think of it as a black-n-white issue.)
1 Like
Hi Ya’ll! “Member me?” I’ve been ranting about loss of privacy since before the migration from the Actuarial Board to the Rebel Forum. Now, I am a part of Law Enforcement and am trained and certified yearly on the do’s and don’ts of using the American surveillance network. Somewhere around here I described just how nitty gritty we can get if we suspect something about you. Here’s a couple of bullet points to help everyone out.
- Anyone using Flocks or any of the surveillance network for personal use is breaking the law. Nasty Federal laws that have stiff penalties associated with them. Push for government to enforce and strengthen those laws. Media loves this kind of shit actual personal use of Flocks is most likely very rare. Of course, under Trump all evil is possible.
- Banning Flocks or stopping any of the surveillance network is as difficult as holding a billionaire accountable for their crimes. The power of the technology is so compelling those with power (political, economic, religious, etc,) will be seduced by its use.
- Privacy does not exist. Accept that.
So how do us peons, the non-owners, the proletariat compete in a no privacy world?
- Demand the same lack of privacy from the powerful. Absolute open books from corporations. No private equity without strict and full accountability, politicians finances completely on display, Etc. etc. etc.
- Think like the powerful think. All you need is a way forward for them and a few billionaire’s heads on pikes of those that balk for the rest to fall in line.
TLDR: Accept the cameras, demand at threat of death transparency from the powerful.
3 Likes