Bipartisan 'Uprising' Against Flock Cameras: a Larger Fight Against Big Tech and Surveillance? (salon.com) 36
Politico notes that over 20 local jurisdictions in America "either stopped using Flock cameras or began the process of doing so in July, according to a tracker maintained by DeFlock, an activist group that has been mapping the company. It's the highest amount in a single month since they began tracking in 2021."
Some local officials said the public safety promises weren't worth the cost. The cameras "didn't help us with anything. From a utility aspect, they were just kind of not useful," said Eric Couture, a Democratic first selectman in Killingworth, Connecticut, another city that recently canceled its contract with Flock. "I'd say it was a net negative."
And their article adds that it's a bipartisan pushback that "runs parallel to sprawling fights over the future of technology in American life, including the rise of increasingly advanced artificial intelligence tools and the construction of massive data centers needed to power them."
Salon even argues Flock's cameras "have become a symbol of growing anger over the efforts by technology oligarchs to impose their dystopian fantasies on the country, replacing liberal democracy with a surveillance state... People are sick of tech billionaires trying to control our lives"" By targeting Flock cameras, activists are building momentum for a larger rebellion against the tech industry — and against political leaders who are complicit in their assault on our freedoms. Flock Safety embodies the dishonesty that has been the prevailing theme of tech corporate communications and marketing for at least the past decade. While the cameras are sold to the public as a banal traffic safety measure, they have prompted an outpouring of stories about how they're being used to violate civil liberties and undermine democracy...
According to an exhaustive 10-month analysis by Electronic Foundation Frontier, a nonprofit dedicated to defending civil liberties in our digital age, local police were using the cameras to track protesters, such as those at No Kings rallies, who were then put in a national database to be used across all jurisdictions. Despite claims that the cameras only record license plates, the technology-focused outlet 404 Media found that the database is also being used to collect information on individual people whom cops can then search for using descriptions of clothing, race, gender and body type.
The Flock uprising, though, is the stirrings of public understanding that none of this inevitable — and we have the right to fight back... Along with protests against data centers, it's a sign that the public is desperate for a way to fight back against not just AI, but also the anti-democratic forces fueling this latest tech wave.
Salon's writer also adds that "what stands out about the burgeoning public rebellion against Flock security cameras is just how fun it all is," citing "a national cat-and-mouse game between vandals and cops that is being merrily followed on social media, mostly by people rooting for the vandals." City council meetings in which citizens swarm to protest paying for the cameras are the new must-see TV. In Huntington, West Virginia, a small city in the heart of Appalachia, one man became an internet folk hero when he stood up at a city council meeting and said, "I'm not gonna waste your time; I'm kinda hungry. But one last thing: Every single Flock camera has about 2-3 pounds of copper and about 1-2 grams of gold. Do with that information what you will." He then walked off in triumph.
And their article adds that it's a bipartisan pushback that "runs parallel to sprawling fights over the future of technology in American life, including the rise of increasingly advanced artificial intelligence tools and the construction of massive data centers needed to power them."
Salon even argues Flock's cameras "have become a symbol of growing anger over the efforts by technology oligarchs to impose their dystopian fantasies on the country, replacing liberal democracy with a surveillance state... People are sick of tech billionaires trying to control our lives"" By targeting Flock cameras, activists are building momentum for a larger rebellion against the tech industry — and against political leaders who are complicit in their assault on our freedoms. Flock Safety embodies the dishonesty that has been the prevailing theme of tech corporate communications and marketing for at least the past decade. While the cameras are sold to the public as a banal traffic safety measure, they have prompted an outpouring of stories about how they're being used to violate civil liberties and undermine democracy...
According to an exhaustive 10-month analysis by Electronic Foundation Frontier, a nonprofit dedicated to defending civil liberties in our digital age, local police were using the cameras to track protesters, such as those at No Kings rallies, who were then put in a national database to be used across all jurisdictions. Despite claims that the cameras only record license plates, the technology-focused outlet 404 Media found that the database is also being used to collect information on individual people whom cops can then search for using descriptions of clothing, race, gender and body type.
The Flock uprising, though, is the stirrings of public understanding that none of this inevitable — and we have the right to fight back... Along with protests against data centers, it's a sign that the public is desperate for a way to fight back against not just AI, but also the anti-democratic forces fueling this latest tech wave.
Salon's writer also adds that "what stands out about the burgeoning public rebellion against Flock security cameras is just how fun it all is," citing "a national cat-and-mouse game between vandals and cops that is being merrily followed on social media, mostly by people rooting for the vandals." City council meetings in which citizens swarm to protest paying for the cameras are the new must-see TV. In Huntington, West Virginia, a small city in the heart of Appalachia, one man became an internet folk hero when he stood up at a city council meeting and said, "I'm not gonna waste your time; I'm kinda hungry. But one last thing: Every single Flock camera has about 2-3 pounds of copper and about 1-2 grams of gold. Do with that information what you will." He then walked off in triumph.
Everyone hates a busybody (Score:2)
A great bipartisan issue: people who can't mind their own business are universally disliked.
And companies that stick there nose in everyone's personal business, then tell you it's for your own good? They are reviled.
We'll see (Score:5, Insightful)
Talk is cheap. Pay attention to how they vote.
Re: (Score:2)
Talk is cheap. Pay attention to how they vote.
And the arson...
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Flock is something each and every one of them will believe is good for the country because "terrorists" or
Re: We'll see (Score:4, Informative)
While I suppose that Congress could pass a bill banning federal agencies for paying for access to their data, if you want to keep the cameras out of your neighborhood, the place to do it is at your local council meeting.
Re: We'll see (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it isn't as simple as that, and I don't know how much power either party has on the matter. It would take legislation at the state level to really block it state-wide, and there are probably too many other things that would be affected for them to blanket ban something like this. Of course legislation wouldn't say "Flock cameras are not allowed". It would have to ban ALPR in general, and then you get into things with private property and so on. If I have a business and a security camera sees the stree
Re: (Score:2)
New legislation supersedes old legislation and jurisprudence unless that old legislation (respectively, the legislation the old jurisprudence is based on) is more binding (e.g. the constitution). Maybe it's time to start pressuring for new legislation which explicitly recognises an expectation of a certain level of privacy even in public spaces. There are places where your business
Re: (Score:3)
Many have voted with hairspray and a sawzall.
Believe them when they tell you who they are (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, he apologized recently once he started losing revenue. I am very doubtful that the apology was genuine. Someone who thought that creating a map was equivalent to terrorism (and happens to share MAGA's obsession with a make-believe version of Antifa) probably didn't have a total about-face change of heart to realize that building a total surveillance state might give people legitimate worries about abuse of the system.
Re: (Score:2)
Bipartisan my ass (Score:2, Interesting)
The Democrats may be reckless and borderline insufferable but at the end of the day they will do what the voters want.
Now if I can just get the voters to stop being so mother fucking stupid.... It's like the old saying goes democracy is the worst political system besides all the other ones
Re: (Score:1)
Re: Bipartisan my ass (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Hundreds-of-thousands of illegals voted in the presidential election TRUMPS lost . Democrats encouraged those illegal voters and covered for them.
You've never actually met any election workers, have you?
Re: (Score:2)
Hundreds-of-thousands of illegals voted in the presidential election TRUMPS lost
And we're gonna prove it now, any day, it totally happened, because vibes and trust us bro
Re: (Score:2)
American citizen voters did not want 20-million border-jumping narco-Mex criminals.
Yes, I know: don't feed the trolls, and it's useless to argue with stupid. For the others, the Cato Institute [cato.org], not noted for its strong support of the Democratic Party or support for illegal immigration: "... there was a net increase in the illegal immigrant population of 5.5 to 6 million during Biden’s administration."
Also: "What if There Were 20 Million More Illegal Immigrants? Illegal immigrant crime and incarceration rates would be among the lowest of any subpopulation in the United States. ...
I sure would effing hope so. (Score:2)
EOM
Re:Copper and gold (Score:4, Informative)
I don't think the goal there was to provide factual information.
Re: (Score:2)
Now this suggestion is completely immoral but someone could place a $20 bounty on Flock cameras and let the junkies go wild.
Modern problems require modern solutions.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think the goal there was to provide factual information.
The meme of Flock cameras' greatly exaggerated scrap value exists because everyone wants to feel like there's those beneath them to be exploited for their own benefit. Instead of the mentality that we should be trying to make things better for folks who drew the shortest sticks in life, it's "fuck you, I got mine" all the way down.
We collectively don't want to foot the bill to build a society that doesn't need Flock cameras.
Re: Copper and gold (Score:3)
Add the wiring and connectors.
Re: (Score:2)
The most valuable part of a Flock camera is the *thump* noise it makes when it hits the ground.
Flock is Big Tech? (Score:2)
Same problem as traffic enforcement (Score:4, Interesting)
One of the issues with traffic enforcement cameras (speeding, red light) is that they can either:
a) Do the claimed job: reduce infractions (less speeding, less running red lights)
b) Fulfill predictions and pay for themselves. Note, I did not say be profitable, I said pay for themselves. Usually they end up costing the city more money then the cost to install/maintain. At best a company is paid to manage them and they make money but not the city.
They cannot do both. If they reduce the infractions, then the tickets drop and it is not profitable. If enough tickets are paid, then that means infractions remain constant.
For this reason a lot of the time, towns just end the contract.
Re: Same problem as traffic enforcement (Score:2)
They are not.
Re: (Score:2)
The subject said "same problem".
The problem is that the equipment either
a) solves a problem by spending more than it is worth or
b) does not solve the problem and costs a ton.
That applies to Flock cameras - they cost too much for what they do.
Obligatory Housemartins... (Score:2)
And when you see a crowd I see a flock
It's sheep we're up against
Diminishing returns - Spend where the crime is (Score:1)