6 ms·

These cameras are showing up everywhere in my state. It's creepy. I had no idea what they were, and now suddenly they're at every intersection, gas station, you

These cameras are showing up everywhere in my state. It's creepy. I had no idea what they were, and now suddenly they're at every intersection, gas station, you name it. I don't like that the government is tracking everyone's movements so openly. I knew they were doing this with cell phone data, but that wasn't so brazen.

extropic-engine 1y ago
did you know that flock has a data sharing contract with ring cameras? amazon’s panopticon is much larger. i believe it is on by default and users have to manually opt out, but i don’t have a ring camera to verify.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- garrettlangley 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - vanc_cefepime 1y ago
    Feel free to place a disclosure that you are a cofounder of Flock.
  - CharlesW 1y ago
    Only sharing specific clips is opt-in¹, but the program and its notifications are on by default. Maybe not surprisingly, consumers aren't asked if they want to participate, and the option is buried enough that most people will never see it. ¹ I'm being generous here. Police can still obtain Ring footage via warrants or "emergency" requests that don’t involve the user choosing to share anything.
    - lysace 1y ago
      So your concern here is spam of unsolicited requests from LE to consider sharing data related to some local event?
  - spaceguillotine 1y ago
    hey, while I have you here Mr CEO, why are you comfortable allowing abusive cops the tech to stalk and harass former partners, I've met women that had ex husbands in the FBI that kept chasing them across country to continue the abuse and your camera systems help enable those acts. I hope you lose sleep like those women do.
    - extropic-engine 1y ago
      since the flock CEO’s comment is dead, i hope you don’t mind if i reply to him here. Your wealth and power will not save you. Your rich friends will not save you. Turning off the monstrosity you are helping to create and reckoning with what you have already done in the world is the only thing that will. If there is still any shard of humanity left in you, I hope this finds it. It is not too late to turn away from the path you chose. But it soon will be. And there will be a reckoning either way.
  - queenkjuul 1y ago
    Texas cops used your data to harass abortion recipients. FBI agents used it to abuse former partners. You want to make the world safer? Shut down your company.
diogenes_atx 1y ago
Here in Austin, the city council no longer allows Flock ALPR's (automated license plate readers) on city streets, but Home Depot and other businesses still use them in their parking lots, and they scan your vehicle license plate every time you enter and exit the premises. Flock sells its data to ICE and law enforcement.
- garrettlangley 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - CharlesW 1y ago
    Correct. Flock sells cameras and platform access, but gives data from their shared, nationwide surveillance utility to ICE and law enforcement. https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/flock-massachusetts-and-updates https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/flock-massachus... https://www.404media.co/ice-taps-into-nationwide-ai-enabled-camera-network-data-shows/ https://www.404media.co/ice-taps-into-nationwide-ai-enabled-... https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/surveillance-company-flock-now-using-ai-to-report-us-to-police-if-it-thinks-our-movement-patterns-are-suspicious https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/surveillance-com...
    - tptacek 1y ago
      I don't like that this is the case, but you understand that a pretty huge fraction of the country doesn't share your set of political premises that providing data for immigration enforcement is unethical, right? (I do, but that shouldn't matter for the analysis.) It seems weird to me to hyperfocus on Flock's role here rather than the role your own local municipalities play in deciding how to configure these things. Not sharing with ICE is apparently quite doable? At least to the point of requiring a court order to get access to the data, which is a vulnerability all online cameras share. Later s/company/country, thanks for the correction!
projektfu 1y ago
Here was the CEO back in 2017: "Alexro, there are clear and large signs about the cameras at the entrance to our neighborhoods. "Our neighborhoods are not large public roads, they are typically 100-400 home communities. You would never have to enter the community." Now, it's clear that the cameras are not always obviously marked, they are not always in small communities, and they are often now on public thoroughfares. i go past at least one every day and it is not within a subdivision, rather it's on a main thoroughfare. It is marked, but a sign that is readable at 5 MPH is not necessarily readable at 35 MPH. It doesn't help to mark it "Flock" because I don't know who it is for. Presumably, someone who has permission to the data can use it for legitimate investigations. Or they can use it for illicit investigations. Or share it with others for their own investigations. Or exchange it for other data they care about. And since we're not the "customer", what can we do about it? We're the target.
- RandomBacon 1y ago
  I take down scam bandit signs [0]. Since I noticed the Flock signs in one neighborhood, I no longer enter that neighborhood to take down the scam bandit signs. [0] "Text us to see if you qaulify for (some non-existent) government program to get free (things)" I hope that neighborhood enjoys the flock cameras more than the visual blight and their neighbors getting scammed.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]

extropic-engine 1y ago

did you know that flock has a data sharing contract with ring cameras? amazon’s panopticon is much larger. i believe it is on by default and users have to manually opt out, but i don’t have a ring camera to verify.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
garrettlangley 1y ago
[flagged]
- vanc_cefepime 1y ago
  Feel free to place a disclosure that you are a cofounder of Flock.
- CharlesW 1y ago
  Only sharing specific clips is opt-in¹, but the program and its notifications are on by default. Maybe not surprisingly, consumers aren't asked if they want to participate, and the option is buried enough that most people will never see it. ¹ I'm being generous here. Police can still obtain Ring footage via warrants or "emergency" requests that don’t involve the user choosing to share anything.
  - lysace 1y ago
    So your concern here is spam of unsolicited requests from LE to consider sharing data related to some local event?
- spaceguillotine 1y ago
  hey, while I have you here Mr CEO, why are you comfortable allowing abusive cops the tech to stalk and harass former partners, I've met women that had ex husbands in the FBI that kept chasing them across country to continue the abuse and your camera systems help enable those acts. I hope you lose sleep like those women do.
  - extropic-engine 1y ago
    since the flock CEO’s comment is dead, i hope you don’t mind if i reply to him here. Your wealth and power will not save you. Your rich friends will not save you. Turning off the monstrosity you are helping to create and reckoning with what you have already done in the world is the only thing that will. If there is still any shard of humanity left in you, I hope this finds it. It is not too late to turn away from the path you chose. But it soon will be. And there will be a reckoning either way.
- queenkjuul 1y ago
  Texas cops used your data to harass abortion recipients. FBI agents used it to abuse former partners. You want to make the world safer? Shut down your company.

diogenes_atx 1y ago

Here in Austin, the city council no longer allows Flock ALPR's (automated license plate readers) on city streets, but Home Depot and other businesses still use them in their parking lots, and they scan your vehicle license plate every time you enter and exit the premises. Flock sells its data to ICE and law enforcement.

garrettlangley 1y ago
[flagged]
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- CharlesW 1y ago
  Correct. Flock sells cameras and platform access, but gives data from their shared, nationwide surveillance utility to ICE and law enforcement. https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/flock-massachusetts-and-updates https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/flock-massachus... https://www.404media.co/ice-taps-into-nationwide-ai-enabled-camera-network-data-shows/ https://www.404media.co/ice-taps-into-nationwide-ai-enabled-... https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/surveillance-company-flock-now-using-ai-to-report-us-to-police-if-it-thinks-our-movement-patterns-are-suspicious https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/surveillance-com...
  - tptacek 1y ago
    I don't like that this is the case, but you understand that a pretty huge fraction of the country doesn't share your set of political premises that providing data for immigration enforcement is unethical, right? (I do, but that shouldn't matter for the analysis.) It seems weird to me to hyperfocus on Flock's role here rather than the role your own local municipalities play in deciding how to configure these things. Not sharing with ICE is apparently quite doable? At least to the point of requiring a court order to get access to the data, which is a vulnerability all online cameras share. Later s/company/country, thanks for the correction!

projektfu 1y ago

Here was the CEO back in 2017: "Alexro, there are clear and large signs about the cameras at the entrance to our neighborhoods. "Our neighborhoods are not large public roads, they are typically 100-400 home communities. You would never have to enter the community." Now, it's clear that the cameras are not always obviously marked, they are not always in small communities, and they are often now on public thoroughfares. i go past at least one every day and it is not within a subdivision, rather it's on a main thoroughfare. It is marked, but a sign that is readable at 5 MPH is not necessarily readable at 35 MPH. It doesn't help to mark it "Flock" because I don't know who it is for. Presumably, someone who has permission to the data can use it for legitimate investigations. Or they can use it for illicit investigations. Or share it with others for their own investigations. Or exchange it for other data they care about. And since we're not the "customer", what can we do about it? We're the target.

RandomBacon 1y ago
I take down scam bandit signs [0]. Since I noticed the Flock signs in one neighborhood, I no longer enter that neighborhood to take down the scam bandit signs. [0] "Text us to see if you qaulify for (some non-existent) government program to get free (things)" I hope that neighborhood enjoys the flock cameras more than the visual blight and their neighbors getting scammed.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]