4 ms·

I was expecting the headline to be sensational but a crash out was exactly what happened. The bad faith non-sequiturs is the cherry on top.

mckn1ght 5mo ago
[flagged]
- tekno45 5mo ago
  The future is now old man.
- nemomarx 5mo ago
  Why is the revealed preference of "I don't want to have a contract with a specific notorious company" mapped to "I don't want Internet at all" here? Maybe he should have proposed banning Comcast or another notorious company.
  - mckn1ght 5mo ago
    That’s not a revealed preference, but a stated one. My guess is that the councilman perceives the revealed preference to be: “I’m willing to give up privacy for convenience” and this is a way to get people to examine why they want certain conveniences at the cost of privacy, like doordash, netflix, facebook marketplace or group messages, vs others where they say they don’t, like convenience of law enforcement to track down criminals.
  - sensen 5mo ago
    Honestly, there are ways to advocate for better digital privacy without the need to entirely dismantle modern day life.. Arguments like this are counterproductive and are made in bad faith, suggesting that privacy is an all or nothing approach. Comparing Flowers' total ban on all technology to "A Modest proposal" is incredibly troublesome. His argument seems to be designed to show that privacy is impossible and that government overreach is inevitable and reasonable. He's not challenging existing power structures in any way, but aims to legitimize it. "Crash out" might not be the best term, but I think it helps to emphasize how unreasonable his position is in this matter.
    - mckn1ght 5mo ago
      FWIW I agree he’s not taking a good approach, it does sound like he’s flipping the bird on the way out due to frustration with not getting his way. I also agree that government overreach should not be inevitable and is not reasonable. But I also agree that privacy is actually already much more eroded than the average citizen realizes. For that reason, I agree there are actually better places to put ones effort than banning LPRs. For instance, tech companies like those I mentioned should face stricter regulations than they do today. Now, Flock would be party to that itself as it is collecting highly sensitive data. But operating in a regulated environment is not the same as being prohibited from operating at all. Generally speaking, I think machines that cause death and destruction and provide easy escape from crime scenes should be monitored while operating in public domains, where externalities of bad behavior can be foisted upon innocent parties. For the same reason, I also think speed and red light cameras should be a thing. Yes yes, then municipalities will shorten yellow light durations… this is an example of a pathological edge case than can be remedied, and doesn’t warrant throwing out the baby with the bathwater, IMO. We should also consider that the privacy concerns being raised against LPRs are also edge cases. Can’t we have the benefits of LPRs as well as systems that prevent and punish abuses of such technology?
      - dpark 5mo ago
        > I think machines that cause death and destruction and provide easy escape from crime scenes should be monitored while operating in public domains This ignores the other issues that come with these systems. People concerned with Flock cameras are largely not complaining about catching criminals. > We should also consider that the privacy concerns being raised against LPRs are also edge cases. Can’t we have the benefits of LPRs as well as systems that prevent and punish abuses of such technology? These aren’t really edge cases. Abuses of surveillance systems seem ubiquitous and rarely are punished. The US is a nation where a man was put in jail for over a month for posting an anti Trump meme and it seems literally nothing will happen to the people who did this to him. We seem categorically unable to punish abuse of power for some reason.
SpicyLemonZest 5mo ago
[flagged]
- nemomarx 5mo ago
  anecdotes about whether people like Flock cameras where they live are kinda useful, I think? maybe it'll inspire other city council votes elsewhere
  - SpicyLemonZest 5mo ago
    Anecdotes about whether people like Flock cameras are useful. Anecdotes about how one specific guy who likes Flock made an overheated analogy are not useful. The author conflating the two is a dictionary-perfect example of sensationalism.
    - johnnyanmac 5mo ago
      > Anecdotes about how one specific guy who likes Flock made an overheated analogy are not useful. You haven't been on social media the last decade, have yoh? We're no longer in times where (if we ever were) of the most eloquent, subtle, balanced argument winning over elected representatives.
- msabalau 5mo ago
  That's an odd way of viewing it. Having the reporting from the local paper amplified outside the immediate community strengthens the signal, and supports the general norm of holding officials accountable. "No man is an island entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main"
  - SpicyLemonZest 5mo ago
    Strengthens what signal? The local coverage does not say anything about "crashing out". It states that the council has voted to terminate the contract after an initial approval, in response to public opposition, and publishes a dissenting statement from one of the councilmembers in full. The author could have amplified that non-sensational article and tied it in with the Youtube clips and other non-sensational articles he found; there's good journalism lurking in here. But instead he wanted to be sensational.
tclancy 5mo ago
Yeah, it's even worse because the Johnathan Swift reference makes clear just how I Am Very Smart this dude is.
- mghackerlady 5mo ago
  It would maybe be fine if it was just, like, one modest proposal instead of three of them
  - tclancy 5mo ago
    Does feel immodest.

mckn1ght 5mo ago

[flagged]

tekno45 5mo ago
The future is now old man.
nemomarx 5mo ago
Why is the revealed preference of "I don't want to have a contract with a specific notorious company" mapped to "I don't want Internet at all" here? Maybe he should have proposed banning Comcast or another notorious company.
- mckn1ght 5mo ago
  That’s not a revealed preference, but a stated one. My guess is that the councilman perceives the revealed preference to be: “I’m willing to give up privacy for convenience” and this is a way to get people to examine why they want certain conveniences at the cost of privacy, like doordash, netflix, facebook marketplace or group messages, vs others where they say they don’t, like convenience of law enforcement to track down criminals.
- sensen 5mo ago
  Honestly, there are ways to advocate for better digital privacy without the need to entirely dismantle modern day life.. Arguments like this are counterproductive and are made in bad faith, suggesting that privacy is an all or nothing approach. Comparing Flowers' total ban on all technology to "A Modest proposal" is incredibly troublesome. His argument seems to be designed to show that privacy is impossible and that government overreach is inevitable and reasonable. He's not challenging existing power structures in any way, but aims to legitimize it. "Crash out" might not be the best term, but I think it helps to emphasize how unreasonable his position is in this matter.
  - mckn1ght 5mo ago
    FWIW I agree he’s not taking a good approach, it does sound like he’s flipping the bird on the way out due to frustration with not getting his way. I also agree that government overreach should not be inevitable and is not reasonable. But I also agree that privacy is actually already much more eroded than the average citizen realizes. For that reason, I agree there are actually better places to put ones effort than banning LPRs. For instance, tech companies like those I mentioned should face stricter regulations than they do today. Now, Flock would be party to that itself as it is collecting highly sensitive data. But operating in a regulated environment is not the same as being prohibited from operating at all. Generally speaking, I think machines that cause death and destruction and provide easy escape from crime scenes should be monitored while operating in public domains, where externalities of bad behavior can be foisted upon innocent parties. For the same reason, I also think speed and red light cameras should be a thing. Yes yes, then municipalities will shorten yellow light durations… this is an example of a pathological edge case than can be remedied, and doesn’t warrant throwing out the baby with the bathwater, IMO. We should also consider that the privacy concerns being raised against LPRs are also edge cases. Can’t we have the benefits of LPRs as well as systems that prevent and punish abuses of such technology?
    - dpark 5mo ago
      > I think machines that cause death and destruction and provide easy escape from crime scenes should be monitored while operating in public domains This ignores the other issues that come with these systems. People concerned with Flock cameras are largely not complaining about catching criminals. > We should also consider that the privacy concerns being raised against LPRs are also edge cases. Can’t we have the benefits of LPRs as well as systems that prevent and punish abuses of such technology? These aren’t really edge cases. Abuses of surveillance systems seem ubiquitous and rarely are punished. The US is a nation where a man was put in jail for over a month for posting an anti Trump meme and it seems literally nothing will happen to the people who did this to him. We seem categorically unable to punish abuse of power for some reason.

SpicyLemonZest 5mo ago

[flagged]

nemomarx 5mo ago
anecdotes about whether people like Flock cameras where they live are kinda useful, I think? maybe it'll inspire other city council votes elsewhere
- SpicyLemonZest 5mo ago
  Anecdotes about whether people like Flock cameras are useful. Anecdotes about how one specific guy who likes Flock made an overheated analogy are not useful. The author conflating the two is a dictionary-perfect example of sensationalism.
  - johnnyanmac 5mo ago
    > Anecdotes about how one specific guy who likes Flock made an overheated analogy are not useful. You haven't been on social media the last decade, have yoh? We're no longer in times where (if we ever were) of the most eloquent, subtle, balanced argument winning over elected representatives.
msabalau 5mo ago
That's an odd way of viewing it. Having the reporting from the local paper amplified outside the immediate community strengthens the signal, and supports the general norm of holding officials accountable. "No man is an island entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main"
- SpicyLemonZest 5mo ago
  Strengthens what signal? The local coverage does not say anything about "crashing out". It states that the council has voted to terminate the contract after an initial approval, in response to public opposition, and publishes a dissenting statement from one of the councilmembers in full. The author could have amplified that non-sensational article and tied it in with the Youtube clips and other non-sensational articles he found; there's good journalism lurking in here. But instead he wanted to be sensational.

tclancy 5mo ago

Yeah, it's even worse because the Johnathan Swift reference makes clear just how I Am Very Smart this dude is.

mghackerlady 5mo ago
It would maybe be fine if it was just, like, one modest proposal instead of three of them
- tclancy 5mo ago
  Does feel immodest.