7 ms·

Flock's CEO Faced Me After Its Cameras Led to My Wrongful Stop

94 points by f154hfds 2mo ago

curiousgal 2mo ago
Flock (YC S17)
- ryandvm 2mo ago
  Ugh. It hurts my brain to think about the Venn diagram of privacy advocates and YC sycophants that hang out on Hacker News.
  - nekusar 2mo ago
    YCombinator and HN would run a "Slit your mommas throat as a service" if they though there were hockey stick growth profit. Flock, and anybody who funds them are the real domestic terrorists. Anybody who destroys these devices are patriots in my book. And if I ever serve for jury duty over a case like that, they didn't do it.
    - dylan604 2mo ago
      > And if I ever serve for jury duty over a case like that, they didn't do it. Now you're bending facts. You can decide they are not guilty of a crime, but you can't make them have not done it.
      - lovich 2mo ago
        He’s referencing jury nullification. Juries actually can “make them have not done it”, although that’s been used for good and ill purposes.
        sib 2mo ago
        "Not guilty" does not mean "did not do it" - it means "the state didn't prove that they did it beyond a reasonable doubt."
        nekusar 2mo ago
        Exactly. I think as a citizen and a 2x juror, that it is our responsibility first to determine if a law should be a law for all. Secondly, if the law passes scrutiny, ONLY then should we determine guilt or innocence. I am highly disincentivised in seeing victimless crimes as crimes. Like drug usage and all that. Or destruction of horrific security appratus like Flock. Simply put, the laws wrong. And that means 'Not Guilty' for anyone I would have to judge, even if they admitted it in open court. (I'm also aware that jury nullification has also been used to find black lynching perpetrators to be not guilty of the same nullification. I said that I judge a law if it should be. Murder is pretty clearly not victimless, but extenuating circumstances like self defense are a thing. Lynching is terrible, and so is freeing lynching perpe-traitors.)
        lovich 2mo ago
        Yea and that’s effectively “did not do it” when it comes to anything involving consequences. It was obvious what the rhetorical point `nekusar was making. I’ll give you the pedantic point of being technically correct when looking at it from a gods eye view.
        dylan604 2mo ago
        But for the purposes of doing something in protest like destroying flock cameras, the person doesn't want to be known as not doing it. They want people to know they did it, and why they did it. They want the cred. So saying they didn't do it is not helping the cause. Accepting they did it while returning not guilty is the desired outcome. Having juries return not guilty verdicts when someone very clearly did something is a good step in having stupid laws overturned. Even if they don't get removed, it shows police and prosecutors that that juries are not going to convict for this type of case. You'd have to be a Jeanine Pirro type to be willing to bring cases that are known losers. Rational prosecutors will not.
      - cucumber3732842 2mo ago
        If you really want to nitpick, juries are what settle questions of facts.
        dylan604 2mo ago
        You can agree that the person did the act yet still find them not guilty. The fact is still the fact. As someone else stated, not guilty does not mean they did not do it. It just means they do not want to say they are guilty. There's only two options. If if you do not choose "guilty" the only option remaining is "not guilty".
      - xboxnolifes 2mo ago
        And you're just being a pedant, aiming for the worst kind of correct.
        dylan604 2mo ago
        nope, read my response lower in this thread before your knee jerk reaction https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49158933 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49158933
        xboxnolifes 2mo ago
        You're being a pedant because it's a common saying to say "if they did it, no they didn't". Everyone knows what is meant by saying it. Going through all of those words to explain what everyone already knows is what it means to be a pedant.
    - bob001 2mo ago
      > YCombinator and HN would run a "Slit your mommas throat as a service" if they though there were hockey stick growth profit. While saying they're making the world a better place in the process. At least Wall Street sharks tend to be honest about their motivations and lack of giving a shit about you.
  - _def 2mo ago
    Human rights are really important to us!* *As long as it doesn't prevent us from getting rich.
  - yomismoaqui 2mo ago
    Money is a nice balm for cognitive dissonance.
- zuzululu 2mo ago
  not a good look for YC
f154hfds 2mo ago
> Garrett: At the highest level, nothing would make me happier than if we had state-by-state regulation on this type of technology. That to me is so crystal clear, because the lack of regulation on this type of technology just shows that our elected officials need to move faster than they have historically. Agreed. We've had a lot of this - tech companies begging for tech regulation. Without the regulation it seems we'll always get these competitive races to the bottom of what's possible within the confines of the laws that do exist as less and less scrupulous companies enter the fray.
- vel0city 2mo ago
  This just reads to me like "won't someone please stop me from grinding up all these babies? If only someone would pass a law preventing me from doing these horrible things I keep doing..." Like, you know you can just stop doing bad things, right? You shouldn't need a government telling you that maybe you shouldn't do bad things. Its as if he's saying he has no free will or executive action being the CEO of Flock, he has no way of having the company not be evil until the government gives him a rulebook.
  - dfxm12 2mo ago
    It's hard when people are paying for the cameras. This is capitalism. Money is always the #1 priority & we have little relative to those pushing for the surveillance state.
    - goatlover 2mo ago
      For Flock and similar cameras, it's often city councils without asking the public to vote on it first. I suppose the parking lot cameras are commercial, so customers would need to complain loudly enough or boycott businesses. However majority of customers might prefer having a sophisticated camera system making sure nobody breaks into their car while shopping. Those things seem to run after business hours, so presumably they're there to prevent anyone from using the parking lot who doesn't work or shop there. More of the if you're living out of your car, we don't want to give you a place to park for the night because not having a home is a terrible sin in society. So is just hanging out I guess. The stores themselves should have adequate security already.
josefritzishere 2mo ago
Flock executives should be under constant 24/7 surveillance to prevent corporate crime.
- SpaceL10n 2mo ago
  Who watches the watchers?
  - roysting 2mo ago
    The people who let them get away with everything because they’re traitors
  - xboxnolifes 2mo ago
    Everyone.
righthand 2mo ago
> That to me is so crystal clear, because the lack of regulation on this type of technology just shows that our elected officials need to move faster than they have historically. Ah so the guy who’s responsible for giving access to whoever and refusing to take down cameras when city/state governments regulate them, is saying: it’s the fault that the states didn’t regulate the technology? Fuck Flock and their fork tongued CEO. Regulations have been passed. People should be tearing these cameras down if Flock isn’t going to follow the law either.
overgard 2mo ago
This is such an evil company; they should be regulated out of existence.
- righthand 2mo ago
  Yes they should be shut down and their assets destroyed and their CEO should be publicly humiliated as he’s done to many many other people.
- morkalork 2mo ago
  This shouldn't be a controversial opinion. The company exists to launder responsibility between government and corporation in order to facilitate mass surveillance. Another more accurate name for them could be "Constitutional Loophole Corp."
- projektfu 2mo ago
  The swiftness with which this company went from "We are setting up cameras in neighborhoods where we were invited by HOA, representing the homeowners" to "We set up cameras on public highways all over the country putting everyone in a dragnet" is exactly why you don't let the camel's nose under the tent.
jakubmazanec 2mo ago
What a coincidence, John Oliver just talked about this company [1] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnBPhelCdWE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnBPhelCdWE
- morgan814 2mo ago
  It was good but I feel like he missed the point somewhat. These tools are inaccurate, sure. But even if they weren’t we should still oppose this type of surveillance. Even if these cameras stopped all crime. He touched on more ideological grounds briefly but wish he spent more time there. There’s nothing in the Constitution that makes me think warrantless (mass) surveillance should be legal.
- Bender 2mo ago
  Benn Jordan has released a number of them as well showing how insecure they are among other things. [1] [1] - https://www.youtube.com/@BennJordan/search?query=flock https://www.youtube.com/@BennJordan/search?query=flock
sterlind 2mo ago
seems like: - cop messed up, added an incomplete license plate number (34DTM) into the NCIC database. - Flock cameras found his fancy car, a $155k Range Rover, which had a license plate like 34DTM10, and flagged it. - cops didn't bother checking the police report before they went in and surrounded him. thoughts: - as much as I dislike Flock, it seems like it wasn't at fault here. this was a scene straight of Brazil, and Flock was the typewriter. it was an accelerant, not the cause. - police are shockingly incompetent. the individual officers, the departments, the bureaucratic systems, they're bad at their jobs. probably because they're insulated from consequences - these are people who can shoot the wrong person by accident, and at worst they get fired (QI.) - none of this would have made the news if it wasn't a $155k Range Rover being driven by a reporter. how many people in beat-up Carollas have faced this same situation?
- righthand 2mo ago
  So we should give guns to children then because it’s just a tool to defend themselves right? Or a more common metaphor, if you give chimpanzee’s a gun… The police have no actionable method of abuse if you take Flock cameras away. They wouldn’t be acting on flagged random license plates if you took away the dragnet and surveillance system that’s randomly flagging people. This is 100% fault of Flock.
  - pc86 2mo ago
    Flock can be a terrible unconstitutional company and this particular incident can have nothing to do with that and not be Flock's responsibility in any way. Acting like anyone who understands how true legacy ALPR systems work and how police officers track plates and search for stolen vehicles are by extension somehow supporting or excusing Flock is ridiculous. Nearly the exact same thing could have happened with traditional non-surveillance ALPR systems, or with manual plate running by officers in cars.
    - righthand 2mo ago
      Nope! Traditional ALPR systems follow the law and do not give out access like candy and do not automate flagging and tracking individuals. Traditional systems are not a dragnet. This is 100% the fault of Flock.
scrapcode 2mo ago
I am absolutely biased, but there is a lot of attempt to shift or at least share the blame here and not a lot of accountability. Flock themselves mis-translated the plate, plain and simple, and should not be being used in production for alerting authorities on very serious matters. We are already very aware that the police overreact and make plenty of mistakes. The obvious here being that even if this was the exact plate criminals can very easily, and do, swap plates - so you shouldn't just aggressively be knocking down vehicles because of the standard screwed in license plate that is displayed on the back. When was the last time you checked your license plate and made sure it was still yours? Would you even know it is yours? It has happened to me.
- overgard 2mo ago
  The way I see it their fundamental business model is not something we should tolerate. This is basically just stalking with a lot of money put behind it and barely any legal accountability. This is just not a thing we should tolerate in a free society.
  - plorg 2mo ago
    In fact they seem to structure their business to specifically avoid accountability both for themselves and their customers.
- zenapollo 2mo ago
  In Pampano beach FL my 76 yo mother got pulled over for driving a stolen vehicle. Luckily the police had some common sense to decipher what happened. Plate swap, same make model and color.
  - gumby 2mo ago
    I’m not a criminal*, but I hope when I’m 76 I’ll still be sufficiently lithe and compos mentis to pull off a career in crime, should I so choose. * Though wouldn’t a criminal say that?
    - 2mo ago
jimt1234 2mo ago
I watched a series on Netflix recently: "Homicide Squad: New Orleans". The series was basically an infomercial for video surveillance cameras and license plate readers. It felt like all the detectives did was watch video and monitor LPR data all day. Every single homicide was solved like this - video surveillance and LPR data. I'm not sure how accurate that show is, but the use of video surveillance and LPR data to solve crimes certainly seemed plausible. And it made me realize, unfortunately, these Flock cameras aren't going anywhere. People want crimes to get solved, especially homicides. https://www.netflix.com/title/82158926 https://www.netflix.com/title/82158926
xoa 2mo ago
There's a lot going on in this story and interview, but I'd like to narrow in on one aspect I consider pretty core, and that I'm pretty disappointed Joel didn't push back on: >Garrett:[...] To individuals that are promoting breaking the law, I just find that confusing. We’re a company that, by and large, by design from our founding, was that people shouldn’t break the law. I don’t know why that’s controversial, that I don’t agree with breaking the law. [...] So do you hate gays Mr Garrett? Or "race mixing"? Because it wasn't that long ago that mixed-race sexual relations or homosexual relations were illegal in at least parts of the USA. See history about anti-miscegenation laws [0]. The 14th Amendment was adopted in 1868, but it would be 99 YEARS before the SCOTUS would rule that such laws were unconstitutional. And it wouldn't be for another 36 years after that until a ruling (Lawrence v. Texas, 2003) that anti-sodomy laws [1] criminalizing "unnatural or immoral" sexual acts (and used heavily for discrimination and punishment of LGBT) were unconstitutional (and on grounds that, along with marriage equality, the current SCOTUS could certainly reverse). Completely thoughtless appeals to "the law" demonstrate wild levels of ignorance and insular thinking, even ignoring the undoubted hypocrisy and bullshit given Flock's many little... incidents... just in the last few years (ex: "City Learns Flock Accessed Cameras in Children's Gymnastics Room as a Sales Demo" [2], "Flock Credibility Lost as It Repeatedly Lies to City Councils, Police, & Public" [3], "Flock and Cyble Inc. Weaponize "Cybercrime" Takedowns to Silence Critics" [4], "Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women" [5], etc etc etc). I suppose it's possible this guy is just incredibly bubbled vs also being a lying psychopath and/or being fully onboard with the boot stomping on prole faces forever, but it's awful either way. ---- 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-miscegenation_laws_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-miscegenation_laws_in_the... 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_laws_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_laws_in_the_United_Stat... 2: https://www.404media.co/city-learns-flock-accessed-cameras-in-childrens-gymnastics-room-as-a-sales-pitch-demo-renews-contract-anyway/ https://www.404media.co/city-learns-flock-accessed-cameras-i... 3: https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/tracking-alpr-cameras/flock-safety-credibility-lost-as-it-repeatedly-lies-to-city-councils-police-departments-and-public-across-the-country https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/tracking-alpr-c... 4: https://footnote4a.org/news/cyble-downtime https://footnote4a.org/news/cyble-downtime 5: https://ipvm.com/reports/police-chiefs-track https://ipvm.com/reports/police-chiefs-track
legitster 2mo ago
I know we're all sharpening pitchforks for Flock - but the national license plate database has been leading to mistakes like this for decades. Some states also compound the problem by issuing a license plate number multiple times. So long before Flock getting someone else's speed camera tickets in the mail was already a problem.
- behringer 2mo ago
  A mistake like this wouldn't be so bad if we didn't have flock cameras everywher.
  - dundarious 2mo ago
    Yes, building a highly reactive automated system upon flawed foundations is bad.
- rationalist 2mo ago
  One of my plate numbers was reissued. I only found out when I went to renew the registration and they gave me a new plate and told me then. It was a shame because I liked that random combination of letters and numbers.
  - xkcd1963 2mo ago
    [dead]
Cider9986 2mo ago
There's a map of ALPRs based on OpenStreetMap so you can see ones near you: https://maps.deflock.org/ https://maps.deflock.org/ There's a lot more than just Flock, Flock is just one of thousands of terrible companies creating mass spying on innocent people. And there's also other ALPR companies like Axon and Motorola. Flock may be worse than those because of the AI features and large databases, but other companies making surveillance tech are not avoiding the AI features because of moral reasons.
- vablings 2mo ago
  There is a huge difference between the likes of Flock + Axon/Motorola currently. Flock is bad not because its surveillance its bad due to the scale, size and centralization.
  - JohnFen 2mo ago
    And because of its surveillance and desire to turn the entire nation into a panopticon. Axon/Motorola is no better.
dominick-cc 2mo ago
I can't deal with the ads on this page on mobile
- behringer 2mo ago
  use firefox and ublock origin. Use dns with ad blocking. You shouldn't see ads on mobile.
  - projektfu 2mo ago
    Also, Brave Mobile, by default, seems to block most ads.
  - dominick-cc 2mo ago
    I'm in a hospital right now. I think that's part of the problem, used to my home wifi with dns block lists. I'll try to see if I can find ublock origin on mobile.
dylan604 2mo ago
"Inevitably what happens is, let’s take the rental car example: A car is reported stolen by the rental car agency." I've heard stories of rental car companies being very aggressive in reporting a car stolen. It sounds like Flock is having to do a lot of work to handle reports made by rental car companies specifically. This leaves me wondering how aggressive rental companies are in reporting back to the department they made the stolen report notifying the car had been found. I'm guessing not very. These rental companies need to be held responsible for their lackadaisical use of stolen car reports. It is not the police's responsibility for what is essentially a contract dispute. If I allow someone to borrow my car, the police will not consider this a stolen car situation even if they said they would bring it back the next day. This is no different than a car not being returned to the rental company, so why are the police willing to be involved?
- black6 2mo ago
  Hertz had a "glitch" in their system which would wrongly flag cars as stolen and automatically report that to police. https://www.npr.org/2022/12/06/1140998674/hertz-false-accusation-stealing-cars-settlement https://www.npr.org/2022/12/06/1140998674/hertz-false-accusa...
roysting 2mo ago
[flagged]
kittikitti 2mo ago
I find this quote interesting, "That lack of feeling safe starts to lead to these erosions of society." These camera's don't make me feel safer given the rising fascism associated with surveillance. If they are taking it seriously, the false positives would also include the racism in policing and the inequality in criminal courts. However, they're not serious about it, and for them, this is just a public relations issue. If America wasn't actively mobilizing their own gestapo (ICE) then my opinions would be more muted. I think that wealth inequality and oppression of a state's own citizens leads to the erosions of society. A modern interpretation of Benjamin Franklin's quote is apt, "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
- goatlover 2mo ago
  I fee watched all the time now. Part of me wonders what sort of legal behavior gets one noticed.
ItsBob 2mo ago
I haven't read the transcript yet but are there no "human in the middle" loops here? Surely we could just get a pair of eyeballs on everything flagged and if it's not 100% crystal clear what's going on, then it gets flagged for a senior pair of eyes to look at? I'm against the Minority Report kind of stuff but a system (AI Flock cameras in this case) flags up <thing>, surely it should then go into a queue for humans to look at! Flock can add in a certainty score and the human must verify! It could still increase efficiency this way.
- projektfu 2mo ago
  The best read I can give it is that the police like slop just as much as anyone, and when the computer says "found it" they say "ok" and don't bother checking, especially if they're not the ones who have to stop the car themselves.
- JohnFen 2mo ago
  The "human in the middle" is supposed to be the cops. However, what we've seen is what history tells us we can expect: the "human in the middle" will tend to just accept whatever the automation says and not give it a second thought. This is why "human in the middle" doesn't provide much protection or solace.
zippyman55 2mo ago
It’s time for a refilm of the Paul Newman movie Cool Hand Luke but in this version he is cutting off the poles that support the fluke cameras.
scoofy 2mo ago
I think a discussion we're not having is how policing should exist moving forward given this technology exists for criminals as well. We literally have people driving around with electromagnets on their license plates to cheat any number of perfectly reasonable traffic instruments. We have folks breaking into and going for joyrides in cars that lack engine immobilizers by exploiting them, then ditching them often after crashing. I'm certainly fine with the folks who say we shouldn't have surveillance, but then how do we have law enforcement without hiring a literal army of police officers? We are effectively at the point where technology allows very small groups to massively exploit the general public. In the vast majority of cases, we do not have the public funds to do law enforcement purely in person anymore. I suspect the alternative is not "greater liberty" but organized crime/vigilante justice.
- patrickmay 2mo ago
  > how do we have law enforcement without hiring a literal army of police officers? Just like we did way back in 2023 before the massive nationwide rollout of Flock cameras. A surveillance state is the antithesis of what the U.S. founders gave us. It is fundamentally illiberal.
  - scoofy 2mo ago
    2023 was a pretty miserable year in SF, in large part, because organized crime was using modern reselling platforms to create wildly productive fencing operations, driving extreme increases in car break-ins and burglaries. This lead to a massive political shift towards stronger policing in the city, much of which has been facilitated by drone surveillance of groups engaging in burglaries without the dangers of high-speed car chases to the general public. I do not think “just go back” is anything other than a nostalgia for a world we no longer live in.
dundarious 2mo ago
If Flock has so many issues with this database, and all their solutions are patchwork, and those solutions remain local to the jurisdiction that is locally using Flock, then this is a bad product. If you build a product on a bad database, you cannot load the blame for the resulting bad product on the bad database. If it was not fit for purpose, then the product designers are the problem as much as anything else. This applies doubly for a product that relies so heavily on automation enabling speedy responses with heavy consequences. I understand that this may smack of perfect being the enemy of good, but this domain is akin to medical devices in terms of impact.
josefritzishere 2mo ago
Garrett Langley should be arrested for making false reports to law enforcement authorities. It's a felony.
dundarious 2mo ago
Is there any evidence or other form of justification for the Flock CEO's claims about how it is responsible for SF's crime downturn? I find it hard to believe that Flock cameras are at the heart of such a wide-ranging effect. I am not a local, and I have only done a cursory search, but I don't see the elected officials making the same claim -- I have seen them say it has more to do with changing socioeconomic factors.
- tencentshill 2mo ago
  >like San Francisco, where crime is incredibly hard to get away with—so hard that people just choose not to do it. hilarious.
  - dundarious 2mo ago
    Exactly, the charge rates for the type of crime he was talking about (stealing from cars) are still incredibly bad, his claims are incredibly suspect.
Ancapistani 2mo ago
I’d be interested in seeing a history of Mr. Langley’s movements for the past couple of years. Anyone know where I could obtain such a dataset?
trinsic2 2mo ago
If you are "sitting down" with anyone from Flock you are not facing the the truth of what this is. There is clearly an effort to install a nation-wide surveillance system and flock is right in the middle of it. They know what they are doing. Stop giving them a platform.

94 points by f154hfds 2mo ago

curiousgal 2mo ago

Flock (YC S17)

ryandvm 2mo ago
Ugh. It hurts my brain to think about the Venn diagram of privacy advocates and YC sycophants that hang out on Hacker News.
- nekusar 2mo ago
  YCombinator and HN would run a "Slit your mommas throat as a service" if they though there were hockey stick growth profit. Flock, and anybody who funds them are the real domestic terrorists. Anybody who destroys these devices are patriots in my book. And if I ever serve for jury duty over a case like that, they didn't do it.
  - dylan604 2mo ago
    > And if I ever serve for jury duty over a case like that, they didn't do it. Now you're bending facts. You can decide they are not guilty of a crime, but you can't make them have not done it.
    - lovich 2mo ago
      He’s referencing jury nullification. Juries actually can “make them have not done it”, although that’s been used for good and ill purposes.
      - sib 2mo ago
        "Not guilty" does not mean "did not do it" - it means "the state didn't prove that they did it beyond a reasonable doubt."
        nekusar 2mo ago
        Exactly. I think as a citizen and a 2x juror, that it is our responsibility first to determine if a law should be a law for all. Secondly, if the law passes scrutiny, ONLY then should we determine guilt or innocence. I am highly disincentivised in seeing victimless crimes as crimes. Like drug usage and all that. Or destruction of horrific security appratus like Flock. Simply put, the laws wrong. And that means 'Not Guilty' for anyone I would have to judge, even if they admitted it in open court. (I'm also aware that jury nullification has also been used to find black lynching perpetrators to be not guilty of the same nullification. I said that I judge a law if it should be. Murder is pretty clearly not victimless, but extenuating circumstances like self defense are a thing. Lynching is terrible, and so is freeing lynching perpe-traitors.)
        lovich 2mo ago
        Yea and that’s effectively “did not do it” when it comes to anything involving consequences. It was obvious what the rhetorical point `nekusar was making. I’ll give you the pedantic point of being technically correct when looking at it from a gods eye view.
        dylan604 2mo ago
        But for the purposes of doing something in protest like destroying flock cameras, the person doesn't want to be known as not doing it. They want people to know they did it, and why they did it. They want the cred. So saying they didn't do it is not helping the cause. Accepting they did it while returning not guilty is the desired outcome. Having juries return not guilty verdicts when someone very clearly did something is a good step in having stupid laws overturned. Even if they don't get removed, it shows police and prosecutors that that juries are not going to convict for this type of case. You'd have to be a Jeanine Pirro type to be willing to bring cases that are known losers. Rational prosecutors will not.
    - cucumber3732842 2mo ago
      If you really want to nitpick, juries are what settle questions of facts.
      - dylan604 2mo ago
        You can agree that the person did the act yet still find them not guilty. The fact is still the fact. As someone else stated, not guilty does not mean they did not do it. It just means they do not want to say they are guilty. There's only two options. If if you do not choose "guilty" the only option remaining is "not guilty".
    - xboxnolifes 2mo ago
      And you're just being a pedant, aiming for the worst kind of correct.
      - dylan604 2mo ago
        nope, read my response lower in this thread before your knee jerk reaction https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49158933 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49158933
        xboxnolifes 2mo ago
        You're being a pedant because it's a common saying to say "if they did it, no they didn't". Everyone knows what is meant by saying it. Going through all of those words to explain what everyone already knows is what it means to be a pedant.
  - bob001 2mo ago
    > YCombinator and HN would run a "Slit your mommas throat as a service" if they though there were hockey stick growth profit. While saying they're making the world a better place in the process. At least Wall Street sharks tend to be honest about their motivations and lack of giving a shit about you.
- _def 2mo ago
  Human rights are really important to us!* *As long as it doesn't prevent us from getting rich.
- yomismoaqui 2mo ago
  Money is a nice balm for cognitive dissonance.
zuzululu 2mo ago
not a good look for YC

f154hfds 2mo ago

> Garrett: At the highest level, nothing would make me happier than if we had state-by-state regulation on this type of technology. That to me is so crystal clear, because the lack of regulation on this type of technology just shows that our elected officials need to move faster than they have historically. Agreed. We've had a lot of this - tech companies begging for tech regulation. Without the regulation it seems we'll always get these competitive races to the bottom of what's possible within the confines of the laws that do exist as less and less scrupulous companies enter the fray.

vel0city 2mo ago
This just reads to me like "won't someone please stop me from grinding up all these babies? If only someone would pass a law preventing me from doing these horrible things I keep doing..." Like, you know you can just stop doing bad things, right? You shouldn't need a government telling you that maybe you shouldn't do bad things. Its as if he's saying he has no free will or executive action being the CEO of Flock, he has no way of having the company not be evil until the government gives him a rulebook.
- dfxm12 2mo ago
  It's hard when people are paying for the cameras. This is capitalism. Money is always the #1 priority & we have little relative to those pushing for the surveillance state.
  - goatlover 2mo ago
    For Flock and similar cameras, it's often city councils without asking the public to vote on it first. I suppose the parking lot cameras are commercial, so customers would need to complain loudly enough or boycott businesses. However majority of customers might prefer having a sophisticated camera system making sure nobody breaks into their car while shopping. Those things seem to run after business hours, so presumably they're there to prevent anyone from using the parking lot who doesn't work or shop there. More of the if you're living out of your car, we don't want to give you a place to park for the night because not having a home is a terrible sin in society. So is just hanging out I guess. The stores themselves should have adequate security already.

josefritzishere 2mo ago

Flock executives should be under constant 24/7 surveillance to prevent corporate crime.

SpaceL10n 2mo ago
Who watches the watchers?
- roysting 2mo ago
  The people who let them get away with everything because they’re traitors
- xboxnolifes 2mo ago
  Everyone.

righthand 2mo ago

> That to me is so crystal clear, because the lack of regulation on this type of technology just shows that our elected officials need to move faster than they have historically. Ah so the guy who’s responsible for giving access to whoever and refusing to take down cameras when city/state governments regulate them, is saying: it’s the fault that the states didn’t regulate the technology? Fuck Flock and their fork tongued CEO. Regulations have been passed. People should be tearing these cameras down if Flock isn’t going to follow the law either.

overgard 2mo ago

This is such an evil company; they should be regulated out of existence.

righthand 2mo ago
Yes they should be shut down and their assets destroyed and their CEO should be publicly humiliated as he’s done to many many other people.
morkalork 2mo ago
This shouldn't be a controversial opinion. The company exists to launder responsibility between government and corporation in order to facilitate mass surveillance. Another more accurate name for them could be "Constitutional Loophole Corp."
projektfu 2mo ago
The swiftness with which this company went from "We are setting up cameras in neighborhoods where we were invited by HOA, representing the homeowners" to "We set up cameras on public highways all over the country putting everyone in a dragnet" is exactly why you don't let the camel's nose under the tent.

jakubmazanec 2mo ago

What a coincidence, John Oliver just talked about this company [1] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnBPhelCdWE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnBPhelCdWE

morgan814 2mo ago
It was good but I feel like he missed the point somewhat. These tools are inaccurate, sure. But even if they weren’t we should still oppose this type of surveillance. Even if these cameras stopped all crime. He touched on more ideological grounds briefly but wish he spent more time there. There’s nothing in the Constitution that makes me think warrantless (mass) surveillance should be legal.
Bender 2mo ago
Benn Jordan has released a number of them as well showing how insecure they are among other things. [1] [1] - https://www.youtube.com/@BennJordan/search?query=flock https://www.youtube.com/@BennJordan/search?query=flock

sterlind 2mo ago

seems like: - cop messed up, added an incomplete license plate number (34DTM) into the NCIC database. - Flock cameras found his fancy car, a $155k Range Rover, which had a license plate like 34DTM10, and flagged it. - cops didn't bother checking the police report before they went in and surrounded him. thoughts: - as much as I dislike Flock, it seems like it wasn't at fault here. this was a scene straight of Brazil, and Flock was the typewriter. it was an accelerant, not the cause. - police are shockingly incompetent. the individual officers, the departments, the bureaucratic systems, they're bad at their jobs. probably because they're insulated from consequences - these are people who can shoot the wrong person by accident, and at worst they get fired (QI.) - none of this would have made the news if it wasn't a $155k Range Rover being driven by a reporter. how many people in beat-up Carollas have faced this same situation?

righthand 2mo ago
So we should give guns to children then because it’s just a tool to defend themselves right? Or a more common metaphor, if you give chimpanzee’s a gun… The police have no actionable method of abuse if you take Flock cameras away. They wouldn’t be acting on flagged random license plates if you took away the dragnet and surveillance system that’s randomly flagging people. This is 100% fault of Flock.
- pc86 2mo ago
  Flock can be a terrible unconstitutional company and this particular incident can have nothing to do with that and not be Flock's responsibility in any way. Acting like anyone who understands how true legacy ALPR systems work and how police officers track plates and search for stolen vehicles are by extension somehow supporting or excusing Flock is ridiculous. Nearly the exact same thing could have happened with traditional non-surveillance ALPR systems, or with manual plate running by officers in cars.
  - righthand 2mo ago
    Nope! Traditional ALPR systems follow the law and do not give out access like candy and do not automate flagging and tracking individuals. Traditional systems are not a dragnet. This is 100% the fault of Flock.

scrapcode 2mo ago

I am absolutely biased, but there is a lot of attempt to shift or at least share the blame here and not a lot of accountability. Flock themselves mis-translated the plate, plain and simple, and should not be being used in production for alerting authorities on very serious matters. We are already very aware that the police overreact and make plenty of mistakes. The obvious here being that even if this was the exact plate criminals can very easily, and do, swap plates - so you shouldn't just aggressively be knocking down vehicles because of the standard screwed in license plate that is displayed on the back. When was the last time you checked your license plate and made sure it was still yours? Would you even know it is yours? It has happened to me.

overgard 2mo ago
The way I see it their fundamental business model is not something we should tolerate. This is basically just stalking with a lot of money put behind it and barely any legal accountability. This is just not a thing we should tolerate in a free society.
- plorg 2mo ago
  In fact they seem to structure their business to specifically avoid accountability both for themselves and their customers.
zenapollo 2mo ago
In Pampano beach FL my 76 yo mother got pulled over for driving a stolen vehicle. Luckily the police had some common sense to decipher what happened. Plate swap, same make model and color.
- gumby 2mo ago
  I’m not a criminal*, but I hope when I’m 76 I’ll still be sufficiently lithe and compos mentis to pull off a career in crime, should I so choose. * Though wouldn’t a criminal say that?
  - 2mo ago

jimt1234 2mo ago

I watched a series on Netflix recently: "Homicide Squad: New Orleans". The series was basically an infomercial for video surveillance cameras and license plate readers. It felt like all the detectives did was watch video and monitor LPR data all day. Every single homicide was solved like this - video surveillance and LPR data. I'm not sure how accurate that show is, but the use of video surveillance and LPR data to solve crimes certainly seemed plausible. And it made me realize, unfortunately, these Flock cameras aren't going anywhere. People want crimes to get solved, especially homicides. https://www.netflix.com/title/82158926 https://www.netflix.com/title/82158926

xoa 2mo ago

There's a lot going on in this story and interview, but I'd like to narrow in on one aspect I consider pretty core, and that I'm pretty disappointed Joel didn't push back on: >Garrett:[...] To individuals that are promoting breaking the law, I just find that confusing. We’re a company that, by and large, by design from our founding, was that people shouldn’t break the law. I don’t know why that’s controversial, that I don’t agree with breaking the law. [...] So do you hate gays Mr Garrett? Or "race mixing"? Because it wasn't that long ago that mixed-race sexual relations or homosexual relations were illegal in at least parts of the USA. See history about anti-miscegenation laws [0]. The 14th Amendment was adopted in 1868, but it would be 99 YEARS before the SCOTUS would rule that such laws were unconstitutional. And it wouldn't be for another 36 years after that until a ruling (Lawrence v. Texas, 2003) that anti-sodomy laws [1] criminalizing "unnatural or immoral" sexual acts (and used heavily for discrimination and punishment of LGBT) were unconstitutional (and on grounds that, along with marriage equality, the current SCOTUS could certainly reverse). Completely thoughtless appeals to "the law" demonstrate wild levels of ignorance and insular thinking, even ignoring the undoubted hypocrisy and bullshit given Flock's many little... incidents... just in the last few years (ex: "City Learns Flock Accessed Cameras in Children's Gymnastics Room as a Sales Demo" [2], "Flock Credibility Lost as It Repeatedly Lies to City Councils, Police, & Public" [3], "Flock and Cyble Inc. Weaponize "Cybercrime" Takedowns to Silence Critics" [4], "Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women" [5], etc etc etc). I suppose it's possible this guy is just incredibly bubbled vs also being a lying psychopath and/or being fully onboard with the boot stomping on prole faces forever, but it's awful either way. ---- 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-miscegenation_laws_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-miscegenation_laws_in_the... 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_laws_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_laws_in_the_United_Stat... 2: https://www.404media.co/city-learns-flock-accessed-cameras-in-childrens-gymnastics-room-as-a-sales-pitch-demo-renews-contract-anyway/ https://www.404media.co/city-learns-flock-accessed-cameras-i... 3: https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/tracking-alpr-cameras/flock-safety-credibility-lost-as-it-repeatedly-lies-to-city-councils-police-departments-and-public-across-the-country https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/tracking-alpr-c... 4: https://footnote4a.org/news/cyble-downtime https://footnote4a.org/news/cyble-downtime 5: https://ipvm.com/reports/police-chiefs-track https://ipvm.com/reports/police-chiefs-track

legitster 2mo ago

I know we're all sharpening pitchforks for Flock - but the national license plate database has been leading to mistakes like this for decades. Some states also compound the problem by issuing a license plate number multiple times. So long before Flock getting someone else's speed camera tickets in the mail was already a problem.

behringer 2mo ago
A mistake like this wouldn't be so bad if we didn't have flock cameras everywher.
- dundarious 2mo ago
  Yes, building a highly reactive automated system upon flawed foundations is bad.
rationalist 2mo ago
One of my plate numbers was reissued. I only found out when I went to renew the registration and they gave me a new plate and told me then. It was a shame because I liked that random combination of letters and numbers.
- xkcd1963 2mo ago
  [dead]

Cider9986 2mo ago

There's a map of ALPRs based on OpenStreetMap so you can see ones near you: https://maps.deflock.org/ https://maps.deflock.org/ There's a lot more than just Flock, Flock is just one of thousands of terrible companies creating mass spying on innocent people. And there's also other ALPR companies like Axon and Motorola. Flock may be worse than those because of the AI features and large databases, but other companies making surveillance tech are not avoiding the AI features because of moral reasons.

vablings 2mo ago
There is a huge difference between the likes of Flock + Axon/Motorola currently. Flock is bad not because its surveillance its bad due to the scale, size and centralization.
- JohnFen 2mo ago
  And because of its surveillance and desire to turn the entire nation into a panopticon. Axon/Motorola is no better.

dominick-cc 2mo ago

I can't deal with the ads on this page on mobile

behringer 2mo ago
use firefox and ublock origin. Use dns with ad blocking. You shouldn't see ads on mobile.
- projektfu 2mo ago
  Also, Brave Mobile, by default, seems to block most ads.
- dominick-cc 2mo ago
  I'm in a hospital right now. I think that's part of the problem, used to my home wifi with dns block lists. I'll try to see if I can find ublock origin on mobile.

dylan604 2mo ago

"Inevitably what happens is, let’s take the rental car example: A car is reported stolen by the rental car agency." I've heard stories of rental car companies being very aggressive in reporting a car stolen. It sounds like Flock is having to do a lot of work to handle reports made by rental car companies specifically. This leaves me wondering how aggressive rental companies are in reporting back to the department they made the stolen report notifying the car had been found. I'm guessing not very. These rental companies need to be held responsible for their lackadaisical use of stolen car reports. It is not the police's responsibility for what is essentially a contract dispute. If I allow someone to borrow my car, the police will not consider this a stolen car situation even if they said they would bring it back the next day. This is no different than a car not being returned to the rental company, so why are the police willing to be involved?

black6 2mo ago
Hertz had a "glitch" in their system which would wrongly flag cars as stolen and automatically report that to police. https://www.npr.org/2022/12/06/1140998674/hertz-false-accusation-stealing-cars-settlement https://www.npr.org/2022/12/06/1140998674/hertz-false-accusa...

roysting 2mo ago

[flagged]

kittikitti 2mo ago

I find this quote interesting, "That lack of feeling safe starts to lead to these erosions of society." These camera's don't make me feel safer given the rising fascism associated with surveillance. If they are taking it seriously, the false positives would also include the racism in policing and the inequality in criminal courts. However, they're not serious about it, and for them, this is just a public relations issue. If America wasn't actively mobilizing their own gestapo (ICE) then my opinions would be more muted. I think that wealth inequality and oppression of a state's own citizens leads to the erosions of society. A modern interpretation of Benjamin Franklin's quote is apt, "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

goatlover 2mo ago
I fee watched all the time now. Part of me wonders what sort of legal behavior gets one noticed.

ItsBob 2mo ago

I haven't read the transcript yet but are there no "human in the middle" loops here? Surely we could just get a pair of eyeballs on everything flagged and if it's not 100% crystal clear what's going on, then it gets flagged for a senior pair of eyes to look at? I'm against the Minority Report kind of stuff but a system (AI Flock cameras in this case) flags up <thing>, surely it should then go into a queue for humans to look at! Flock can add in a certainty score and the human must verify! It could still increase efficiency this way.

projektfu 2mo ago
The best read I can give it is that the police like slop just as much as anyone, and when the computer says "found it" they say "ok" and don't bother checking, especially if they're not the ones who have to stop the car themselves.
JohnFen 2mo ago
The "human in the middle" is supposed to be the cops. However, what we've seen is what history tells us we can expect: the "human in the middle" will tend to just accept whatever the automation says and not give it a second thought. This is why "human in the middle" doesn't provide much protection or solace.

zippyman55 2mo ago

It’s time for a refilm of the Paul Newman movie Cool Hand Luke but in this version he is cutting off the poles that support the fluke cameras.

scoofy 2mo ago

I think a discussion we're not having is how policing should exist moving forward given this technology exists for criminals as well. We literally have people driving around with electromagnets on their license plates to cheat any number of perfectly reasonable traffic instruments. We have folks breaking into and going for joyrides in cars that lack engine immobilizers by exploiting them, then ditching them often after crashing. I'm certainly fine with the folks who say we shouldn't have surveillance, but then how do we have law enforcement without hiring a literal army of police officers? We are effectively at the point where technology allows very small groups to massively exploit the general public. In the vast majority of cases, we do not have the public funds to do law enforcement purely in person anymore. I suspect the alternative is not "greater liberty" but organized crime/vigilante justice.

patrickmay 2mo ago
> how do we have law enforcement without hiring a literal army of police officers? Just like we did way back in 2023 before the massive nationwide rollout of Flock cameras. A surveillance state is the antithesis of what the U.S. founders gave us. It is fundamentally illiberal.
- scoofy 2mo ago
  2023 was a pretty miserable year in SF, in large part, because organized crime was using modern reselling platforms to create wildly productive fencing operations, driving extreme increases in car break-ins and burglaries. This lead to a massive political shift towards stronger policing in the city, much of which has been facilitated by drone surveillance of groups engaging in burglaries without the dangers of high-speed car chases to the general public. I do not think “just go back” is anything other than a nostalgia for a world we no longer live in.

dundarious 2mo ago

If Flock has so many issues with this database, and all their solutions are patchwork, and those solutions remain local to the jurisdiction that is locally using Flock, then this is a bad product. If you build a product on a bad database, you cannot load the blame for the resulting bad product on the bad database. If it was not fit for purpose, then the product designers are the problem as much as anything else. This applies doubly for a product that relies so heavily on automation enabling speedy responses with heavy consequences. I understand that this may smack of perfect being the enemy of good, but this domain is akin to medical devices in terms of impact.

josefritzishere 2mo ago

Garrett Langley should be arrested for making false reports to law enforcement authorities. It's a felony.

dundarious 2mo ago

Is there any evidence or other form of justification for the Flock CEO's claims about how it is responsible for SF's crime downturn? I find it hard to believe that Flock cameras are at the heart of such a wide-ranging effect. I am not a local, and I have only done a cursory search, but I don't see the elected officials making the same claim -- I have seen them say it has more to do with changing socioeconomic factors.

tencentshill 2mo ago
>like San Francisco, where crime is incredibly hard to get away with—so hard that people just choose not to do it. hilarious.
- dundarious 2mo ago
  Exactly, the charge rates for the type of crime he was talking about (stealing from cars) are still incredibly bad, his claims are incredibly suspect.

Ancapistani 2mo ago

I’d be interested in seeing a history of Mr. Langley’s movements for the past couple of years. Anyone know where I could obtain such a dataset?

trinsic2 2mo ago

If you are "sitting down" with anyone from Flock you are not facing the the truth of what this is. There is clearly an effort to install a nation-wide surveillance system and flock is right in the middle of it. They know what they are doing. Stop giving them a platform.