3 ms·
I worry that Flock is going to take the fall, and some other bad actor with political connections (my money would be on Palantir) will just quietly pick up wher
by mullingitover 29d ago
I worry that Flock is going to take the fall, and some other bad actor with political connections (my money would be on Palantir) will just quietly pick up where they left off while everyone's patting themselves on the back for defeating Flock.
The stuff Flock is doing is going to be standard AI-driven surveillance in the future, and unless the actual practices are made into political third rails and made into criminal code violations, they will absolutely be legalized on some party line vote in the middle of the night.
Don't make it 'stop Flock,' make it 'criminalize AI-driven surveillance.' Denounce 'conspiracy to implement ai-driven surveillance' as an inherently immoral activity punishable by prison time.
- toomuchtodo 29d agoLegislation guardrails around surveillance technology are a necessary component to defend against future corporate surveillance apparatus establishment and operation, as this surveillance could take many forms (video, audio, geolocation, RF signatures, etc). Flock and Axon today, whatever unsavory folks come along in the future. “Capitalism is the extraordinary belief that the nastiest of men for the nastiest of motives will somehow work together for the benefit of all.” —- John Maynard Keynes Guardrails because we cannot trust the human.
- toomuchtodo 28d agoGov. Abbott blocks state agencies from spending money on Flock cameras - https://www.texastribune.org/2026/08/28/texas-greg-abbott-flock-cameras-order-state-money/ https://www.texastribune.org/2026/08/28/texas-greg-abbott-fl... - August 28th, 2026 > The order came as The Texas Tribune was preparing to publish an investigation detailing how a state agency has devoted at least $30 million to building the state’s Flock surveillance network. Lawmakers added $1 to Texans’ car insurance policies. That money paid for thousands of Flock cameras. - https://www.texastribune.org/2026/08/28/texas-flock-cameras-auto-insurance-fee-mvcpa-grants/ https://www.texastribune.org/2026/08/28/texas-flock-cameras-... - August 28th, 2026 Pennsylvania state senator planning bill to ban Flock, ALPR cameras - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49482256 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49482256 - August 2026 https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/pa-state-senator-planning-bill-191700709.html https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/pa-state-senato...
- CamperBob2 26d agoLawmakers added $1 to Texans’ car insurance policies. That money paid for thousands of Flock cameras. In this thread, two posts up: people who want more powerful governments claim that "capitalism" is to blame for this state of affairs.
- 15155 28d agoAs an exercise, write the statute: how do you legally prevent Home Depot or Wal-Mart from videotaping their parking lots and adjacent streets as they've been doing for the past 3+ decades? I'm genuinely curious how whatever you propose wouldn't be prior restraint.
- toomuchtodo 28d agoI’m currently working with a representative on draft legislation, and will return once I have it and they move to introduce it. “You can just do things.” The video capture is not the issue, but the data processing, retention, and sharing, which can trivially be regulated. CCTV for theft prevention and safety with a restricted retention period and no data sharing off the premises can remain legal. Data broker legislation adjacent.
- 15155 28d ago> the data processing Maybe? > restricted retention period Prior restraint. > no data sharing off the premises 1000% prior restraint. In what world is this not abridging the freedom of the press? Good luck.
- toomuchtodo 28d ago> Good luck. Thanks!
- xahrepap 26d ago> In what world is this not abridging the freedom of the press? Why does that freedom supersede all other guaranteed freedoms? For example the US constitution tries to protect its citizens from unlawful searches, etc. just as strongly as protecting the presses. Why do I have to sacrifice my freedom from searches to preserve Home Depot’s freedom to tape others?
- 15155 26d agoThis is basic law. Your "freedom from [unreasonable] searches" applies only to the government: the government can be barred by the Constitution from broadly using or obtaining data, Home Depot can't be barred from collecting it or sharing it publicly. Both can be true simultaneously. Furthermore, no relevant court has found these to be "searches" or that they are "unreasonable." Your "freedom from [government] searches" doesn't somehow make my Ring doorbell illegal.
- nancyminusone 29d agoMy money would be on Axon. They at least have a claim to the "hold police accountable" angle with bodycams and less-lethal weapons. Compared with Flock's "we'll watch you and what're you gonna do about it"
- chinathrow 29d agoFuck them both.
- lokar 28d agoNPR reported they are already moving in with a competing product . https://www.npr.org/2026/08/22/nx-s1-5931446/flock-fallout-competitors-see-opportunity https://www.npr.org/2026/08/22/nx-s1-5931446/flock-fallout-c...
- stonogo 28d agoAxon's had ALPRs long before Flock existed, and the data management story is completely different. Flock was essentially a data warehouse with dark patterns around sharing settings that led to a lot of places defaulting open. Axon started out in bodycams and other direct-investigative tools, and their data management is very much focused on "the agency keeps its data" -- by default, data sharing requests have to be individually approved. You can't just type a plate number in and get hits nationwide. The question is: will Axon enshittify their mature products in order to pursue that panopticon money?
- queenkjuul 26d ago>The question is: will Axon enshittify their mature products in order to pursue that panopticon money? It would be an historic first if they didn't
- idiotsecant 28d agoSame problems long term with better marketing.
- cucumber3732842 29d ago>they will absolutely be legalized on some party line vote in the middle of the night. Or they'll be legalized piecemeal and you'll get sneered at by the useful idiots for opposing each incremental step based on principal.
- superxpro12 29d agothey'll find a particularly violent crime and use that as the strawman... "Oh you dont want this? well i guess you support violent immigrant mass murderers then!" and then before you know it the state has implemented its mass surveillance apparatus across the entire country. And we though china's social credits were bad? just IMAGINE what those predatory tech bros are cookin up.
- jquery 28d agoI mean, is that even a strawman? You can oppose mass AI surveillance and acknowledge the price of that is more crime.
- cucumber3732842 28d agoExactly. Freedom isn't free. If I have to pay for it with locks on my doors and having to be discerning about which truck I buy $5 steaks out of the back of lest my house get burgled or I get ripped off that seems like a pretty fair deal.
- cindyllm 28d ago[dead]
- stackbutterflow 28d agoBetter five guilty people free than one innocent in prison. I'd like a national poll on this principle. My guess is a vast majority would disagree with it.
- tyingq 28d ago
- Manuel_D 28d ago> they will absolutely be legalized on some party line vote in the middle of the night. What would be legalized? You realize that recording people in public is already legal, right? I'm puzzled where people are getting the idea that Flock is doing something illegal.
- rc5150 28d agoyou're being deliberately daft. Its not the recording, its the surveillance dragnet with zero regulation or oversight that creates an instant dossier on whatever datapoints are searched for, by whomever decides to search for them who has paid for access. Honestly the nuance isn't that intellectually taxing and having to explain it to people in the tech space is tiresome.
- Manuel_D 28d agoYou're calling me daft yet you couldn't be bothered to answer the question. What is going the be legalized, as the above commenter wrote? What law is Flock breaking presently? Like it or not recording and photographing people in public, then selling that information is not illegal. Paparazzi do it all the time. You can point a webcam out your window, run ALPR software on the video feed, and sell access to query that information. Nothing about that is illegal. If it is, then please reference the laws that prohibit this. People talk about privacy laws being violated, but in general privacy laws do not cover public activity. Privacy laws mostly focus on protecting communications and activities carried out in private.
- refactorAbraxas 28d agoThat will notion of an individual’s right to photograph a person in public held against the rights of the person being photographed, to conduct their business and affairs undisturbed, is likely to be challenged successfully before the Supreme Court when it can be shown a majority of people are under perpetual persistent technical surveillance.
- 28d ago
- nemosaltat 28d agoExactly my thoughts. Flock has been brazen on so many things, that second-movers with a modicum of political savvy can come assuage all the major Flock-FUD, while in fact being significantly worse.
- JKCalhoun 28d agoAfter watching the public flaying of Flock, they're certainly welcome to step into the spotlight next and convince the public that they're different.
- Dig1t 28d agoThis is still a useful first step. Once “flock” becomes eponymous and a toxic political football, it can be applied to all future companies who do the same thing. The word “Flock” is quickly becoming toxic, in the future we’ll be able to use it as a shorthand for all companies of this type. e.g. if I call something a cleanex everyone knows what I’m talking about regardless of whether Cleanex the company actually made the item being referred to. Similarly we’ll be able to just say “flock camera” and everyone will know what it is regardless of who makes the camera.
- bluefirebrand 28d agoI think the point you're trying to make is undermined slightly by the fact that the word I think you're looking for is "Kleenex" not Cleanex. It took me a while to figure out what you were talking about, and I did some searching online to make sure I wasn't missing something about "Cleanex" in particular I still agree with you though ."Flock Camera" is very likely to become the general term for "public surveillance camera" and it will carry a negative weight.
- snypher 28d agoSometimes a misspelling is for avoiding social media vampire lawyers.
- bluefirebrand 28d agoThat's silly. :)
- snypher 28d agoWell sure, but people still do it.
- mcphage 26d ago> and some other bad actor with political connections (my money would be on Palantir) will just quietly pick up where they left off while everyone's patting themselves on the back for defeating Flock At that point, though, there will be a large group of people trained on how to defeat a company like Flock.