5 ms·
Flock cameras used to arrest a child for playing on a swing?
- uberman 13d agoWhen I was a kid twisting a swing so you could ride it as it untwisted was something that happend dozens of times every recess. This was something every kid did. If your playground equipment falls apart as a result of the standard way kids use a swing then I think that is a manufacture issue not criminal behavior by a 10 year old
- GlibMonkeyDeath 13d agohttps://www.yahoo.com/news/us/articles/pennsylvania-girls-10-12-taken-124602200.html?guccounter=1 https://www.yahoo.com/news/us/articles/pennsylvania-girls-10... "The borough also says visitors encounter its "Play Smart Rules" when entering the park, including a specific instruction: "Do not twist chains."" So the town buys crappy swings, knowing full well that kids are going to spin them (who hasn't done this a million times as a kid?) Then they slap up a sign telling the kids not to do that. Basically entrapment. Here's an idea for them: maybe the town shouldn't cheap out on unsafe equipment for children...
- bluGill 13d agoMy company makes dangerous equipment like lawn mowers. Because of this, I have to go through training on how to design equipment to be safe. And the rule is very clear. If there is any possibility of an issue, you need to redesign it so the problem can't happen, you need to put gaurds in place so the problem can't happen, or only if those two fail, are you allowed to put up a warning sign. That is an ordered list so if anything is possible in the previous step you cannot go to the next. In this case a chain that can take twisting is obvious and so the sign won't protect them from liability should someone get hurt from twisting the chains.
- spwa4 13d agoYou're both right. What you're describing is liability. A warning does not guarantee safety from liability suits, that's why the other options are preferable (only being a Chinese or outside-of-the-west manufacturer guarantees safety from liability suit). But the problem with twisting chains is that it needs a warning. And so both putting in the law, and arresting the kid, are a way to protect the borough, a government organization, from liability when something goes wrong.
- kstrauser 13d ago[dead]
- casey2 13d agoIf the town feels that arresting children is a good use of public money they that's their right. At some point the citizens have to actually care about how their town operates if they want it to get better. Most townspeople care about UX as much as f2p mobile shovelware developers.
- marcosdumay 13d ago> If the town feels that arresting children is a good use of public money they that's their right. TF? Doesn't your country have a Constitution?
- xboxnolifes 13d agoDoes your country have a constitution that explicitly handles this scenario?
- marcosdumay 13d agoOf a government body deciding to go around arresting people for no reason? Yes.
- russdill 13d agoDecent swing chains $250. Mass surveillance recurring cost of $5000/mo. Someone please help me budget this, I'm dying.
- chadgpt3 13d agoAs a reminder - if you put an unsafe swing on your property and just had a sign as the only thing stopping it from injuring a child and a child got injured, you'd be automatically liable under the "attractive nuisance" doctrine.
- rpdillon 13d agoYep! We used to call it "twist and shout". Tons of fun.
- Avicebron 13d agoWhy is a 3rd party company keeping videos of people's children? Why aren't the parents concerned about this?
- swader999 13d agoRight? Growing up in the eighties we'd twist, stand on them, double up, back flip out of them.
- spwa4 13d agoAnd if you really had the balls, the 360 ...
- smalltorch 13d agoIt's marginally cheaper to install flimsy chains and surveillance than to pony up for a slightly thicker gauge chain get out of here with your common sense /s
- bluGill 13d agoUntil someone gets hurt and the court find they are liable for millions because signs and cameras did not work and because they thought it would they apply punitive damages to make sure the message is sent.
- jerlam 13d agoHere is a direct news link to the actual incident: https://www.cbsnews.com/pittsburgh/news/springdale-girls-court-broken-swing/ https://www.cbsnews.com/pittsburgh/news/springdale-girls-cou...
- heaney-555 13d agoThe article has no mention of Flock
- jerlam 13d agoFlock may not actually be involved. YouTube video titles are often lying clickbait, and the video description starts off with "Flock and other surveillance cameras..."
- kraken_cult 13d agoMight as well call them Kleenex surveillance cameras. The point stands.
- megaman821 13d agoNo, people should say accurate things. If Flock was not actually invovled then it is just useless clickbait. Give your time to someone else who can report accurately.
- AndyNemmity 13d agoThe details are they were caught with surveillance cameras, we don't know which provider.
- deleted 13d ago[deleted]
- nicksaroha 13d agoYeah read the full article and no mention of flock.
- historyrepeatin 13d ago[dead]
- SlightlyLeftPad 13d agoTwo things can be true.
- phoghed 13d agoEven three things, some people are saying
- deleted 13d ago[deleted]
- nomagicbullet 13d agoI don't think we understand yet the kind of world we are building. All the small decisions we are making will shape our future: algorithmic decision making, social network broadcasting and "self-reporting", light-speed meme transmission, always-on audio and video surveillance... the list goes on and on. One day we'll wake up to see we've build a jail around us we can't escape.
- vkou 13d agoThe vermin that are building it understand it just fine.
- chneu 13d agoThe consumer chooses convenience for skill/knowledge and then complains about the outcome of their choice. It's wild.
- kraken_cult 13d agoIt'S ThEiR FaUlT, I'M juSt MaKinG mOneY. Is such a lame excuse. A real engineer knows ethical boundaries. Get lost.
- porkshoe 13d agoAmerican citizens are not choosing to be surveilled via Flock. That is a decision that is being made by billionaires like Paul Graham who fund and profit from it, and authoritarian individuals at police departments and governments who get influenced by the perceived convenience of warrant and subpoena-free surveillance. I carry a cell phone... and thankfully the Supreme Court has agreed that my location data that comes off of it is protected from warrantless search. The heart of your argument is that people shouldn't do anything new unless they accept all of the downsides as-is... but that's a moronic argument. Society is built by people doing new things _but also_ working to come up with new agreements on how to manage the side effects of those new things. This is normal and natural. What's wild is your decision to mock people who want to preserve liberty while advancing technology.
- 13d ago
- neilv 13d agoThat link is an activist YouTube channel. Closest I could find to a news organization reporting on this: https://www.wtae.com/article/springdale-playground-swing-court-case/73547096 https://www.wtae.com/article/springdale-playground-swing-cou...
- sparkling 13d agoNo mention of Flock anywhere in the text
- donmcronald 13d agoIf the chain broke from twisting it up and letting it go, it was in disrepair before the kids started using it. Maybe the city admin should be charged with negligence for letting the infrastructure crumble.
- downrightmike 13d agoChild endangerment
- kwarcode 13d agoHow did they ID the children from photos?
- k310 13d agoGovernment and industry enter the Epstein zone. Creep-shooting little kids. Not surprised at all.
- deleted 13d ago[deleted]
- fedpost 13d agoThere are plenty of people here working on surveillance tech. Is this the world you want to be building?
- MiscCompFacts 13d agoI’d say a lot of people don’t care if it doesn’t affect them directly, and if they can exploit a moral boundary to get rich they’ll do it.
- Dig1t 13d agoI thought these cameras were only used to read license plates. What happened to that discussion?
- torstenvl 13d agoIt was never true.
- jerlam 13d agoThe content creator is using "Flock" as a shorthand for all surveillance cameras, which muddies the conversation.
- fg137 13d agoWhich is why I think traditional media outlets are much more trustworthy than random influencers when it comes to news reporting. They don't have a perfect record but have standards and ethics. Sadly it's not worth anything these days.
- chadgpt3 13d agothey have none of the above, they're still a little more accurate on average than a content creator though
- heaney-555 13d agoThey are. These aren't Flock cameras. The post is a lie, but it's one people want to believe.
- tssva 13d agoLPR cameras are only one of the camera types Flock has. Flock also has PTZ and fixed cameras meant for general surveillance and not LPR. The description of the PTZ cameras on the Flock website even mentions them being ideal for parks. "Single and dual lens live and recorded video cameras with remote PTZ controls. Ideal for open areas like parking lots, intersections and parks."
- demibabs 13d agoAs much as I dislike flock, this only seems like an indictment on the police.
- demosthanos 13d agoSurveillance cameras (not Flock, sounds like) are what allowed the police to spend ridiculous amounts of the city's time chasing (checks notes) $295 of damage to a swing from totally normal use by a couple of pre-teens. Swings have always broken. Before widespread surveillance the swing would have just been replaced or not and everyone would have moved on.
- aspbee555 13d agoHow much money did they waste in police and court resources over a swing obviously in disrepair if it broke so easily? How much resources/money did they waste having someone create invoices for numerous children/families? How much resources/money did they waste on harassing/tormenting children and their families instead of just fixing the damn thing? So nice to see such enormous time and resources being spent on catching actual criminals
- kraken_cult 13d agoright, it probably cost two new swing sets in people's time to make this even happen.
- riskable 13d agoTo be fair, the powers that be do see children and their families as "actual criminals." They literally charged them with a crime! This is their idea of what counts as a real criminal. Instead of, say, someone who rapes children. They'll vote for that person!
- jolmg 13d ago> They tell me in a lengthy statement in part that the department would never issue an ultimatum of pay for the damage or your children will be charged. They tell me quote, "We simply don't operate that way." Rather, the department's approach was consistent among the five juveniles involved in the incident. The damage was divided equally and an opportunity was provided to address the matter through restitution rather than unnecessarily continuing juvenile proceeding. Lol. The same thing, but obfuscated. It's not "pay for the damage"; it's "an opportunity was provided to address the matter through restitution". It's not "or your children will be charged"; it's "rather than unnecessarily continuing juvenile proceeding". Add extra fluff at the start to bury the lede, then avoid the trigger words and pretend it's something different.
- saghm 13d ago"Your children won't be charged! They'll just be arrested"
- heaney-555 13d agoIs everyone going to ignore that those are not Flock cameras? Why is the quality of discussion on this topic on HN so poor? I'm not even pro-Flock, but a blatantly false post like this is just pathetic discourse.
- tssva 13d agoHow do you know they aren't Flock cameras? Flock makes PTZ and fixed cameras intended for general surveillance along with the LPR cameras.
- fg137 13d agoThere are a few posts discussing that here. poor quality of HN discussion -- that's something not with thinking about. Flag the submission and move on.
- LastTrain 13d agoSo the kids were playing on equipment that fell apart and now they owe money? The city is lucky they didn't get injured.
- 123hafd 13d agoTrue disruption! In 1933 the Nazis needed a human, called Blockwart, to surveil the immediate neighborhood block. This has been automated. Shall we call the cameras Flockwart?
- mikestew 13d agoThree questions: 1. Why is the city creeping on children with surveillance cameras? I'd be tempted to run for city council and beat that drum until the head broke (but then I'd have to serve on the city council). 2. How did they identify the children enough to come to their home? Might have read the license plate, but reporting is unclear. 3. Why is our municipality buying such crappy equipment that it fails when kids do what kids have done with swings for 100 years or more?
- kstrauser 13d agoOK, big surveillance fans: please explain why this is OK because "it's not the government", and this keeps us safe, and we don't have any expectation of privacy. It's inevitable that someone is going to claim it's a great idea. Let's get it out of the way.
- neya 13d agoBulk of these cameras are actually installed at the behest of the control freaks sitting on HOAs. They are the real target audience for these cameras because they love the power trip over other people. It seems if you don't get enough attention as a child, you will just grow up to become a control freak.
- y1n0 13d agoWe talked about them in my neighborhood mainly because of package theft. If I ever thought there was a real chance of enforcement action, I’d be in favor.
- NietzscheanNull 13d agoYou would rather infringe on the privacy of your community and invite a company known for indiscriminate multi-pronged dragnet surveillance (plates/faces/bluetooth beacons/etc.), with a nation-wide blanket coverage network that has already been provably abused by police on multiple occasions, all because of a handful of petty package theft cases? Honestly, I'm at a loss for words.
- chadgpt3 13d agoIn other countries you only look at the footage if a crime actually happens, to see who did it
- y1n0 12d agoHell yes. The risk of abuse is absurdly small. I drive too even though there is a risk of death. The juice is worth the squeeze. Except even armed with positive identification, the police won’t do anything. Laws with enforcement are worth nothing. Stalking and whatever else has happened with the data is already illegal. But who gives a shit without enforcement.
- NietzscheanNull 11d agoIf you acknowledge that police regularly fail to act on crimes even with positive ID, why on earth would you allow a private company to collect all that information just for them to ignore/misuse? How is dragnet surveillance a fix for inept/corrupt policing? Police have been granted wildly more powerful capabilities and arms over the course of my lifetime, but from what I've seen, those haven't improved their ability to solve crimes or better serve their communities nearly enough to justify their erosion of civil liberties; in my estimation, it's been an opposite trajectory, with violent escalations by police increasing and community trust in police decreasing (nearly monotonically) across the country. This showed up at the top of HN for me today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49713395 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49713395 Read the linked article; does that seem like "absurdly small" amounts of abuse to you? Besides, when we're talking about a surveillance network so vast you can't avoid it anywhere in the country, the law of large numbers kicks in: there IS abuse, and there WILL be further abuse at some level. The extreme reach of such systems means they should absolutely be treated as 4th amendment violations; the authors of that amendment could never have conceived of such a panopticon and its impacts on individual privacy and autonomy.
- bluGill 13d agohttps://www.cpsc.gov/s3fs-public/325_PublicPlaygroundSafetyHandbook2025_7-30-25_2.pdf?VersionId=NgLAhlZGBKc2Fs2ZjhnHa78mFleoBm2V https://www.cpsc.gov/s3fs-public/325_PublicPlaygroundSafetyH... 'Children tend to swing on their stomach. This behavior should be discouraged.' Not banned, discouraged. I recommend reading the whole thing, it is surprisingly well done and covers a lot of things that should be obvious but are easy to forget.
- stop50 13d agoIs it weird for me that i think this helps pedophiles so much in finding victims? We know that the leader flock is having security problems where literally anyone could access the livestreams, the others are probably not better. My worst fear would be that pedophiles would use the streams to find and abduct victims in broad daylight by posing as cops.
- laimewhisps 13d agoOr pedophile cops just use the system directly. I don't even want "good" people surveilling me and everyone else, but with all of these systems you can assume the worst person that has access to them will be using them nefariously.
- chadgpt3 13d agoHow nice of HN to delete this topic of general interest from the front page
- theturtle 13d ago[dead]
- RajT88 13d agoUgh. Parkrose Permaculture. I actually like her videos, and watch them to learn about some of the issues. I generally agree with her. Hear me out. I had an "AHA" moment recently, where she posted a video about data centers. There's real issues there. I don't disagree with most of the issues, but I do disagree about the prioritization of the issues. Being a techie, I am directly involved in hosting workloads in data centers for my company. I know more than a lay person about what data centers are about. So the very first time I watched a video on a topic I am a SME on, I saw her weigh in with the hot take of "All these data centers are basically surveillance centers!" She's not wrong, but what she is is just repeating what everyone on Facebook is saying without actually trying to understand the issue. Charitably this is word-for-word what people who are waking up to the issue are screaming all over social media, or less charitably people consuming a lot of astroturfed content. TL;DR, I realized she's not really educating herself on the issues via deep dives before forming an opinion, she's just repeating what everyone else is saying on social media. She's no better than all my neighbors on Nextdoor, just a much better public speaker. If you're screaming about "surveillance centers", you are uninformed if you're not talking about data brokers. Nobody screaming on social media about data centers is. This very forum has people who have worked for data brokers saying things like, "It's 1000x worse than you think it is." So, unfortunately, I can't use her content to form opinions. Even though I agree with her on most things. I can't trust that she's actually got her facts straight - she's running a confidence game. It's like finding a PR from your trusted coworker with a really, really stupid nasty bug - "what else is out there that they've touched...?" Now that I've got that put out there... This new privately owned surveillance network in a sane version of this country should be found unconstitutional, and this story about preteens being brought up on charges is only surprising for the reasons she highlighted.
- tzs 12d agoThe map at deflock.org shows no Flock cameras anywhere near there.
- oliwarner 12d agoI'm getting really fed up of this. It's it about time we the people rise up and make it clear how appallingly unacceptable it is to hold your lavalier microphone. But on topic, it's amazing they're getting these things through budget meetings. Are Flock just giving them away in Y1? They're ~$3k including installation and that clip showed several in one area overlapping. Even for legit crime-fighting, that's a lot of taxpayer green on the line for a park. "We caught the culprits for damaging a $10 swing chain and spent $3000 surveilling them, $200 demanding three settle and $500 prosecuting one in court." All for doing something that every who's ever been on a swing has done. Everyone involved in taking this to court should personally pay damages and lose their job.
- ChristmasTomer 12d ago[dead]