5 ms·
My prediction: they are going to change their name and move a lot of their business to multiple subsidiary with different names. Until nobody notices anymore it
by andix 11d ago
My prediction: they are going to change their name and move a lot of their business to multiple subsidiary with different names. Until nobody notices anymore it's all one company formerly known as Flock.
- adamnemecek 11d agoThis is not something you can hide like that, people notice cameras being installed.
- andix 11d agoSure, but they might tell people: no, it's not Flock, it's something much safer, not such a privacy invading AI camera like Flock.
- dghlsakjg 11d agoAxon, formerly known as TASER did a reputational name change. Worth mentioning that they are also a flock competitor, but they are not in the headlines anymore.
- SoftTalker 11d agoThere have been news stories of localities canceling their Flock contracts and quietly switching to Axon.
- Avicebron 11d agoI think word is spreading about Axon as well, I'm heartened by the amount of pushback surveillance and abuses of privacy are getting.
- andix 11d agoI think that's why they are going to create many subsidiaries with a lot of different brand names. Until those names can't "spread" anymore, because it's too many different names and they often change.
- aaronmdjones 11d agoSome of their customers have even asked them to redesign their cameras so they don't look like Flock cameras.
- debatem1 11d agoThey did such an amazingly bad job on their PR. Their best known products literally exist to keep police from killing people or violating their rights undetected, and instead of meeting the moment and explaining why their products should become mandatory, always-on, permanent replacements for firearms or ADVOKATE-style sworn statements they just kind of... pretended that misuse of their products was WAI and ate the consequences of that.
- MBCook 11d agoWell put, they had a delicate line. Those departments buy their products. If they took that angle publicly I bet many departments would suddenly been much less interested in buying/renewing. Accountability seems to be super unpopular (which says A LOT) with their customers.
- debatem1 11d agoI get it, but I also just don't understand why they couldn't effectively explain to the police that they were a for-profit company. The police definitely understand that! Like, when the police were saying "we can't turn on body cameras all the time because it might violate victims rights" the correct response from axon was "we also happen to sell a very expensive victim redaction software on a separate SKU, until you buy that probably just want to let your officers use discretion wink-nod." (I am maybe unfairly assuming here that their actual intent was to make money rather than protect the public from police abuses. I'd love to hear from folks at Axon if that isn't true!)
- MBCook 11d agoThey could have just talked out of both sides of their mouths. Tell the public it’s to curb abuse, tell the police in private “we all know what it’s really for” wink-wink-nudge-nudge. Maybe offer up a few token cases where they caught abuse and the cop got in trouble or something changed as proof. Nope. You’re right, they ran right into that wall.
- mitxela 11d ago
- Retr0id 11d agoThe widespread opposition to flock is unfortunately an aberration. The average person is largely indifferent to mass surveillance, and I think a rebrand has a good chance of working. They'll give it a try either way.
- Avicebron 11d ago> The average person is largely indifferent to mass surveillance I think you would be surprised. Now, whether or not the average local politician is indifferent is not the same as the average person.
- Retr0id 11d agoIn a poll of "do you want to be surveilled", "do you think mass surveillance is good", sure. But in terms of revealed preferences, people will happily give up privacy for mild convenience.
- danaris 11d ago"Revealed preferences" are bullshit. What's really true is that people are, 99% of the time, not actually given that choice. For "revealed preferences theory" to work, the people involved would need to consistently have a free choice between two options. And for people who have had their finances gradually stretched and stretched over the past 40 years of growing inequality, "cheaper but worse" is not a free choice.
- jolmg 11d agoPeople can choose Facebook or to get in contact with people individually via phone, email or visits, but they prefer Facebook because it's more convenient to put a message there and count as maintenance of a group of relationships. People can choose between accepting the cameras or participating in the democracy they belong in and protest and pressure their representatives, but it's more convenient to accept. It's true there are people without choice, but most people aren't without choice, and they choose convenience.
- mitxela 11d agoNo they don't. That's why nobody noticed the Motorola cameras going up in places where Flock cameras came down.
- dlcarrier 11d agoThere was a period when automated red-light cameras were really popular with municipalities, followed by significant backlash. Since then, the companies selling them have not recovered financially and the cameras never regained popularity. It could happen with Flock, too.
- deleted 11d ago[deleted]
- deleted 11d ago[deleted]
- wildrice 11d agoI believe much of the backlash was the fact that companies were bribing municipalities and the majority of fines collected just went to the private companies themselves; https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/former-red-light-camera-company-ceo-pleads-guilty-to-bribery/ https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/former-red-light-camera...
- SoftTalker 11d agoThey also did stuff like shortening the yellow light duration so that people got caught in the intersection with the light red.
- nilamo 11d agoMaybe they'll rename to something which has only ever had negative connotations for decades. Maybe something like Palantir. Or maybe Nazgul, Leviathan, Beelzebub, Cyberdyne, or Moloch?
- ButlerianJihad 11d ago"Moloch" only means "Lord" in its essential consonants. It's the same Semitic triple-root for "Malik" and "Melkite" and "Melchizedek". Cognates: certainly still in widespread use today as forenames and surnames, et. al. "Leviathan": The full name certainly strikes fear. One of my ancestors brought his family over from Scotland on the Leviathan which was a captured-and-repurposed German passenger vessel. We can imagine: it was ginormous. has an interesting derivation if we take it apart into component parts: they would be recognizable as good guys, or denim jeans I guess. Since Semitic roots standardized on the triple-consonant, we may see ancient tongues incorporated for this one. "Be-el-ze-bub": "Lord of the Flies", of course; the implication of the English name of the novel about those good children on a desert island, who lived in interesting times. A theophoric name. Shares a root with "Ba'al" of the Tanakh. Glottal stops FTW. "Nazgûl" -- mainly sounds like "ghoul" to us! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazg%C3%BBl#Etymological_connotations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazg%C3%BBl#Etymological_conno... Godwin's Law endures
- giantrobot 11d agoThey'll change their name to Meta to get away from a scandal. I don't think that's ever happened before.
- teeray 11d agoIt’s Comcastic!