APP - What does the collected present think of Flock cameras?

ModernDiogenes

ModernDiogenes

Well-known member
So, is it a great gift to public safety, or right out of George Orwell’s “1984”.

In case anyone is unaware a quick Google A.I summary:

What Flock Cameras Do
    • Scan Plates: They take photos of license plates on passing cars.
    • Log Details: They record the vehicle's make, model, color, and time of day.
    • Build Databases: They create searchable history logs for police and private groups like neighborhood associations.

Why People Are Concerned
    • Mass Surveillance: They track everyday drivers who have not committed any crime.
    • Data Misuse: Some police officers have used the tool to track people for personal reasons.
    • Privacy Risks: Critics worry about how long data is saved and who can see it.
 
Last edited:
The problem is it has capabilities far beyond those stated in the Google blip above.

For one thing they are easily abused. Therexsrexsjready dizens if cases of law enforcement misuse, like following spouses and girlfriends around.



They are also easily hacked.

www.courthousenews.com

Hawley kicks off Senate probe into Flock cameras

The AI surveillance company operates more than 100,000 cameras across the country, using technology that advocates and lawmakers point out has already been misused by law enforcement and is prone to errors.
www.courthousenews.com www.courthousenews.com

Dissecting Flock Safety: The Cameras Tracking You Are a Security Nightmare [video] | Hacker News

news.ycombinator.com news.ycombinator.com
 
ModernDiogenes said:
The problem is it has capabilities far beyond those stated in the Google blip above.

For one thing they are easily abused. Therexsrexsjready dizens if cases of law enforcement misuse, like following spouses and girlfriends around.



They are also easily hacked.

www.courthousenews.com

Hawley kicks off Senate probe into Flock cameras

The AI surveillance company operates more than 100,000 cameras across the country, using technology that advocates and lawmakers point out has already been misused by law enforcement and is prone to errors.
www.courthousenews.com www.courthousenews.com

Dissecting Flock Safety: The Cameras Tracking You Are a Security Nightmare [video] | Hacker News

news.ycombinator.com news.ycombinator.com
Click to expand...
Like this?

1000001625.gif
 
ModernDiogenes said:
OK, but I don’t see it as funny. The constant retreat of liberty in the name of public safety is degrading the nature of our personal freedoms. The Patriot Act in down, we are a much less free society than we use to be and it continues to shrink.
Click to expand...
I agree. It was a Republican who did it.
 
AProudLefty said:
I agree. It was a Republican who did it.
Click to expand...

There are Democrats all up and down the ranks that voted for Flock cameras (and the Patriot Act).

I might be a registered Republican but I an for two reason:

1) I live in “Trumplandia”, in a one political party county, and that party is Republican. If I want a say in local,politics I have to be able to vote in the Republican Primary, and I can only do that as a registered Republican.

2) BOTH parties are corrupted. The Republicans are currently more so. I want change. Change is more readily made from within. So I rejoined the Republican Party.

I am NOT a partisan. I am an independent thinker and it is so with my politics.
 
ModernDiogenes said:
So, is it a great gift to public safety, or right out of George Orwell’s “1984”.

In case anyone is unaware a quick Google A.I summary:

What Flock Cameras Do
    • Scan Plates: They take photos of license plates on passing cars.
    • Log Details: They record the vehicle's make, model, color, and time of day.
    • Build Databases: They create searchable history logs for police and private groups like neighborhood associations.

Why People Are Concerned
    • Mass Surveillance: They track everyday drivers who have not committed any crime.
    • Data Misuse: Some police officers have used the tool to track people for personal reasons.
    • Privacy Risks: Critics worry about how long data is saved and who can see it.
Click to expand...
Mostly, I am strongly opposed, but I think there are circumstances where they should be used.

Not for minor crimes like speeding, but an extremely high crime areas, and around schools, I would support it
 
My village has three bridges one of which must be used to enter or exit. They have those cameras at every bridge.

If someone’s license plate is expired, the police get an alert and that car gets pulled. I believe that is over enforcement.

If a serial killer were operating in my neighborhood, I’d like to have those cameras operating.
 
First of all, there is no constitutional right to drive. And that is what this whole issue revolves around.

If you are driving on a public road, there is no expectation of privacy.

And considering that we lose over 35k people in car accidents annually, we have a duty to do what we can to drastically reduce the number of deaths.
 
Jarod said:
Mostly, I am strongly opposed, but I think there are circumstances where they should be used.

Not for minor crimes like speeding, but an extremely high crime areas, and around schools, I would support it
Click to expand...

Well, what would you think of pedo's hacking into Flock cameras to watch little kids from a distance. It is truly possible. They are NOT secure devices. I was watching a YouTube video the other day by a White Hat hacker who, while not describing precisely how to because that would be teaching how to hack them, explained a multitude of their vunerablitities - and they list in the HUNDREDS.

Did you know they run on an old verision of Andriod-OS that is no longer supported and no longer has security patches available for it. How is THAT for vunerable?
 
ModernDiogenes said:
So, is it a great gift to public safety, or right out of George Orwell’s “1984”.

In case anyone is unaware a quick Google A.I summary:

What Flock Cameras Do
    • Scan Plates: They take photos of license plates on passing cars.
    • Log Details: They record the vehicle's make, model, color, and time of day.
    • Build Databases: They create searchable history logs for police and private groups like neighborhood associations.

Why People Are Concerned
    • Mass Surveillance: They track everyday drivers who have not committed any crime.
    • Data Misuse: Some police officers have used the tool to track people for personal reasons.
    • Privacy Risks: Critics worry about how long data is saved and who can see it.
Click to expand...
Actually, I see more good to come from the cameras than bad...so I tend to support them.

I am willing to listen to and consider the reasons some want them eliminated, but on the whole, as I suggested, at present I see them to be more of value for society than harm.
 
Ross Dolan said:
Actually, I see more good to come from the cameras than bad...so I tend to support them.

I am willing to listen to and consider the reasons some want them eliminated, but on the whole, as I suggested, at present I see them to be more of value for society than harm.
Click to expand...

1) They are invasive breach of privacy in many cases and the use by law enforcers to follow ex-wives and girlfriends around is proof of that.

2) They are readily hacked and used for purposes other than their intended uses by those never intended to have access to them.

3) They are a threat to national security and are being investigated as such in the Senate.

4) The company that owns it have lied to the purchasers of the product about their internals, the secure nature of the devices [they aren't, as I stated earier] and heavily investing in by some pretty cheesy charactors [Andreessen Horowitz of note] that have been guilty of fraudulent business practices in the past.
 
ModernDiogenes said:
1) They are invasive breach of privacy in many cases and the use by law enforcers to follow ex-wives and girlfriends around is proof of that.

2) They are readily hacked and used for purposes other than their intended uses by those never intended to have access to them.

3) They are a threat to national security and are being investigated as such in the Senate.

4) The company that owns it have lied to the purchasers of the product about their internals, the secure nature of the devices [they aren't, as I stated earier] and heavily investing in by some pretty cheesy charactors [Andreessen Horowitz of note] that have been guilty of fraudulent business practices in the past.
Click to expand...
Okay. But I stand by my remark that, in my opinion, they offer more value for society than those negatives.

I understand that others may disagree with me. But you asked for our opinions...and I have given you mine.
 
ModernDiogenes said:
Well, what would you think of pedo's hacking into Flock cameras to watch little kids from a distance. It is truly possible. They are NOT secure devices. I was watching a YouTube video the other day by a White Hat hacker who, while not describing precisely how to because that would be teaching how to hack them, explained a multitude of their vunerablitities - and they list in the HUNDREDS.

Did you know they run on an old verision of Andriod-OS that is no longer supported and no longer has security patches available for it. How is THAT for vunerable?
Click to expand...
Any such camera that can see into a house should be banned. It should be illegal for any entity to place such a camera.
 
Ross Dolan said:
Actually, I see more good to come from the cameras than bad...so I tend to support them.

I am willing to listen to and consider the reasons some want them eliminated, but on the whole, as I suggested, at present I see them to be more of value for society than harm.
Click to expand...
I think the problem is the bad that could easily happen. Its a very slippery slope.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top