Reminder- **$2,500-3,500 per camera per year** means *they are spending $1,250,000-$1,750,000 per year* just on the subscription to access days on camera they don't own.
1080
GibbysUSSA3 days ago
+574
There is no money for social programs, yet there is money for this shit?
574
Norseman9013 days ago
+266
Ah but you see social programs benefit all people. This allows the rich to funnel money from our taxes.
266
iamthinksnow3 days ago
+73
And feed the data centers and AI models, don't forget those.
73
kstargate-4253 days ago
+15
See, this is how they get taxes, the fines, arrests and everything else help pay for this. Its like the cycle of wars to get oil that the military buys lots of the oil and gas to fight another war elsewhere to get more oil that then pays for the next war.
15
Take-Me-Home-Tonight3 days ago
+3
Can't forget the drugs that get moved so black budgets can be funded. Odd how two years after America pulls out of Afghanistan, it's no longer the biggest producers of poppy's. But when we were there it was, and some even had our soldiers protecting them.
3
TumblrInGarbage3 days ago
+106
When I saw a contract locally, it was $1000 per camera per year. But it was still slated to eventually be costing my area nearly $1 million / year. All to some for-profit company that exists out of state and gives **nothing** back. Flock is a parasite on your tax money.
106
New-Ad-3631 day ago
+1
Where's your area roughly? Asking because that's a shitload of Flock cameras.
1
saera-targaryen3 days ago
+67
Imagine what would happen if we gave 2500 in groceries to 500 struggling families per year instead
67
going-for-gusto3 days ago
+30
The 500 families would sure notice as well as the children’s teachers, neighbors, + coworkers.
30
Toomanyeastereggs3 days ago
+19
Yeah but you’re missing the most important people that exist in the US!
Stockholders.
They would easily notice the reduced value of their stocks so we’ll have to find another way I’m afraid.
19
going-for-gusto3 days ago
+5
Do not be afraid to resist the oligarchs
5
Toomanyeastereggs3 days ago
+3
I should have added a /s but thought it was obvious. You are right, no point being afraid of them.
3
Acedrew893 days ago
+5
And, they are spending YOUR money to do this.
5
procheeseburger3 days ago
+1
You know when you see those houses and you think what does that person do for a living? It's this! They get the gov to sign a subscription to pay them millions.
1
grove_tower3 days ago
+1911
We went from “traffic c*** for safety” to “always-on license plate dragnet” real fast. At minimum, cities should be required to publish retention policies and independent audits before installing this many.
1911
Mrjlawrence3 days ago
+971
The only way to guarantee the Flock are not abused by authorities is to never install them.
971
jdave5123 days ago
+200
Alternatively... angle grinder? A ladder and spray paint?
200
mynamejeff-973 days ago
+73
Reminder that when France tried to install speed cameras, the French went out and destroyed 60% of the nations speed cameras.
Though, there are still speed cameras in France today.
73
OneSkepticalOwl3 days ago
+35
Only 40% of them functioning though
35
Slypenslyde3 days ago
+4
Yeah but those are the French, they have a reputation for being tough and fighting back.
These are Americans. They're desperate for a Daddy to keep them in line. There are some highlights in their history but also a long line of showing up, making a situation worse, giving up as soon as they realize the world is pushing back, then crying for decades nobody gave them a trophy for trying.
For example, if you ask a Texan about this, they'll sagely tell you to remember The Alamo: "If you don't comply you get slaughtered by the government like the criminal thugs you are."
4
choke_on_my_downvote3 days ago
+26
I bet that in France, destroying a government camera wouldn't lead to felonies and the actual ruining of your life.
People can talk a big game all they want about how Americans are desperate for daddy to keep them in line but you're probably eating cheetos and looking at TikTok while you type this out.
26
Every_Ad_61683 days ago
+8
No crime charge will matter if enough people participate, especially if it is people in critical positions.
One function of big protests is to build momentum and organisational capability for future direct action. It is why a protest without direct results can still be an important part of political resistance.
8
SweetLittleFox3 days ago
+21
Telling your local methhead they’re full of copper? Idk. There’s gotta be something we can do though, because I did not opt in to this shit.
21
SummerAndTinklesBFF3 days ago
+7
They will say that you did when you got your drivers license
Its bs i know
7
Neoliberal_Boogeyman3 days ago
+152
There are 2 pounds of copper and an ounce of gold in every flock camera, supposedly.
152
PUTIN_FUCKS_ME3 days ago
+85
I believe the copper but a whole ounce of gold would be insane. $4800 just in gold in one flock camera?
Edit: they have about 1 gram of gold in each camera.
85
dotcubed3 days ago
+66
1/28th of an ounce.
But the real value is being a service to community.
66
PUTIN_FUCKS_ME3 days ago
+15
100%, I was just thinking about alternative incentives for some folk 😉
15
dotcubed3 days ago
+9
In my mind if added up all the municipalities and box realtors, you could hit 28 = 1oz in a day’s work.
*Isn’t gold trading at $4,800 /oz*
Interesting method to rent a van and drive around as an employee randomly replacing equipment with empty cases as you go.
9
PUTIN_FUCKS_ME3 days ago
+10
Only issue would be actually getting the gold out of the equipment. I assume most of it is gold plated pins/connectors. Probably would need to dissolve it in aqua regia to refine it into something that can be sold or used.
10
Equivalent-Resort-633 days ago
+7
If i see a quarter on the ground, I’ll pick it up. So yes, that 1/28 of an once will add up.
7
muegle3 days ago
+12
2 lbs of copper would be pretty generous as well tbh. These things aren't that big and are self contained so there's no long copper wire runs. Maybe 2 lbs of lithium from the battery pack.
12
misterpickles693 days ago
+10
Nope. It’s true. Take one down and see for yourself.
10
PUTIN_FUCKS_ME3 days ago
+3
I googled it and they have about a gram of gold. Big difference.
3
brianqueso3 days ago
+3
You think people who scrap for metals are going to stop and think about unit economics?
3
iamsotiredofthiscrap3 days ago
+14
...yes?
Else they'd be digging through dumpsters for aluminum foil as well.
14
Jebediah_Johnson3 days ago
+6
And a free solar panel on top .
6
Little-Use-20273 days ago
+3
Say less
3
WreckNTexan483 days ago
+8
Grinder, Wine bottle,old towel... not going to jail today, but you can find the rest online.
There are some extra tidbit's that make those extra spicy, from the Anarchist cookbook.
8
Pans_Labradoodle3 days ago
+5
Everything you need to know is in the first two minutes of Cool Hand Luke.
5
TheCrimsonDagger3 days ago
+6
Lasers can also damage cameras, so you should never point a laser at a camera because that could damage it. Especially more high powered ones, never shine those on cameras because it could destroy them.
6
jdave5123 days ago
+2
You need a pretty powerful laser to damage a camera. And theres no way to check if its actually inoperable unless you can check the footage or open it up.
2
hedgetank3 days ago
+3
paintball gun and paintballs emptied and refilled with epoxy paint, or some kind of etching compound that'll permanently destroy the lenses?
3
pianobench0073 days ago
+3
they sell spray can on a stick adapters on amazon. Simply attach to a pole and there is a sprayer pull type lever. It is just 20 dollars. Alternatively you can purchase expensive 250 dollar commercial versions.
if the authorities over reach and abuse their powers we have ways to fight back.
3
Mixels3 days ago
+2
I hear paintball is a fun sport to play this time of year.
2
SpiderDijonJr3 days ago
+2
A strong class 3 or 4 ir laser would do the job nicely
2
No-Quote-18153 days ago
+6
They have glaringly bad cyber security and it's been recently exposed to the public even more through that viral town hall video and demonstration. I honestly believe we will hear of a massive flock outage soon. The leader of the company denies there's any issues and I guarantee hackers that saw the town hall and his response are prepping
6
almighty_bucket3 days ago
+2
I guarantee they were being pen tested within 24 hours
2
Slypenslyde3 days ago
+57
My city did a small pilot program. Even during the pilot, when police knew they'd be audited, it was found that roughly 20% of queries made against the system had nothing to do with an investigation.
They can't even use it carefully when they KNOW it's being audited.
57
jsickayo3 days ago
+29
My county is now piloting Flock drones as well.
29
JusticeAileenCannon3 days ago
+145
And should publish every single time law enforcement accesses those records without a warrant
145
axonxorz3 days ago
+41
> And should publish every single time law enforcement accesses those records without a warrant
Flock cameras are so f****** insecure, I'm not sure even they can reliably provide that data.
If you have two hours or so, and you care about mass surveillance (you should) and/or tech fuckery, Benn Jordan has some excellent videos that should terrify you.
[We Hacked Flock Safety Cameras in Under 30 Seconds](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uB0gr7Fh6lY)
[Breaking the Creepy AI in Police Cameras](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pp9MwZkHiMQ)
Most relevant to my comment: [This Flock Camera Leak is like Netflix for Stalkers](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vU1-uiUlHTo&t=132s)
edit: Oh my, two Flock Safety executives (ab)using their service to access cameras in a children's gymnastics studio for hours across multiple days. [Gymnasics room, the pool, fitness room and the preschool daycare.](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/YwVBsFD7v84). The timing of access suggests the first one got on the company Slack right f****** quick to tell the other one to tune into a children's gymnastics class...
41
ObjectiveDark403 days ago
+3
The first link is really good, oddly enough I watched it this morning.
3
FrostyCartographer133 days ago
+67
Or gets fed into an AI that collects and builds models identifying and tracking driver habits.
67
NiobiumThorn3 days ago
+40
Or, wild idea.
We *don't.*
40
IPDDoE3 days ago
+4
Yes, but that's the maximum end of OP's spectrum.
4
Sislar3 days ago
+9
How about making all the tracking data of all politicians collected public.
9
ToolTimeT3 days ago
+22
My town is near san jose on the coast and we had these cameras under agreement they wouldn't share data with the feds without a warrant, but they did anyway, so we made them tear them all out and kicked them out of our town.
22
Loud_Ninja23623 days ago
+1
A bonus would have been requiring them to delete the associated footage from their system.
1
Bassracerx3 days ago
+10
This c*** costs billions of dollars a year yet we can’t have free healthcare?? Defund the budget they have too much
10
Aidrox3 days ago
+3
At the least, this should all be publicly accessible data that we can immediately access too. It’s our money that pays for it.
3
PurpleSailor3 days ago
+3
10 years ago people in the US were bitching about China putting cameras everywhere and tracking everyone. I wonder how long until we have a government issued social score like they do in China.
3
Brick_Lab3 days ago
+1
Oh it's so so much worse than that
1
trickygringo2 days ago
+1
San Jose city council voted to reduce the data retention from 1 year to 30 days. No idea on any independent audits.
1
JadedTikal3 days ago
+300
People in my city have been destroying flock cameras, not a terrible idea
300
PantsandPlants3 days ago
+108
I’ve heard tell that there is a pretty significant amount of copper and gold inside each one, so that’s not terribly surprising.
108
Idivkemqoxurceke1 day ago
There’s a salt-based desiccant inside that when the vapors are smoked it creates a weird euphoric sensation.
0
PeakQuirky843 days ago
+19
How do you destroy them?
(Hypothetically)
19
plumbumplumbumbum3 days ago
+42
Spray paint, Sawzall, Powerful enough laser pointer, well aimed rock. There are options. You figure it out.
42
Minerva_Moon3 days ago
+24
I like the idea of a paint ball. You get to keep distance and have more precision except for maybe the laser pointer.
24
petitmorte23 days ago
+17
Trash bag and a zip tie if you dont want to break anything
17
Minerva_Moon3 days ago
+10
That could leave evidence that can trace back to you. Not to mention that you have to get close.
10
DevonLuck243 days ago
+5
and you can just keep doing it every time they remove it. if you get caught it’ll be a crime but they won’t charge you for the damage on top of whatever fine they give you
5
MercantileReptile3 days ago
+19
I'm sure they would. Alongside every other nonsense they could even think of. Littering, Terrorism and carrying a Weapon of mass obstruction.^^^^/s
19
nickajeglin3 days ago
+15
"He said, "What were you arrested for, kid?"
And I said, "Littering." And they all moved away from me on the bench"
15
Dale_Carvello3 days ago
+3
"I cannot *tell a lie...*"
3
PeakQuirky843 days ago
+2
Need a ladder though
2
TSL4me3 days ago
+2
Epoxy or spray foam is a good one.
2
ButteredPizza694203 days ago
+4
I heard they have copper and gold in there..
4
WriterDave3 days ago
+649
> the suit argues that the city’s use of the technology constitutes an unreasonable law enforcement search, in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. Pictures collected from the cameras are added to giant searchable databases that use AI to help law enforcement easily identify when and where particular vehicles have traveled.
I get that we all carry phones that can be tracked (etc) but there's something uniquely "big brother" about cameras tracking our location. It just feels more sinister...
649
gentlemantroglodyte3 days ago
+366
It's probably because you can leave your phone at home if you want to, but you can't leave Flock at home.
366
WriterDave3 days ago
+103
Sure you can.
Just buy a Ring cam...
103
WindowsVistaWzMyIdea3 days ago
+48
Yes, ring routinely hands ring owner's videos to law enforcement with no judicial oversight, another huge problem
48
GildedAgeV23 days ago
+35
thatsthejoke.jpg
35
kusariku3 days ago
+14
Okay but does owning a Ring suddenly move all the Flock cameras on the streets to your home instead of on the streets?
14
avds_wisp_tech2 days ago
+3
They are functionally the same, as far as law enforcement is concerned.
3
riegspsych3253 days ago
+35
this is something out of Watch Dogs 2, there were a handful little stories about how big brother was used to screw over people. In the game, a couple characters mentioned how this tech was being used by insurance companies to hike up rates based on any and all little details picked up (illegally) through security cameras and info
35
AdonisJames893 days ago
+20
i think about that 10 year old game OFTEN now especially living in the bay area. They reallly tried to warn us
20
DocSmizzle3 days ago
+62
It’s more wild to me that these are subscription services and not something owned and operated by the municipalities using them. It’s incredibly techno-dystopian.
62
uzlonewolf3 days ago
+69
That's intentional, because the courts have said they can purchase data from a 3rd party without a warrant but if they owned the cameras then they would need a warrant to access the data.
69
bannedagainomg3 days ago
+15
Same way UK, US and other allies got around not spying on their own people.
Just spy on each other and give the data over, doubt they even bother with that step anymore tho.
15
SanityPlanet3 days ago
+6
So, 4th amendment violations, but with the added step of annually grifting some tax money for each camera.
6
Ok-Grand-14923 days ago
+5
AND allowing a shady as hell corporation first dibs to the ownership rights of all that data.
5
Eggonioni3 days ago
+53
Because if you don't want to, you can still get a rudimentary mobile phone that isn't hooked up to tracking 24/7 (cell tower triangulation can still narrow your location of course) while it's on. You can still leave most functions to a dedicated home computer or laptop even instead of dealing with the annoyance of mobile apps. It feels sinister because it is sinister, who wouldn't think Palantir owner and big Epstein fan Peter Thiel isn't getting up to something evil 24/7 nowadays?
53
WindowsVistaWzMyIdea3 days ago
+19
Wrong, something big brother about phone tracking too. It is all in violation of our privacy which has been so effectively eroded that you don't see the phone tracking as also being a huge problem
19
tomz173 days ago
+7
They still need a warrant for your cell phone location.
7
Proper_Trouble81913 days ago
+6
Just wait. They won't need cameras because our cars will feed them location data as well as anything else they feel like providing.
6
NUMBerONEisFIRST3 days ago
+2
Sure makes you wonder how it's legal in Illinois, with our strict biometric protections, but somehow this doesn't qualify because license plates are 'public data'.
2
Sideview_play3 days ago
+2
Not just always tracking you (which btw if law enforcement was to use a GPS tracker that requires a warrant) but to also the AI is pre determing who MIGHT be a criminal and sending that info to police. And the police is using the tracking to determine if you are driving somewhere currently and pulling those individuals over solely based on this AIs recommendation based on your driving behavior. There is an ongoing case of this happening in San Antonio. There was a news report on it but I can't find it currently again because searching for flock now pulls up a million and one news results lmao
2
L_Cranston_Shadow3 days ago
+73
If it achieves nothing else, this raises the interesting question of at what point does correlating information from multiple sources constitute an invasion separate from what each individual source captures. I am not sure what the answer is, but given that these video feeds can already be fed through AI to look for certain things, it really needs to be answered.
73
Adventurous_Light_853 days ago
+43
Makes me wonder if all these data centers aren’t actually for the public ai benefit but rather to squeeze lucrative government contracts for population monitoring with a combination of flick cameras. I bet they are all cloud based and I bet they are tied to one of these ai companies.
43
ZantaraLost3 days ago
+11
If nothing else the sort of data centers that hypothetically would be used for that level of population monitoring are not going to be publicized in any fashion.
They'll be set up wherever the three letter agencies already have a footprint and quietly funded through the Pentagon which historically can't balance a budget.
11
etgfrog3 days ago
+1
There was all kinds of rumors about the NSA warehouses a decade ago with how a copy of all internet traffic was being sent to there.
1
ZantaraLost3 days ago
+4
The weird thing is that rumor really doesn't make a ton of sense.
That's 1.8-2.6 exabytes of data a day a decade ago globally.
If the government was collecting ALL that data, where in the seven hells did they get that much storage space?
Not to mention that much data transfer on a daily basis from different nodes would be noticeable.
I can see them working on a ton of semi-closed systems IE internal foreign governmental emails, geofenced sms systems, so-called 'dark web' stuff etc.... but the entire internet traffic?
Probably a bridge too far.
Especially without current LLM models that can scrape the information gathered for key phrases, etc
EDIT: you know the part that would royally piss me off if this was the case (besides the obvious civil liberties angle)? That if the NSA could do that back then they could have easily spent the last bloody decade dismantling every single botnet out there as soon as they formed and they allowed the internet to turn out this way.
4
jtlemon233 days ago
+9
If you haven’t looked into Palantir I would do so. Basically exactly what you’re talking about. They’re using facial recognition to determine if you’re a “citizen” so we’ll see how long before they determine if you’ve been up to wrong think online as well.
9
PiercedAndTattoedBoy3 days ago
+14
I’m glad in my city of Denver the backlash was taken seriously and they cut the number of cameras in half. They ended the contract with the previous company and signed a one year only contract with a different company to test the impact on crime and gauge public opinion. Only one that complained was the police department lol
14
punk-recluse-28343 days ago
+4
That’s honestly a good approach and how any new “intervention” program should be done. Evaluate the roll out and move forward from there
Edit: Law enforcement agencies like probation departments already conduct research and evaluation of their anti-recidivism programs, Flock should be no different if the claim is that it reduces crime.
4
PiercedAndTattoedBoy3 days ago
+3
I didn’t say this in my comment but I think it adds weight. There was highly controversial video that went viral in Denver where the Denver PD had a drone that was allegedly surveilling a crime taking place. The drone was actually right by a lady’s bathroom window pointed into her bathroom and not where the crime was happening across the street. This city was ripe to be done with surveillance.
https://www.9news.com/article/news/local/colorado-news/denver-police-drone-outside-bathroom-window-woman-says/73-0cddb25f-bb40-4489-a2c2-93453f1e135b
3
Tecvoid23 days ago
+40
[deflock.me](http://deflock.me)
find your cameras and make them die please
40
Mixture-Emotional3 days ago
+61
I wish these cameras were being used for good, like finding missing people. There are other countries that just send you a ticket instead of getting into high speed chases and causing accidents just to hand someone a ticket. The problem is there are too many bad actors and not enough integrity to be honest by the public/taxpayers in this current situation.
61
DoradoPulido23 days ago
+17
It might be different if it were just a speed camera that sent you a ticket. These are being set up in business parking lots and public parks. They scan and identify faces. Big Brother is literally watching.
17
RedditReader40313 days ago
+5
I understand your point but who do you send a summons to in the case of a stolen car or bogus/ obscured plates? Just as one example, the MTA Bridges and Tunnels Division in NY experiences 750,000 toll scofflaws a month with them owing the agency around $360 million.
5
Animal_Courier3 days ago
+3
If a car has been reported stolen, and a police report filed, than obviously the ticket gets added to the stolen vehicle report and not the registration. If it’s not reported stolen, slap it on the vehicle, if it’s not paid promptly it must be paid at renewal.
Not that complicated tbh. What’s more complicated is slapping tickets on individual drivers when the camera may not have a good image.
3
RedditReader40313 days ago
+9
Photo enforced summonses are not directed to individual drivers nor do they carry points since they aren’t served in person and have no identity verification ability.
Further, while police have access to stolen car info, these photo enforcement cameras are operated by private firms, often in another state, on a contract basis. You can find errors and mishandling reports all over the internet. Police agencies do not process nor verify these citations, which is why they are merely civil debts.
9
Due-Yogurtcloset-5523 days ago
+17
nothing a 10watt blue laser pointer cant solve.
17
420_SixtyNine3 days ago
+1
You're going to blind yourself with that. Just throw a rock and be done with it.
1
brakeled3 days ago
+16
Denver just went through this, except the new Mayor was in bed with Flock. Probably the case here. Throw a stink, get media attention, see who is profiting from this. After throwing a fit, Denver is told the Flock contract got shredded and replaced with a new surveillance agency but privately owned Flock cameras are still in the city on private property. Denver had also just finished laying off 150+ civil servants while touting this expensive contract so that played a role in having it ended.
16
2Drogdar2Furious3 days ago
+8
Yessssss.
Deflock the USA
8
ckrygier3 days ago
+8
We live in a surveillance state. All that surveillance imagery we’d use in older media to instill viewer’s with fear of a totalitarian society is now our reality and we just gave it away to feel a little more safe because fear mongering works so damn well on Americans.
8
Strange-Effort13053 days ago
+9
The police will never protect you from wealthy predators. They only exist to enable wealthy predators.
9
brindlewc3 days ago
+14
Tell all the crackheads that there is several dollars worth of copper in one.
14
taywray3 days ago
+6
Why bother with pricey lawyers when you can just put a bounty on em for 20 bucks a unit and spread the word among the homeless?
6
2beatenup3 days ago
+5
C**** drones with spray can???
5
eastsiderhere3 days ago
+5
Unfortunately they can argue that they are not tracking vehicles but the license plates, which I have read actually belong to the State of California. This may need a state law to stop.
5
MadMass233 days ago
+42
Does it helps for crimes solving ? Is San José safer ?
42
Chaos-Cortex3 days ago
+146
It helps Palantir gathers data on who is part of the resistance.
146
MadMass233 days ago
+23
Hunger games are coming fast
23
therealsilentjohn3 days ago
+47
Studies that claim it solves more crime are funded by ... you guessed it ... Flock.
47
coomzee3 days ago
+9
They tend to miss the million dollar law suite when the camera fails.
9
uzlonewolf3 days ago
+33
No, it does not. It does, however, allow abusive cops to stalk their ex's.
33
GoofyGills3 days ago
+9
Apostrophes don't make plurals. Exes*
9
Sponchman3 days ago
+3
No, there so tons of insane drivers in San Jose
Constant loud modified cars blasting through stop signs and red lights everywhere.
These cameras clearly aren't working.
3
DryPersonality3 days ago
+2
My sweet summer child.
2
anlwydc3 days ago
+8
Now that you’ve heard all the silliness, yes it does. They can track stolen cars, missing person(s), and other vehicles via license plate data, make/model/color, and other details that have been involved in other criminal offenses.
8
go5dark3 days ago
+16
San Jose was already safe and has been for decades. So this becomes a question of trading the ability to travel and live anonymously for a _marginal_ improvement in post-hoc resolution of already committed crimes. Most people, though, would think of safety in terms of preventing crimes from happening, which is not what these systems do.
16
saera-targaryen3 days ago
+9
But at what tangible gain? How many unsolved mysteries are now solved using flock cameras and is it worth the millions a year in subscription fees and the violating of peoples' rights?
9
CrotalusHorridus3 days ago
+6
Then why does it feel like cops still don't do shit?
6
DryPersonality3 days ago
+4
Cause they don't? I don't know what rock you've been living under, but the police only exist to protect private property, not citizens.
4
Caymonki3 days ago
+9
Cant fund schools or healthcare but we can have a private company run a subscription service for 24/7 surveillance country wide. “It’s for criminals” okay investigate the Epstein files. “Not those kind of criminals” neat.
9
sailor_bat_903 days ago
+5
How can we get a lawsuit like that going in Los Angeles? They installed so many and we didn't even get to vote on it.
5
salfora3 days ago
+3
How can we replicate this suit in SF?
3
Silly-Low60193 days ago
+5
How can I participate in that lawsuit?
5
Forward-Trade34493 days ago
+6
isnt matt mahan the mayor of san jose? bro said he would never let privacy be turned over to ice....
6
just_jake863 days ago
+4
Around the Chicago area, there are almost 6,000 Flock cameras and rapidly growing. I'm starting a group on DeFlock for the Chicago area to get these bullshit devices taken down. These are not for "safety" or to benefit the people. These devices are for control and surveillance and must be removed. If the people don't fight, there will be many tens of thousands more of these things. After that? Whatever Flock 2.0 is. I, for one, don't intend to find out what that f****** plan might look like in our society.
4
Strange-Effort13053 days ago
+4
Can of black spray paint from Home Depot
4
ST33LDI9ITAL3 days ago
+2
[ Removed by Listnook ]
2
Cool_Cheetah6583 days ago
+4
Keep up the good work fellow citizens.
Every time I see a story about flock, I think of the British communities that went around and kept cutting the camera poles down after their council approved them despite massive disapproval. The council then reversed their decision. I would not be surprised if we begin seeing that here.
4
Strange-Effort13053 days ago
+5
Americans are too subservient to wealth to ever stand up for ourselves.
5
Weaver2703 days ago
+3
Setup a do not scan db. If you are scanned then the owners send you a 10k check for every violation.
Money fixes these kinds of issues.
3
Fabulous-Ad37883 days ago
+4
Can you elaborate? Is this possible and legally defensible?
4
Weaver2703 days ago
Just a wish, it is highly unlikely. So a fictional aspiration. Maybe a good plot for a scifi novel. Hmm
0
1911Earthling3 days ago
+3
I hate flock cameras with the very essence of my soul. There is a flock camera pointed at every gun store in America!
3
ToolTimeT3 days ago
+2
I approve of drivers in San Jose actions.
2
PurpleDragonDix3 days ago
+1
[ Removed by Listnook ]
1
muusandskwirrel1 day ago
+1
Honest question: Should an EU citizen have a right to file a “forget me” request under the GDPR for any and all flock video and records containing their details?
156 Comments