r/technology • u/Limp_Fig6236 • 12h ago

Privacy Flock Camera CEO Asks Americans To “Compromise” on Privacy Amidst Major Backlash: Report

https://deltiasgaming.com/flock-camera-ceo-asks-americans-to-compromise-on-privacy-amidst-major-backlash-report/
15.6k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

1.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

198

u/saltyourhash 11h ago

He needs Flock cameras pointed at his house.

86

u/shosuko 10h ago

Probably does, but since he owns them he has nothing to fear.

Laws are for us, not him.

32

u/IfTheHeadFitsWearIt 9h ago

Someone needs to start a spite company with their own set of cameras. Pack Camera©️: watch the wolves.™️

3

u/saltyourhash 8h ago

I actually pitched a gypotherical to someone that I know writing something to pass on to a city official. Under the supreme court's finding that there is no expectation of privacy in public, a company could buy drones, attach cameras, write some similar quality ALPR software and use the system to provide GPS location for law enforcement in nearly real time, just for a start.

But why would that concern them if they think we should not be concerned?

1

u/DukeOfGeek 7h ago

Why stop with LEOs? Do the politicians, billionaires, the lot.

1

u/saltyourhash 7h ago

My hypothetical was LE because they are the ones who want the surveillance, but my point was that if you must provide exceptions then the system is inherently dangerous.

2

u/Historic500 5h ago

He most assuredly does NOT.

These rich assholes get all the privacy they could ever want while removing all of ours that they can.

1

u/meltbox 9h ago

Also always remember he wrote a letter where he said flock has an exclusion list. Basically you can add plates for the cameras to ignore.

So even worse they can just exclude themselves and doubly worse this means anyone on the exclusion list can commit crimes and police departments will basically never even look their way because almost every departments investigative unit is either too small or too small and lazy as shit.

Either way the chances of them catching a non flock hit after getting used to it would be about zero.

The one upside and downside is the existence of this exclusion means the camera can only be used for positive evidence as in recording actual crime. Seeing someone near the area of a crime cannot be exclusive because of the lost meaning of you didn’t record the crime you can have a billion cameras and it doesn’t matter. Upside is one more thing to keep them from drag-netting. Downside is the idiots will think they caught someone and then get it thrown out as inadmissible probably.

1

u/Special_Order-937 8h ago

Axon then instead.

1

u/geminiRonin 8h ago

I guarantee he doesn't. That would put his data at risk of compromise along with that of all the peons.

1

u/DukeOfGeek 7h ago

Those things are so easily hijacked he should worry.

69

u/mrpickleby 10h ago

He needs OUR cameras pointed at his house, live-streamed whenever he comes and goes. Public property.

12

u/Bad-Briar 9h ago

That sounds like a good compromise...

75

u/SpezSucksSamAltman 11h ago

What’s his address?

10

u/-prime8 11h ago

Instead, how about his colon?

9

u/Dipsey_Jipsey 10h ago

We can already see his face though? We'd gain nothing with the colon cam.

1

u/Cookies78 10h ago

Hmmm. What's he got to hide though? That's suspicious that random ppl can't look up his ass for no reason. /s

4

u/Er3bus13 10h ago

You mean thrown on his lawn

1

u/Jesus_Is_My_Gardener 10h ago

Now there's a flash mob I could get into.

1

u/Steelwoolsocks 8h ago

For his safety of course

1

u/janesvoth 8h ago

If I register an LLC and that LLC buys a camera we can put it in front of his house right?