Yeah, need to find a way to go after the government to stop using the tech rather than going after a single company. Eventually, Flock will just go bankrupt, the pieces will get bought up and either sold to a competitor or the VC that buys them will change the name and start a new company that’s basically the same and the executives from Flock will join that or go to competitors. There’s not much use attacking a single company these days. But it is good that attention is being brought to the technology in use and how the government is using it.
Flock is canceled—and its competitors are profiting
Submitted 2 days ago by remington@beehaw.org to technology@beehaw.org
Comments
irotsoma@piefed.blahaj.zone 2 days ago
Thorry@feddit.org 2 days ago
It is very revealing how the people rebelling against Flock isn’t seen as the people opposing mass surveillance and data being made available to all the cops without cause, due process, oversight, restrictions or consequences for abuse, but instead as the people being against Flock specifically and the same system with a different label would be peachy.
Either they are monumentally stupid or more likely they are corrupt as hell and/or evil.
rainbowbunny@slrpnk.net 2 days ago
What’s wrong with Motorola?
LilB0kChoy@reddthat.com 2 days ago
I believe Motorola already manufactured ALPRs for one of the other companies and decided to get into the ALPR provider business too.
DahGangalang@infosec.pub 1 day ago
Damn. Didn’t they also just sign a deal with GrapheneOS? Real disappointed in this duality.
k0k0_belgium@lemmychan.org 2 days ago
Remember, your tax dollars are being wasted on this while you’re not able to afford a house.
Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 2 days ago
As far as I understand it, the alternatives do not include a nationwide search as part of their features. Flock is actually especially bad on that front.
That said, I think most of the emotional revulsion against Flock is just the idea of persistent tracking of everyone by your local police force, and that isn’t mitigated by a brand switch.
chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
Given the Snowden leaks, it seems inevitable that if that data is being recorded and collected into the servers of a small number of US companies, that it will end up being used to enable nationwide searches regardless
dan@upvote.au 2 days ago
Yeah I think people would feel much better if the cameras were operated by the local police department, and they were the only ones that had access to it. ALPR cameras have been around for a long time, but it previously wasn’t an issue because access to the data was restricted. Other jurisdictions had to subpoena the data rather than being able to instantly access everything.
Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 2 days ago
The local police should also need to go to court to access their own cameras. The 4th amendment protects against police surveiling people without a warrant.
Cethin@lemmy.zip 2 days ago
I’m pretty sure part of why this is all being done is because the police can’t legally do this. A third party company can though, and police can purchase access (in their theory at least, though this is being tested).
Vodulas@beehaw.org 1 day ago
Consider the ridiculous amount of stalking from cops using these cameras, no, I don’t think people would be OK with only local cops having access
noxypaws@pawb.social 1 day ago
that’s what palantir is for, unfortunately. I would be shocked if they didn’t already have a “solution” for this, or at least if they aren’t already working on it.
and Axon sure as shit ain’t broke, being the rebranded literal Taser company, they can afford the R&D to develop it, and will probably get free cash from the fascist government to do so in the near future anyways