Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

64% Positive

Analyzed from 3470 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#cameras#flock#cities#don#more#crime#police#surveillance#should#person

Discussion (125 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

ChrisMarshallNY•about 2 hours ago
Yeah, I'm not a fan of these things. If they were just ALPRs, I could probably give them a bit of slack -if they tightened up their security-, but all the other stuff they do, makes them pretty much untenable.

However:

> This makes AI powered cameras like Flock's distinct from traditional surveillance or traffic cams, which require someone to manually look over footage in order to find a specific vehicle or individual.

Is a bit misleading. These days, anyone can give an LLM footage from any source, and get this kind of information.

maccard•about 1 hour ago
What LLM can I get and feed hundreds of hours of video into that will give me the position of a specific vehicle alongside when that happened?

An LLM isn’t going to help you here, but basic Computer Vision and a SQL database has been a solution _if you have the cameras_. I wrote a license plate reader as a university project using OpenCV almost 20 years ago.

handoflixue•38 minutes ago
If you were able to write one 20 years ago, I dare say an LLM could whip one up super-fast. Or just search the internet and tell you where to find one.

One of the risks of LLMs is that a lot of tasks go from "an expert could do this easily given a few weeks" to "anyone who thinks to ask an LLM can do this easily and get results the same day"

jubilanti•36 minutes ago
Bullshit. Show me how, today, an average person with no coding or ml background can go from 0 to their own ALPR tracking system in ONE DAY with Claude Code or Codex. Assuming they have access to terabytes of regional video surveillance but don't have their own compute besides what the LLM will buy for them.

I'll wait.

LLMs can do some incredible things but the hype is astronomical.

erikerikson•about 2 hours ago
I think there's a limit to how misleading.

There's a very important difference between "anyone could walk through my door and steal my stuff" and "this person walked in my door and stole my stuff".

TheRealPomax•about 1 hour ago
But not so much between "this person walked in my door and stole my stuff" and "I left the door to my house open and then I put my stuff in the doorway."

Flock cameras are roughly that secure.

lesuorac•6 minutes ago
Isn't Flock more like a house sitter in the analogy though?

"I gave the person keys to my house and then I trusted they wouldn't open bathroom doors while somebody was there".

Like law enforcement is being given access to the systems, the door isn't "left open", a key was given to them.

llm_nerd•about 1 hour ago
What makes Flock bizarre is that it's a private business, and this is precisely how police departments are getting around a lot of traditional gates and checks on this sort of thing.

Police setting up a 1984 monitoring system throughout your city, tracking every car, person, activity -- yields lots of questions, oversight, concerns, debate, challenges, etc.

Some private business doing the same, and then letting the same police use it at will as a paying customer -- yay, all of the invasive monitoring with none of the oversight.

jkestner•23 minutes ago
And of course, it's compounded by being pooled. Like RealPage, ALPR services like Flock, Axon Fleet Hub, and Motorola Vigilant VehicleManager offer data laundering so that organizations that shouldn't be talking can communicate.

Privacy laws now.

christoph•43 minutes ago
“Fascism should rightly be called corporatism, as it is the merger of corporate and government power.”

- Benito Mussolini

microgpt•9 minutes ago
Nah. Fascism only tolerates one power, that being itself. It can emerge from either the state or corporate side, and necessarily subsumes or destroys the other, just as it subsumes or destroys unions, families, friend networks, communications, and anything else that can establish power. That doesn't mean the merger of two of them is the defining feature.
sandworm101•about 1 hour ago
The real joke is that the 1984 system was already in place long before flock. We all carry phones. Either from tower records ot google advert tags, private industry already tracked our every movement. Licence plate readers? Why bother when every car now has bluetooth enabled and so is constantly prodcasting its LAP id. (Some cities have tracked cars this way for over a decade, mostly for traffic management.)
TheRealPomax•about 1 hour ago
That's actually the one thing that does make sense: police has always wanted to be able to do this, but they legally can't. But they can reward a private company willing to do it for them, so that they can "ask for the data" without ever breaking the law.
cyanydeez•about 2 hours ago
>These days, anyone can give an LLM footage from any source, and get this kind of information.

Is a bit misleading itself, to do this at scale requires all those iffy data centers.

xnx•about 2 hours ago
What's an iffy data center?
goatlover•about 1 hour ago
One that gets built over the public's objection because just maybe the company building it will create an AGI that will take everyone's jobs?
deepsquirrelnet•42 minutes ago
Can anybody find trustworthy stats that these actually reduce crime? All I see are occasional anecdotes about how they were used to find one person one time.

Skeptical me seriously doubts this is an effective solution for crime. But maybe that's because this country has a history of being willing to do a million expensive and privacy violating things, and only if it's a punitive measure.

sublinear•23 minutes ago
I don't have stats, but most police have made it pretty clear that they're used for investigations that would otherwise have very little to go on.

I don't think anyone other than the manufacturers have made claims of cameras reducing crime. You can put all the AI bells and whistles on them, but they're still just cameras.

They're a fallback option, not a dragnet. The police are generally reactive to reports of crime, not proactively trying to piece together the details of everyone's lives and nail them the moment their dog poops on the sidewalk. No AI can even do that anyway and it would be a waste of money.

There are two vocal camps of people on these threads that are eroding HN: fearmongerers and grifters. I don't understand how it got this bad, but that's the real crisis here.

microgpt•8 minutes ago
If they don't reduce crimes what do they do? Oh right they track inconvenient people
Cider9986•32 minutes ago
They're also getting banned fast. The city level should be the most accessible government for change.

There's been over 70[1] documented wins.

Don't feel like this is a lost cause, it clearly isn't. If everyone who was going to comment on this thread instead or additionally got involved by going to a city council meeting and explaining the problems to friends/family, many more cities could reject them.

[1] https://deflock.org/council/#wins

hombre_fatal•about 2 hours ago
Meanwhile in Texas we can’t even have red light cameras to automatically ticket people willing to kill you just to catch a light.
kodablah•32 minutes ago
"Meanwhile in <location> we can't even have Flock cameras to automatically catch people who may have killed someone"

Hopefully the absurdity of broad scale surveillance can't be so easily lost in hyperbole

microgpt•8 minutes ago
Flock doesn't automatically catch people who killed someone. Red light cameras do catch people who run red lights.
hfosidkc77•about 1 hour ago
Having been in Texas last month these cameras are all over your state. I saw them everywhere from the smallest city to houston

https://imgur.com/a/P7WxKpU

kodablah•30 minutes ago
They're all basically turned off by law, just not removed
fc417fc802•about 2 hours ago
Honestly I like that policy. What's the legality of flock in Texas?
Spooky23•about 1 hour ago
Totally legal.

The operating theory of all of these cameras is that anything happening in public sight is by its nature not private. The federal government is dumping millions and millions of dollars into grant programs for municipalities to buy it… It’s a giant federal surveillance program disguised as decisions made by individual police departments.

It’s hilarious and depressing to contrast the HN community reaction to Snowden versus the mostly meh response to flock.

pixl97•about 1 hour ago
The last 20 years has burned privacy into the ground for a large part of the population.
bertt•about 1 hour ago
You're mistaken if you think the community is still the same percentage of humans.
infecto•about 1 hour ago
What meh response? There has been a continued and very vocal response against flock here.
microgpt•12 minutes ago
It's legal for any random citizen to build one of these surveillance networks, right?
tiahura•10 minutes ago
Only in free countries. Many authoritarian regimes don’t let people take pictures in public.
abalashov•about 1 hour ago
These horrific things are multiplying exponentially in my (rural GA) environs. There are a dozen of them along every conceivable cycling route I could take, and far more if I drive somewhere. If you think this is a city thing meant to deter urban crime, the explosive proliferation of Flock cameras in quite rural and suburban areas may shock you. I find them in the darndest of places, near but not on county lines, adjacent to minor bridges, etc. And next time I go through there, there are more. They seem to be procreating.

As others have pointed out, they're not just ALPRs or traffic cameras, and their use-cases, official and unofficial, are extremely dynamic and expanding fast. They are not the only thing of their kind, but they justly earned the lightning rod status for their conspicuous cooperation with the administration's immigration thuggery and the douchy--but highly consequential--pronouncements of their CEO. Moreover, there's a ticker tape of daily news about police misuse of Flock's database, mainly for stalking exes and things like that.

This _is_ a stop on the way to a Chinese-style surveillance state, and there's nothing inevitable about it. But it will happen if we allow it to happen.

Ben Johnson's video on the security vulnerabilities, linked in the article, always deserves an explicit shout-out. It's likely to intrigue the tinkerers here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uB0gr7Fh6lY

shwaj•about 1 hour ago
Benn Jordan, you mean. Good video.
nekomi•11 minutes ago
"Security" will be redefined.
aquir•about 2 hours ago
I don't get why any of these devices are still intact...
EA-3167•14 minutes ago
Are you willing to potentially be prosecuted to make a point that will ultimately come down to, "The cameras you destroyed are replaced with newly purchased units"?

The way to beat this isn't vandalism, it's getting them banned from every municipality and county in the country, while fighting at state levels for more bans.

It's also silly talk from kids online, just like "Don't vote, burn your local Wal-Mart" is only meant to impress other online children. The rest of us know that you'll neither vote, nor burn down the Wal-Mart.

microgpt•6 minutes ago
You get to sacrifice your life one or zero times in your life. Surely there are some terminally ill people who would do it?
EA-3167•2 minutes ago
I can't speak for anyone else, but I suspect most terminally ill people want to spend time with the people they love, not breaking cameras and working their way through the legal system.
crises-luff-6b•about 1 hour ago
There is no expectation of privacy in public. It's really that simple.
afh1•20 minutes ago
There may be no expectation of privacy in the sense someone may see you and take your picture.

There is an expectation you are not constantly tracked everywhere you go by a nationwide surveillance apparatus, that your location is not constantly monitored, indexed and shared. Unless you expect to live in an Orwellian distopia.

Cider9986•39 minutes ago
Actually, the supreme court ruled that police have to get a warrant to view cell tracking data and attach a location tracking device to cars.

Flock is a clever workaround that should be illegal, but before that can happens we can get them removed at the city council level.

kennywinker•9 minutes ago
Do you agree with that, or are you just deferring to an overly simplified interpretation of the law?

No law is that simple. You can be photographed when you’re out in public most places, yet stalking is also illegal most places.

thechao•27 minutes ago
I have strong expectations, in fact; I need the state to respect that.
anigbrowl•23 minutes ago
There should be. Other countries have one and they seem no worse off for it.
dualvariable•32 minutes ago
There should be.
therobots927•about 2 hours ago
They owe George orwell’s estate a royalty for this idea.
fithisux•about 2 hours ago
As a voter and taxpayer, I never asked for this.
infecto•about 1 hour ago
That’s not how voting and paying taxes work.
goatlover•about 1 hour ago
Imagine representatives who did what voters actually wanted. There's probably a name for that. Representative democracy or something. As opposed to corporate representation.
thechao•26 minutes ago
This is why gerrymandering should be unconstitutional, and why corporations should have their rights explicitly curtailed: they're not citizens or the people.
infecto•27 minutes ago
Imagine what I really meant was that in those areas people largely approve of these cameras and it’s the minority that don’t.

Now of course your narrative is rude and more entertaining but sadly far from the mark. Saying “that’s not what I paid for” is all fine and dandy but it’s cuts both ways.

Advertisement
arkhiver•about 2 hours ago
Cider9986•41 minutes ago
Consider using that one as well as archive.org(when no paywall), archive.today, megalodon.jp, archive box?
dev1ycan•about 1 hour ago
If a certain group of people think that it should be their right to take others rights away and turn society into a dystopia for perceived security, then for the same reason it should be other individuals rights to assert that their rights should be protected by taking the first group's rights away to install or do whatever they think they can do for convenience/security's sake.

This includes "ancestry tests", security cameras with AI in them, upload IDs to "verify", and even social media where you are allowed to upload pictures with others in them.

And since we "supposedly" live in a democracy, we should be allowed to have a vote to decide on this, the group that wins is the majority, right? I don't understand why we're allowing our rights to erode before we have an informed election about this, in democracies.

joering2•about 1 hour ago
Got these installed all over local parking lots for wallmart, home depot, ross, every exit solar panel and camera. Was wondering if there is some sort of quickly blinking infrared light or something that would make it visible to a naked eye of a cop, but not to a recording camera. I bet you would sell millions of those license plate holders in a heartbeat.
edoceo•about 1 hour ago
Like that paparazzi fabric that saturates the image?
tchalla•about 2 hours ago
Amazing innovation and dynamism.
icapybara•about 2 hours ago
We need some way to address the low level crime in the US. If you look at cities in east Asia, they're both much larger than typical US cities and much safer. It -is- possible to have safe large cities. The fact that we don't is a choice.
rdiddly•43 minutes ago
Don't we? Crime rates have been dropping for decades.

https://usafacts.org/answers/what-is-the-crime-rate-in-the-u...

But if the choice is between liberty and safety, then Americans are supposed to choose liberty, that's why America is what it is.

Ben Franklin famously said, "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

Cider9986•37 minutes ago
Exactly. More people die from cars every month in the US than in 9/11. We value our freedom with cars, we should value our privacy to an even greater extent.
epoxia•about 2 hours ago
What's even more amazing is that they had these safe cities without [Flock, Motorola, Axon]. I guess we will never know how they did it, but at least we get the Chinese surveillance state.
khuey•about 2 hours ago
My experience in major East Asian cities (predominantly Tokyo and Taipei) is that they have extensive networks of surveillance cameras operated by or accessible to the police.
kurthr•about 1 hour ago
Japanese police are very rarely willing to even ask to look at any of the disorganized hodgepodge of private cameras for property crimes or even minor physical altercations. They are far more likely to rely on personal accounts. TV dramas not withstanding.

Although Tokyo does have a system of traffic cameras which log traffic movement and license plates, that's most all that it does. Except in cases of murder or kidnapping (or political influence), it's quite rare to request the recordings of many private cameras. Outside of big cities, it's even more rare.

The largest connected system of cameras I'm aware of are for the subway camera systems (Shinjuku, Shinagawa, etc). Although independent systems, together they can do facial recognition to track individuals. Not a lot of AI yet, though.

In Tokyo, it is not uncommon to see bikes parked on residential streets with keys left overnight in their wheel locks (as if there aren't even mischievous 12 year olds?!). Oh, and outside of the cities, crime is even more rare. It is common in youth hostels for there to be open cubbies where personal items are stored in the front near the door. Nothing is taken. Most common thefts are: umbrellas (considered a fungible public good?), unlocked bikes (in high traffic business areas), women's underwear (off of outdoor drying racks).

dopidopHN2•about 2 hours ago
Flock is not the police. Their main customer is Home Depot. Their second one is Lowe's.

Then come the big police department.

Allowing a private company to profit of holding information about me is innerving to me.

I would feel better if it was 100% run by the police. ( better, not good )

nerdsniper•about 2 hours ago
I can’t remember the last place I visited which didn’t. Maybe Lake Atitlan pre-2020?

Still, a few some areas of Asia achieved this reputation back when cameras were still extremely rare.

greenleafone7•about 2 hours ago
It is possible. What keeps japanese cities safe'er', is not the cameras though.
ChrisMarshallNY•about 2 hours ago
It’s the culture. Every Japanese person is always aware that they are “a part of society.”

Even the Yakuza participate in society. When they have big disasters, the local mobsters are usually helping people out, before the authorities can get going.

jchw•about 2 hours ago
A lot of the neighborhoods where Flock is being deployed aren't even bad by higher standards, so I'm not sure what this has to do with anything.
naturalmovement•about 2 hours ago
East Asia built a uni-culture by being extremely racist against outsiders. I don't think you can get away with that anywhere else.

A friend of mine (white guy) married a Chinese woman and when they visited China they were subject to slurs and dirty looks in public.

There's a whole category of videos on social media of Japanese furiously angry at Westerners acting like fools on their subways. They're not happy about it.

arjie•about 1 hour ago
I’m an Indian with a Taiwanese-American wife. I’ve never experienced even the mildest amount of racism in Taiwan. Everyone was kind and friendly to me. And Taiwan is very safe.

I’m not going to pretend that an anecdote fully captures a problem but considering I spent over a month there just living a normal life I imagine that if the problem were widespread I’d have many chances to experience it.

My elderly parents were there for two weeks too and they have nothing but positive things to say.

And finally, my wife’s cousin married a White man from Ireland and he has loved the place for the many years he’s lived there.

infecto•about 1 hour ago
I don’t know if I would consider a month long vacation as evidence. Taiwan is pretty famous for have lower labor classes that they import from places like the Philippines and while people are friendly, they are still generally looked down upon. Not dissimilar to places like Japan, Hong Kong and Singapore. So I think racism is a pretty loaded and broad word and people typically think about it in purely an American context, it’s more common around the world than people think in all kinds of shades.

Ultimately I do agree with the original thesis around monocultures.

kevin_thibedeau•about 1 hour ago
PRC has a demographic issue with missing women that engenders resentment of the foreign devils.
naturalmovement•about 1 hour ago
I've never been to Taiwan but would you agree it feels very Westernized along with Hong Kong and Philippines? Probably because of colonization.
kevmo314•about 1 hour ago
The pot calling the kettle black…
infecto•about 1 hour ago
What are you even trying to say? Why does everything devolve into whataboutism?
mcmcmc•about 2 hours ago
Poverty and lack of economic opportunity are the biggest drivers of street-level crime. Good thing we have all these AI layoffs.
fc417fc802•about 2 hours ago
A choice that has tradeoffs. Assuming we're talking about the sorts of places that lean heavily into surveillance I don't want to live there and their views on the role of the government is one of the reasons.
dw_arthur•about 2 hours ago
You're correct that it is a choice. Flock would barely move the needle on stopping crimes caused by the mentally ill and drug addicted.
shiandow•about 2 hours ago
By low level crime you mean unlawful surveillance?
kevin_thibedeau•about 1 hour ago
> much safer

They have severe consequences for criminal behavior and no subculture that elevates criminality.

cr125rider•about 1 hour ago
That sounds pretty racist though…

Is the anti-prosecution narrative

edoceo•42 minutes ago
How much of that is addressed by a strong social-safety net? How are addicts and homeless people handled? How about general poverty (a known driver of crime)?
nosioptar•about 2 hours ago
My small city was safer before flock.

Before, if the cops asked for witnesses to come forward, they always got someone because they had a good reputation and were trusted.

A few years of the people saying no to flock and the cops and city hall ignoring us has destroyed that trust.

Now, when the cops ask for help, they get told to go flock themselves.

I'd suggest a better way is to reform policing. They need to start working for all the people, not just the Epstein class.

llm_nerd•about 1 hour ago
You're getting loads of replies that seem to knee-jerk defend US cities purely to oppose Flock. And let's be real and admit that adding more cameras does little to improve this. My whole neighbourhood has a panopticon of surveillance cameras on every property, yet there have still been home burglaries and several cars stolen.

Many Asian cities are safer -- and they undisputedly are -- for cultural reasons. You can't create culture through surveillance.

goatlover•about 1 hour ago
What is the trade off though and are Americans willing to make it? What sort of social conditions lead to more low level crime? This sort of complaint is nothing new btw.
thisisnotauser•about 2 hours ago
I've lived in major US cities my entire life and have never been a victim of crime. Do you have any facts to back up this seemingly outrageous claim?
righthand•about 2 hours ago
US cities are plenty safe. The fact that you think otherwise is propaganda you’ve been successfully served. I live in Nyc and visit other cities often.
steelbrain•about 2 hours ago
You must live in a different New York City than the one I visited. I had the safety calibration of Tallinn, Estonia and Dubai, UAE.

The subway was extremely hostile. People were regularly drugged out of their mind. I saw one guy try to drink a Coca Cola upside down and spilled it all in the bus. Another crazy chased my limited mobility Estonian friend who wanted to visit nyc alongside me when she went alone for groceries.

Could it be that your frame of reference is broken and/or you’re numb to it?

beau_g•about 2 hours ago
You saw someone try to drink a soda upside down and spill it? We are going to need more than a Flock cam to stop that heinous act, perhaps a Flock robot arm that could grab the criminals arm and turn it right side up, or just restrain them while the authorities are on the way.
wat10000•about 1 hour ago
You’re describing a spilled soda as a safety issue. The other person isn’t the one with a broken frame of reference.
righthand•about 1 hour ago
These are all lies. Small towns have notiriously higher crime rates than Nyc. We should send the National Guard to your small town and place cameras every where. I dont feel safe in your small town. I moved away from middle America that’s swamped in meth, high murder rate, and racism. Sorry someone spilled a coca-cola though. Your pearls must be powder in your hands by now.
billfor•about 2 hours ago
I live in NYC and I don't think it is safe, so there's one person that disagrees with you. Part of the problem in NYC is when you commit a low-level crime the social-justice warriors let the person back out on the street without charging them. This is why when somebody kills somebody in NYC you often hear that the person had been arrested for various things twelve times earlier. Just covering up the "un-safeness" by saying "it's safe" or citing crime stats doesn't change what people can see with their own eyes.
goatlover•about 1 hour ago
Are you sure these people weren't making plea deals or having their cases dismissed because prosecutors can't try every single low level criminal case? I'm not sure where "social-justice warriors" comes in to play. It's the legal system making choices about what crimes are worth prosecuting.
righthand•about 1 hour ago
This is a bail reform propaganda. If you feel unsafe because we dont put deoderant thieves in Rikers then move.
naturalmovement•about 2 hours ago
This type of "there is no problem and any evidence is propaganda" denial is why social disorder like rampant petty theft, open air drug use, and people shitting in the streets is destroying these cities.
righthand•about 1 hour ago
What about the meth heads shitting in the streets of the small town? Rampant assault and murder rates. What about all the drinking and driving killing people in America. No, no, it’s Nyc that’s scary.
Waterluvian•about 2 hours ago
It’s hard to distil to a single comment but I think it might be a poor example given the NYPD takes about double the budget per capita to be less safe than Toronto.

I think the only objective conclusion we can come to in a comments section is that going by “I visited there” vibes isn’t going to be useful.

righthand•about 1 hour ago
What about the high murder rate and meth problems of middle America, lets talk about that more instead of the “oh no homeless people” rhetoric all the time.
derektank•about 2 hours ago
NYC is quite safe compared to most US cities. It is still more dangerous than most major cities in the developed world.
nailer•about 2 hours ago
Really? I lived in Greenwich village until last year and I’d have people threaten to kill me for politely declining to give them change. I live in Park Slope now and there’s violent people on the F line all the time. Maybe wealthy neighbourhoods are super dangerous or maybe you’re just not noticing.
doctorpangloss•about 2 hours ago
> If you look at cities in east Asia, they're... much safer.

ah yes, the famously dependable statistics of east Asia, with their famously free press and citizen auditing communities, and the famously dependable impressions of tourists and expatriates...

monkaiju•about 2 hours ago
What do you mean we don't? Our cities seem quite safe...