• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

What is YOUR pet peeve? Let's have a laugh.

What is it with people not reading replies to their posts? On another forum someone has a receiver which lost reception and comes with a set of measurements on the demodulator chip. Points out an anomaly which is an error on his side. So I tell him to do some tests also telling him the values are meaningless without knowing the actual chip. Then I look it up on the schematic and say so. And then he goes bananas on my remarks on the meaninglessness. Never mind those tests. Good grief...
 
whoaru99 said:
The way the laws are and have been, courts uphold there is no reasonable expectation of privacy when in public. That is the essence of what allows it under the current way things are.
Click to expand...


That doesnt adequately describe FLOCK. It is a surveillance system. Records are kept from each location your car is captured . That history of your movements can be accessed by a wide range of official and private actors. It is in essence a warranties surveillance of the public.
 
DesertRatt said:
That doesnt adequately describe FLOCK. It is a surveillance system. Records are kept from each location your car is captured . That history of your movements can be accessed by a wide range of official and private actors. It is in essence a warranties surveillance of the public.
Click to expand...
It wasn't intended to describe Flock itself.

It describes the essence of what allows Flock to be put up under the current laws.
 
whoaru99 said:
It wasn't intended to describe Flock itself.

It describes the essence of what allows Flock to be put up under the current laws.
Click to expand...
I don't think it is legal vis a vis the 4th amendment. It seems that the FLOCK company devised a surveillance system, then simply sent salesmen out to police authorities to sell them on the idea. Which, of course using public money the cops said, "HELL YES!"

The issue here is that there was no enabling legislation. Ergo, there is NO OVERSIGHT on useage of the data, there is no set of rules regarding security of the data, there is simply no legal structure at all. Cop-stalkers by the hundreds are using it to stalk ex-wives, girlfriends and so on. Yes, they get exposed in a few cases, but there is no penalty of law.

I know people are trying to apply the notion of "no expectation of privacy" but that is not the right standard here, because this is a surveillance data base, and it is 100% unknown who has access and for what purposes.

Maybe even more important is the psychological destruction of the population's belief in FREEDOM. This is a corrosive project for public belief system.
 
DesertRatt said:
It seems that the FLOCK company devised a surveillance system, then simply sent salesmen out to police authorities to sell them on the idea. Which, of course using public money the cops said, "HELL YES!"
Click to expand...
Flock cameras are at Home Depot and Lowe's here.
I'll leave it at that.
 
whoaru99 said:
I'll suggest if there was a solid case in that regard, there wouldn't be on the order of 125,000 in operation.
Click to expand...
Probably for two reasons. They kind of snuck up on the population, and it has just exploded as a public concern in the last couple months. Two, there is no will of any kind for prosecution of crimes involving the TechBro gang. They have wrested control of all social issues. You can see this in the "data center" controversy, social media for kids controversy, surveillance, and lack of guardrails for AI. The DOJ is just shut down for prosecuting much of anything. It's an era of laissez-faire technocracy.
 
DesertRatt said:
I don't think it is legal vis a vis the 4th amendment. It seems that the FLOCK company devised a surveillance system, then simply sent salesmen out to police authorities to sell them on the idea. Which, of course using public money the cops said, "HELL YES!"

The issue here is that there was no enabling legislation. Ergo, there is NO OVERSIGHT on useage of the data, there is no set of rules regarding security of the data, there is simply no legal structure at all. Cop-stalkers by the hundreds are using it to stalk ex-wives, girlfriends and so on. Yes, they get exposed in a few cases, but there is no penalty of law.

I know people are trying to apply the notion of "no expectation of privacy" but that is not the right standard here, because this is a surveillance data base, and it is 100% unknown who has access and for what purposes.

Maybe even more important is the psychological destruction of the population's belief in FREEDOM. This is a corrosive project for public belief system.
Click to expand...
You are absolutely right. There is more and more of this kind of....... stuff.
I guess the notion is to get the population compliant and used to no privacy.
It is worse in many nations, small comfort.
 
Olle said:
It is worse in many nations, small comfort.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is. However, in all of history, every GOVERNMENT becomes paranoid, and spies on their people. Of course, the proper arrangement would be for the people to be constantly spying on their government. But, the people lack organized resource for that. Governments have "agendas they are pursuing" and the last thing they want is for the citizens to interfere with those agendas. ERGO, they feel compelled to spy on the population to get an early warning signal if the public begins to catch on to the agenda. The USA has EIGHTEEN Intelligence agencies!
 
DesertRatt said:
There is a Bill in Congress to ban FLOCK cameras in public streets. Probably won't pass, but there is at least an acknowledgement that this is not right.
Click to expand...

I hope that's not an insinuation you think I think it's right. If so, perhaps this will clarify; just because something is legal to do doesn't inherently mean it's the right thing to do. It means it's not illegal to do it.

The legality/illegality will have to be handled through the court of law.

The implementation of new or rollback of existing, on the other hand, may be influenced at a local level by the court of public opinion if people address the local yokels that sign up for it in your community. The biggest obstacle there, IMO, is far too many people are convinced they need to be afraid of whatever is the current flavor of bogeyman. "This will help keep you safe from the bogeyman." is an easy sell for a LOT of people.
 
Last edited:
whoaru99 said:
I hope that's not an insinuation you think I think it's right. If so, perhaps this will clarify; just because something is legal to do doesn't inherently mean it's the right thing to do. It means it's not illegal to do it.

The legality/illegality will have to be handled through the court of law.

The implementation of new or rollback of existing, on the other hand, may be influenced at a local level by the court of public opinion if people address the local yokels that sign up for it in your community. The biggest obstacle there, IMO, is far too many people are convinced they need to be afraid of whatever is the current flavor of bogeyman. "This will help keep you safe from the bogeyman." is an easy sell for a LOT of people.
Click to expand...
No, no. I wasn't implying/insinuating anything about your feeling of it - no problem. I understood your point.
I've been following it pretty closely (the uproar). It seems that many, if not most, City Councils, approved of this Flock stuff, with no public input, or even announcements. The cops go to the council, wasting tax dollars is always on their minds, and presto, cameras are up the next week. BTW, the average cost to taxpayers is $3500/year/camera.

City Councils, are by and large, run by Stooges put there by local developers. They are unsophisticated politically, and from the meetings I have watched on videos, a good many of them qualify as suffering TIN BADGE SYNDROME. They tolerate the public to whatever is the minimal allowable by law.

I totally agree about the public being fear driven. It is drummed into their skulls 24/7 by media fronting for the political leaders.
 
Olle said:
Just putting this out there. Another of many reasons to distrust the Flock system.

www.businessinsider.com

Flock misread license plates in 71% of the alerts it sent to police in one California town

Flock sent 1,427 alerts to Roseville police over two years, flagging cars as stolen or used in a felony. In 71% of them, Flock read the plates wrong.
www.businessinsider.com www.businessinsider.com
Click to expand...

I have not tried to keep up with any of this outside of hearing concerns in the news, but a 70 % failure rate. And to think I came from an industry where a .0001% failure rate was not acceptable. I'm sure those who said about slick talking salesmen convincing municipalities needing this are spot on.

I'll go back to something I quoted in another thread. An old Department head once said to me when we when we were discussing some questionable practices. "That goes to show you that figures don't lie but liars can figure"
 
BSome said:
I have not tried to keep up with any of this outside of hearing concerns in the news, but a 70 % failure rate. And to think I came from an industry where a .0001% failure rate was not acceptable. I'm sure those who said about slick talking salesmen convincing municipalities needing this are spot on.

I'll go back to something I quoted in another thread. An old Department head once said to me when we when we were discussing some questionable practices. "That goes to show you that figures don't lie but liars can figure"
Click to expand...
More to worry about.

www.wired.com

Flock Has a Powerful New AI Tool for Police. We Got Its Code

Flock’s surveillance cameras have already sparked outrage. WIRED reconstructed its next-generation AI system, already in use by some police, to confirm it goes much further than tracking license plates.
www.wired.com www.wired.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom