Technology

There should be no compromising our right to privacy and these cameras need to go. Fuck Flock and their cash grab.

How about we compromise by saying remove them all, give back the money spent, delete all data and in exchange you don't get the treatments due one helping enable orwillian levels of suvelance

Interesting that he’s framing it as a balance between privacy and safety instead of privacy and security.

Flock cameras haven’t been proven to make anyone safer.

I like the sounds of this. Here's an offer:

Fuck off, and the guillotine gets put away.

Everybody wins!

The compromise is that he lives

Just wait til Flocko'ween.

It's wild, because when I was a kid, there was this huge conservative talking point about how trading freedom for security was bad.

I think the window of compromise has long since passed. Flock as a company went in with a guns blazing, anti-privacy, record everything, give the information to anyone style business style, and then chose to double and triple down on the style when the controversy/outcry first started. Once you've hit the stage where there's people starting to protest and riot and cities have started to go out of their way to ban the product and retract contracts due to the fact that they're concerned about public support. It's too late. That's a fire that's not being put out.

And the zombies said "all we want to do is eat your brains, maybe we can compromise..."

Compromise: Quit now, and keep your head.

Compromise offer: you stop spying on us and we'll stop breaking your cameras.

The more you learn about Flock, the scarier it gets. They have FULL profiles built on EVERY american that has flock cameras nearby. All your shopping, driving, financial habits are tracked. They know who all your friends and family are and how often you visit, they track your vehicles specific identifiable features like bumper damage, stickers, faded paint, etc. All of that is a complete violation of the 4th amendment and all these companies need to be sued.

There is absolutely no reason to track people everywhere they go. We were fine before these things.

If you get rid of your right to privacy, you get rid of your right to safety.

Fuck off with compromise. take your shit and get out no one wants you in case the guillotine wasn't fucking clear

Remember, it's Axon as well, and many more companies. and a major contrbuter who has linked in with all of these creepy services is Amazon and has the largest surveillence network in residential areas not just on travel corridors comprised of Ring doorbell cameras tied in to all of these systems.

Flock seems like the sacrificial lamb, to me. They are in your face, ther cameras are obvious, and their CEO runs his mouth so much everyone hates him.

It's like how Elon can't keep his mouth shut, but Ellison far more dangerous and nearly as rich.

Here's my compromise: we give the Flock CEO twenty to life instead of sentencing him to public flaying like he deserves.

Safety for who, exactly, Garrett? Because the common people aren't safer with this overreach

No, Garrett, we don't negotiate with surveillance states.

For his part, Langley has said that state regulators should “pass bills that make [the illegal use of Flock data] a criminal offense.”

No one trusts the police to genuinely enforce anything that could impact themselves.

I can guarantee this has been said already, but the compromise is simple; no flock cameras (or comparable tech) anywhere.

Okay, here’s the compromise: you close everything down, and we don’t feed you to a hungry business of ferrets.

We're already in the safest time for petty crime ever, and flock won't help with America's real issue of corporate crime. Safety will not be affected.

Anyone who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserves neither.

Garrett can get fucked.

The compromise is you scrap every camera, or we do.

Eat shit, Garrett.

Fuck these clowns. Their “compromise” is finding some way to quiet the bad press while continuing to do what they’ve been doing.

“We’ll stop putting our cameras where people don’t want them and just put then where our clients want them.”

*We didn't invent police abuse! We actually shined a light on it and pointed it out"

Fuck right the hell off with this shit. You don't get to sell your panopticon to a group that routinely abuses every tool they have, and feign ignorance in defense of the results.

Okay, here's the compromise: disband your company and we'll put away the guillotines.

Compromise dez nuts

Fucking fascist.

Here is your compromise. Shutter your company & we won't hang you.

I call a guillotine a compromise.

Tar and feathers are not expensive, and it's a hilarious thing to do to someone

He says as he continues to launch surveillance drones without asking anybody if they're okay with that...

Hey won't be gullitined and instead he will just face prison time and have his mass survelence system dismantled and the rest of his assets seized and redistributed

A fair and just compromise imho

Hey buddy, you didn't ask us about shit before you started installing your creepy cameras to monitor us everywhere, so you can go ahead and fuck off now.

I think one of the problems that encompasses the flock debate besides the privacy issues is the relationship that the police have with people in the United States. Most police view people as a threat and if you look at the police training they teach them to be extremely violent. During simple traffic stops most police are on edge and have an attitude like they might be violent with you. I'm just talking about the general atmosphere- I'm not even getting into all of the examples where police have killed people for no reason, falsified information to arrest innocent people, and generally abused their power.

Did police want to wear body cams or did they want to continue without accountability? Police have a responsibility and have taken an oath. They should be required to have cameras.

In a society where all of its parts work together towards the same goal, ALPRs would not be a problem. In the US this surveillance is very worrisome.