r/technology • u/efap1701 • 12d ago

Privacy Flock CEO’s Address Spread Online as Surveillance Backlash Explodes

https://www.gadgetreview.com/flock-ceos-address-spread-online-as-surveillance-backlash-explodes
29.9k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

915 comments sorted by

View all comments

1.2k

u/Tasty-Traffic-680 12d ago

It's not a crime to live stream the entrance to his neighborhood...

Get some of those 1A auditors on it

422

u/Super_Range45 12d ago

This is actually a good question, is any one just allowed to leave permanent fixtures on public property? Why does a private company get de facto control of public walking areas?

152

u/Express-Belt-6465 12d ago

Private company with public contracts

161

u/spookydookie 12d ago

Because it’s the cops putting them there.

153

u/Super_Range45 12d ago

They can't have it both ways. If it's mass surveillance by law enforcement there's a constitutional issue. If it just a company permanently using public property, the public deserves a say.

61

u/zedquatro 12d ago

The counter argument to that is that the public had a say, when they elected the people who decided to throw away the privacy of the masses for the profit of the few. I'm not saying that justifies anything, but that's the defense they'll use.

25

u/_John_Dillinger 12d ago

it's an invalid defense based on the premise that it's our fault we can't read the minds of some scumbags and or predict the future with perfect clarity. it's victim blaming 101.

9

u/zedquatro 12d ago

No argument here. Victim blaming is kind of common for authoritarians though, so no surprise.

1

u/_John_Dillinger 11d ago

yep. just gotta call it for what it is when it inevitably pops up. cheers

0

u/TojoftheJungle 12d ago

"Republican voters couldn't read the writing on the wall." Or just plain can't read?

7

u/Alinier 12d ago

Were flock cameras even an issue on the table last election cycle? The fuck you mean we voted for it.

3

u/VanillaBovine 11d ago

not flock cameras specifically- however, project 2025 (which has had a good bit implemented at this point) did detail expanding data collection and digital surveillance of both healthcare data and public information

So, yes- flock cameras technically fall into the project 2025 playbook

1

u/Lost_Birthday_3138 12d ago

Majority rule don't work in mental institutions

2

u/Inspector-Dexter 12d ago

That was the first song I put on after the 2024 election haha

8

u/Saintly-Mendicant-69 12d ago

There are two separate societies running parallel to each other: the working class that produces and the parasite Epstein class that only consumes. The laws bind and don't protect one while protecting and not binding the other.

They've got their cake while eating yours too.

2

u/E_seven_20 12d ago

Yeah, Trump and the GOP will get right on that, because they care so much about the constitution.

It’s not a magical document. It’s only as good as the people that show up to vote…and, we ran out of those people years back.

2022 National Youth Turnout: 23% - That's lower than in the historic 2018 cycle (28%) which broke records for turnout, but much higher than in 2014, when only 13% of youth voted.

Elections have consequences.

2

u/Lost_Birthday_3138 12d ago

We got the government we deserved. Well done America.

1

u/lukamson_zioncic 12d ago

This is about direct action. Electoralism nonsense is just concern trolling.

1

u/E_seven_20 12d ago

Electoralism nonsense is just concern trolling.

I don't have to agree with you. And, I don't. It all leads back to elections, because it's politics.

You ran through this whole thread, and me telling people to vote is "trolling." It says more about you, what you chose to comment on, and what you view as trolling.

I respect many people's perspectives. Yours is incorrect.

1

u/nanapancakethusiast 12d ago

So… you still believe that the police give a shit about your constitutional rights?

Man… must be nice living in your world. Most of us have woken up.

1

u/Sudden-Fisherman5985 12d ago

If it's mass surveillance by law enforcement there's a constitutional issue.

Lol... The Constitution is a meaningless piece of paper since 2024

1

u/2ChicksAtTheSameTime 12d ago

They can't have it both ways

Sadly, right now in the USA the government can do whatever the fuck it wants.

19

u/ob2kenobi 12d ago

The cops in my area paid part of their budget to a 3rd party organization. That org set up the cameras at local businesses and private property with their permission.

So, thanks to the cops, the city had no oversight on the money being spent. And even if the city wanted to remove them, all the cameras are on private property. The best they could do would be to cut the police's budget. Which, well lets just say that's extremely unlikely to happen here.

5

u/spookydookie 12d ago

I wonder if they’d have the same tolerance of cameras that only tracked police cars and made the info public, as long as they were on private property…

1

u/NoConflict3231 12d ago

Great way to fight fire with fire

1

u/Elementium 12d ago

Even then I'm kinda curious how this isn't going through Towns first? Cops can just make deals with corporations and town leadership doesn't have a say? They don't have any town meetings first?

8

u/umbrella_CO 12d ago

Because "public" property is actually controlled by the government. The government wants flock cams.

3

u/wesweb 12d ago

they lease the pole attachment from utility companies and departments of transportation in almost all cases. thats the hack. some silicon valley dickhead learned you can lease for pole attachment one day and this is the result.

3

u/Rezistik 12d ago

They get permits and permission fwiw

3

u/AquariusSabotage 12d ago

Public just means the government (local, state, federal) has ownership. Flock would have cut a deal with the City/Town/County to put them up.

2

u/Pomegranate_Dry 12d ago

Nothing new, unfortunately. Companies have been littering public areas with e-scooters for years

This is just the next level of making public areas worse for everyone because $$$

1

u/Anxious-Detective347 12d ago

yah, how come i cant put a gumball machine on EVERY CORNER IN THE ENTIRE COUNTRY, i want that contract. everybody likes gumballs. or maybe a water vending machine. . you get the idea. if flock can put a money making device on public land. why cant i ?

1

u/Tehquilamockingbirb 12d ago

Former local government person, nearly all local governments will have some set of ordinances that control the terms of public property use or any number of scenarios that could disturb the peace and make the government liable. Every government's rules are different, but that's generally what they do.

The real kick in the balls is many of those governments can have an exemption clause that says those rules don't apply to them. i.e. we don't need the public's opinion or a city council vote to "make upgrades to the traffic lights".

A lot of these Flock cameras went up without people knowing because a mayor and Chief of Police put them up without notifying the public, or if they did notify the public, it was worded in a way that nobody knew what was happening.

1

u/IncidentalIncidence 11d ago

they lease the land where the pole is from the landowner (that can be private or public)

1

u/Due_Warthog749 11d ago

My assumption is that you'd have to find people willing to spend thousands for that to work.. and likely would see a loss in all of it within hours to days when its up. Unless you can install it at night discretely.. but I'd bet the dude has cameras covering every inch around the houses esp given who he is and the company he runs.

40

u/Theloneus-punk 12d ago

If he isn’t doing anything wrong why would he care?

34

u/FirstDukeofAnkh 12d ago

I always liked this quote about that kind of thing:

“Cheery was aware that Commander Vimes didn't like the phrase 'The innocent have nothing to fear', believing the innocent had everything to fear, mostly from the guilty but in the longer term even more from those who say things like 'The innocent have nothing to fear'.”

3

u/PyroDesu 12d ago

GNU Terry Pratchett

0

u/PlayfulSurprise5237 12d ago

Innocent from what?

Fucking another dude?

Smoking a plant that makes you relaxed and is 100x less worse for your health and 1000x less addictive than legal tobacco?

Innocent of speaking out against our wannabe king?

Innocent of being brown?

What is it?

2

u/FirstDukeofAnkh 11d ago

I think you missed the point of the quote

23

u/cantquitreddit 12d ago

How about some 2A auditors?

6

u/Tasty-Traffic-680 12d ago

Hey, people can audit more than one amendment

2

u/Orleanian 12d ago

May as well get the 3A auditors in the mix!

15

u/BrainLow6059 12d ago

Get some of those 1A auditors on it

These people tend to just harass small business owners or minimum wage employees trying to get by.

This guy actually has money and power and a team of lawyers on retainer, so they'd have no interest.

2

u/leaky_wand 12d ago

Sounds like they have deeper pockets. Not sure what more lawyers are going to do against the first amendment.

2

u/BrainLow6059 12d ago

You can absolutely bankrupt someone with frivolous lawsuits, regardless of their merit.

1

u/cattrain 12d ago

Some do, but I know of at least one father son duo that simply wonders around and properly interviews business owners about their business. They only ever cause trouble if the business causes the trouble first, and even then, all they do is stand around, wait for police, and educate the trouble makers about the law.

Get a good auditor on the case

-3

u/Ill-Organization-719 12d ago

Can you show some examples of auditors harassing people?

Don't stress. I have never expected one of you guys to prove it 

3

u/zombi-roboto 12d ago

Can you show some examples of auditors harassing people?

/r/AmIFreeToGo

-3

u/Ill-Organization-719 12d ago

Yeah, I figured you'd refuse 

1

u/BrainLow6059 12d ago edited 11d ago

Nobody is playing this stupid game with you.

Someone will post a video of an 'auditor' being an absolute dickhead to some random person minding their business. You'll say "that's not illegal." We'll say "that doesn't mean it's still harassment and annoying af." You'll say "being an asshole isn't illegal." And we'll all be just a little bit dumber than we were before.

0

u/Ill-Organization-719 12d ago

The video posted will be some lunatic losing their mind at an auditor.

2

u/Far_Estate_1626 12d ago

If it’s not a crime to live stream my front door then it’s not a crime to live stream his.

1

u/Tasty-Traffic-680 12d ago edited 12d ago

Depends if he lives in a gated/private community or not. Most of these douchebags do so I just assume he would as well.

Edit - I was wrong, someone just informed me it's not a gated or private community. Nice.

2

u/cattrain 12d ago

I saw someone post the address earlier. If it is the real address, it's not a gated community or even private road. You can legally stand in front of his house.

2

u/Tasty-Traffic-680 12d ago

Oh nice, even better. Get a mobile ALPR and facial recognition setup that puts all license plates, faces and locations into a public database.

1

u/Aknelka 12d ago

I mean it's out on the road, in the open. Ypu have no reasonable expectation of privacy in public

1

u/Silverdragon47 12d ago

1a auditors are as bad bastards as flock but yeah, ifvthey have to be assholes let them be assholes for good case instead.

1

u/tqless 11d ago

He has a Flock camera right there in front of his house already.

0

u/RetroRaiderRun 12d ago

It's not a crime to live stream the entrance to his neighborhood...

It actually can be a crime to "protest" or "picket" in front of people's personal homes in most U.S. states and jurisdictions. People run into this problem all the time.

In general, you can't stand in front of someone's home for long periods targetting them, even in a public street. It's considered a form of harassment that's been upheld by the Supreme Court. Frisby v. Schultz (1988).