Flock surveillance cameras 20billion scans/month

[NotFuzzyWarm]

I knew Flock readers were widespread but is far more pervasive then I thought. https://www.yahoo.com/news/us/articles/license-plate-cameras-scan-20-191258625.html
20 billion scans per month...

[_Miracle]

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DaQxZ53q7eh/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igsh=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ==

Public servants have more privacy than private citizens.

When we exchange liberty for a false sense of security, we have neither.

[Akbarkoe]

It will be very bad because civilian privacy will be seriously threatened, the camera tracks all the data and is collected and then many externals can access from here it is a form of misuse of the policy that is used to use the tool.

At least if only agencies are responsible and have the right to access for security and traffic purposes it is not a problem, but from what is stated there external parties can use it for their interests.

[Majestic-milf]

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DaQxZ53q7eh/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igsh=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ==

Public servants have more privacy than private citizens.

When we exchange liberty for a false sense of security, we have neither.

It's ironic really. Although this is because private citizens seems to have more dirt and are more interesting than public servants. My thoughts tho but still it's not cool.

[_Miracle]

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DaQxZ53q7eh/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igsh=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ==

Public servants have more privacy than private citizens.

When we exchange liberty for a false sense of security, we have neither.

It's ironic really. Although this is because private citizens seems to have more dirt and are more interesting than public servants. My thoughts tho but still it's not cool.

Even if that were true:

---Politicians literally profit off of war and are currently doing so out in the open [which is filthy dirty and should be of interest to everyone].
---Citizens in America have a right to privacy especially from their government and most especially regarding protected 1st amendment assembly.
Just because some of our citizens are willing to give up their privacy while fearfully simping for those who are abusing power...

  doesn't make either one of those things acceptable even when the power structure wants to make it legal.


Garret Langley (cover of Forbes 2025)


Rage Against the Machine - Evil Empire (Album cover 1996)

[OgNasty]

It makes me a little happy when I see these sorts of things being destroyed.  I don't think anyone really wants the government to have this level of surveillance on citizens.  Maybe I'm wrong, but at some point you have to push back a little bit.  I'm too old to be out doing this sort of thing, but when it comes to destruction of property, this is one I can get on board with.  Too many people are becoming ok with giving up their privacy and other freedoms in the name of fear.

[JeromeTash]

The excuse is always the same... to "fight crime". You give us your privacy so that the government makes you feel "safe", but the honest question is, are we really safe? I personally don't think so. From tracking transactions to cameras racking license plates. Our countries are becoming one big prison with overseers from above. It looks like some people want to play master/God so bad.

I will only believe surveillance is a good thing if crime drops to close to 0%, but no, the crime rates are still high. Someone is fooling the masses.

[NotFuzzyWarm]

I have nothing against LPR's (License Plate Readers) per se, I think their usage by local law enforcement for targeted searches eg, missing persons, stolen vehicles, criminal suspects, etc is fine. Of course to do that the LPR's are continuously collecting data just as any other surveillance camera system does. Thing is, with 'normal' cameras the pictures/video is only accessed when something happens in the local area. My problem is with Flock's data being used in very broad searches by agencies outside of the local areas or states for blanket non-specific target searches - that is going way beyond reasonable surveillance.

Per Flock's general ToS, by default Flock's data is held for 30-days or per local regulations. After that it is moved to trash and not freely shared with contracted agencies but is NOT completely deleted. Trash files are only totally deleted after 5 years. That last bit is what really has concerned people up in arms because it means that law enforcement agencies can request (with warrants) that searches can be tracked for as far back as 5 years. Do note that with active cases the clock is stopped until a case is closed.

Something to note is that recently Ring (doorbell cameras) canceled their contracts with Flock because of public backlash. The idea of consumers being able to opt-in for LOCAL neighborhood targeted usage of it to find lost pets or people who have wandered off - fine. In those cases the parties concerned submit a picture of the missing pet/person along with a defined local area search radius and the Flock systems search using only that criteria.

Allowing Ring camera footage to automatically be available w/o consumer permission for all interested parties to use as part of Flock's data for an all-areas blanket search - terrible idea. That is what caused the backlash of many MANY Ring subscribers cancelling their cloud storage subscriptions which is Ring's main money maker. Losing that revenue stream is why Ring cancelled all consumer contracts with Flock. Do note that private businesses, HOA's, etc still can allow their data to be used in the Flock database after opting-in.

[OgNasty]

Anyone want to put together a list of organizations taking donations that are working towards the removal of these flock cameras? I haven’t seen anything online about this but I’m sure such a thing must be in the works if it doesn’t already exist. Just curious what is being done on the side of privacy and freedom.

[NotFuzzyWarm]

Did not find any orgs backing removal of LPR's and, all in all I think it should remain up to local population to make that decision. IMHO having outside entities interfering with that is a bad idea. Good part is that lately the news is full of coverage of various communities voting to either change their contracts to exclude blanket non-local usage permissions or are outright cancelling their Flock contracts. That goes to show that local activists are doing a fine job w/o outsiders sticking their noses into what should remain a strictly local decision.

There are several sites that track where LPR's are located. Just Google "flock LPR map".

[_Miracle]

Anyone want to put together a list of organizations taking donations that are working towards the removal of these flock cameras? I haven’t seen anything online about this but I’m sure such a thing must be in the works if it doesn’t already exist. Just curious what is being done on the side of privacy and freedom.

Why? So the government can investigate them and label them "Antifa" and then prosecute them as domestic terrorists.

Go to your local council meetings. 5calls.org will give you contact info for your "representatives".

https://abc7.com/post/lapd-ending-agreement-surveillance-company-flock-safety/19483200/

[_Miracle]

Flock Cameras: ACLU Raises Alarm About Nationwide Surveillance Database - Democracy Now
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oaro56lbLyQ



“If you’re doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide from the giant surveillance apparatus the government’s been hiding.”

— Stephen Colbert


















---They Live

[hellflame]

I predicted this many years ago along with the infrastructure and the AI which will determine your future privileges if you are a good citizen as the likes of psychopath Larry et al who will own the states you live in said. Some people called me a conspiritard during coVid but unfortunately a few of them have died from various ilness since however if they were still around they would probably still be scoffing at me. While the zombies fight with each other over the scraps and left v right their puppet masters run both sides. Satan never picks a losing side because he plays on both sides. #Zombiesarereal

"The true pacemakers of socialism were not the intellectuals or agitators who preached it but the Vanderbilts, Carnegies and Rockefellers" (Schumpeter, p. 134).

 

The first aim was to be achieved by the centralisation of capital, means of production, etc. The second was to be gained through organising the workers and through promises of a larger share in resources. These aims coincided with those of the Socialist movement of which the Fabians aimed to become the leading element.

As pointed out by H. G. Wells, big business was by no means antipathetic to Communism as "the larger big business grows the more it approximates to Collectivism" (Wells, p. 100). Similarly, Joseph A Schumpeter, who taught David Rockefeller at Harvard, wrote:



Indeed, we find that the core of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels' "Manifesto of the Communist Party" (1848) consisted of monopolistic capitalist policies like the centralisation of capital and the organisation of workers

[BADecker]

We need revolving license plates.     

[Opiate32]

I knew Flock readers were widespread but is far more pervasive then I thought. https://www.yahoo.com/news/us/articles/license-plate-cameras-scan-20-191258625.html
20 billion scans per month...

What concern me is not just the cameras but the size of the shared database they create. I understand why police find this system useful for recovering stolen vehicles or investigating crime but public trust depends on transparency and accountability, otherwise a tool that is just introduced for one purpose can gradually be used for many others.

[NotFuzzyWarm]

At least one of the organizations tracking their usage (along with ALPR's from other companies as well) is https://deflock.org/

Just google 'Flock surveillance abuse' and you will find several cases of several Law Enforcement folks being caught using Flock cameras to track their boyfriends... That tells me that access to Flock and other companies system is far too open to any 'authorized user' from contracted police departments is not restricted in any way. Sorry, that should go through higher channels before being authorized access limited to specified ungoing cases.

[OgNasty]

It is pretty shocking the amount of abuses that have already happened with Flock cameras. Pretty much everyone hates them and doesn’t want them in their cities. I’m surprised that more pushback isn’t happening politically. Hopefully they are forced to remove them all at some point in the near future.

[Ishicryptic]

I knew Flock readers were widespread but is far more pervasive then I thought. https://www.yahoo.com/news/us/articles/license-plate-cameras-scan-20-191258625.html
20 billion scans per month...

What concern me is not just the cameras but the size of the shared database they create. I understand why police find this system useful for recovering stolen vehicles or investigating crime but public trust depends on transparency and accountability, otherwise a tool that is just introduced for one purpose can gradually be used for many others.

This is the concern of many people, we like the original idea of surveillance cameras because they make fighting crime to be very easy for the law enforcement but again the surveillance information can be used to intrude into people's privacy so it's now a case of good intentions that comes with it's baggage of concerns for privacy intrusion. The question to ask is whether crime has reduced drastically in America, since the innovative surveillance has been installed, the answer will determine how relevant the surveillance cameras will be accepted. We cannot totally eliminate government centralized systems of control in any country, they want to be in the know about everybody's movements to protect them and also to target them if there is any need, beyond government intrusion of privacy people are vulnerable because criminals and enemies can connive with criminal law enforcement agents to track them.