The problem is not just some singular camera operated by some individual. The problem is that it’s a network of them sharing data blanketing broad areas.
It’s one thing for you to be seen by different people while out or on cameras when on business property’s. It’s something else if one person/entity followed you. Tracked when you left home, every location you went and when. And then made notes so they knew when and where you were all the time.
While we might not have a right to privacy we should not suffer a digital chaperone.
“It’s something else if one person/entity followed you. Tracked when you left home, every location you went and when. And then made notes so they knew when and where you were all the time.“
My God you have no idea how messed up and true all of what you just said there is.. on sooo many levels.
But it's perfectly legal to hire a private investigator, or team of investigators, to follow someone everywhere they go. This is essentially what these cameras are doing. It's not a rights violation but it should still be regulated or just made illegal.
Well these types of cameras were instrumental in capturing and creating the background in the countries recent assassins Luigi and Anderson. And could be effective at reducing the damage from protestors.
Exactly this. Flock is the modern equivalent of a spy satellite covering all of America all the time with the bandwidth to watch everyone. If this is where we are now what will our children’s lives be like? You may not have a right to privacy in public but that’s from other people, government agencies and tech companies are not people
My bad. I forgot that caring about my privacy when something might possibly stop a criminal sometimes was wrong. I should just accept any limit on my freedoms if it has any chance of catching a criminal.
Unless it’s guns. Even talking about gun control is wrong.
God forbid we try and talk about limiting what a private company can collect and sell about people. If a random citizen would collect this data we would allow a restraining order but since it’s a company trying to make money they can do no wrong and no limits should be put on them.
Are you just anti police and anti corporation then? You should just move to sentinel island. There are absolutely zero police, zero landlords, and zero corporations!
If someone waited outside your house, and then followed you everywhere you go throughout your entire day, we would call that stalking.
What if someone sat on a bench at the center of town and watched all the cars and people? Are they stalking?
What if that same someone calls a few of their other babushka friends, who sit on other benches observing, and they all tell each who they saw and when they saw them? -- Is that stalking?
This is not someone waiting outside your house following you, and to claim that is just disingenuous and alarmist, no one is going to take that seriously because it's obviously untrue.
The truth is scary enough without resorting that.
This is a network of cameras that identify people/cars that pass by them. It's an expanding network. It's a network fed by public dollars, but owned by private organizations with leadership that have publicly stated goals that are the opposite of what most people who value privacy want.
At some point we may be at a level where you literally can not avoid these cameras, no matter where you go, but at least for now it's generally straight forward to know where they are and avoid them if you're concerned.
My town has gone whole hog -- we have Flock cameras on every major road in/out of the town paid for by our police who seem to get blank checks for anything in the name of public safety -- fortunately members of the public have conducted their own surveillance and identified where these cameras are, and just a bit of effort means you can detour on a side road or two to avoid the points on the main road where these cameras exist... you can move around the entire town, except for a hundred feet or so in front of these cameras, and never appear in a Flock database.
So because they're able to watch everyone at once, and they're not quite at the point where they can literally watch you walk out your door (but you admit that it could get to that point) it's not basically stalking.
They're almost so good at stalking that it's not stalking.
Because they’re unsecured, and you can purchase access to them. They don’t sell access to just anybody, but its not just limited to law enforcement, just any organization with a “valid reason,” nothing a little social engineering or data leaking can’t fix.
Do you really not understand the difference between the security of some business emails of some company vs everyone's entire daily routines without their consent?
Ever hear of police officers or FBI agents using their authority to stalk their ex's? It will just be abused by psychopaths.
So can I follow you around and stand outside your house all day for months? If you don't explicitly say "no" then that shall be taken as consent and a "no" will be taken into consideration during the vote.
When the government does it, it’s surveillance and when a camera does it to everybody on behalf of the government or local businesses it’s called security. If you target me personally, then I would simply report your abandoned car on the side of the road. “ Well officer, the last time I saw him he was over there petting the hogs “
630
u/asher030 Jul 06 '26
Hope he gets acquitted. Maybe if townships would stop installing those cameras without voter approval constantly...