HN Explorer

16 comments

[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 27.5 ms ] thread
altairprime
[delayed]
KetoManx64
> Suspects were captured on camera footage before destroying the devices, yet remain unidentified publicly.

Not sure where you got "faces"

boston_clone
My favorite part of the article is a sentence of almost soft encouragement to other privacy-minded vigilantes:

> These units sit on open roadside poles — reachable, visible, and currently without any publicly announced tamper-resistance plan.

Direct action rocks!

Simulacra
Seriously: I'm actually surprised that more of these have not been attacked for their resources. As I understand it, 2 pounds of copper and 2 GB of RAM.
exabrial
>Pole-mounted Flock cameras lack tamper-resistance, exposing a critical design vulnerability municipalities must address.

How about fuck no they don't.

K0balt
Need to make a device specialized for breaking these things. An industrial vibratory device might work pretty good, especially if it had seeepable speed. Just hit the harmonic and the devices will be destroyed in a jif.
doublesocket
Shouldn't a sufficiently powerful laser be able to cook the sensor quickly and easily?
nameless912
You can buy very powerful handheld green laser pointers on Amazon for around 20 bucks. You absolutely shouldn't shine one into a camera sensor, ever. It says so on the box!
m463
I remember when speed cameras first became popular in europe. People would ride up on motorcycles, throw a tires over them and set them on fire.

I don't think vigilantes should go setting things on fire, but I also think corporate surveillance is way beyond unethical. Will we ever get a balance? Are individual rights a lost cause?

SR2Z
Why are you calling this corporate surveillance? These cameras are installed on the government's orders for the government's use.

It's way more nefarious this way!

glaslong
oh no, I hope the canal's ok
m463
uncertain, we've lost our feed.