29 comments

[ 0.33 ms ] story [ 2.7 ms ] thread
Non-cloudflare link that basically says the same thing: https://mstdn.social/@stux/117186158784673388
Why is cloudflare a problem?
Because of stun.cloudflare.com … if you know, you know.
Cloudflare doesn't reliably let me through.
It regularly blocks me too. I've begun search Google for: what does [url] say about [search query]

It'll make a Gemini summary of the page, and can be prompted for more details. It's really the only use for Gemini I've found reliable. I'd still rather directly view the output of the scraper bot, though.

If anyone knows a good scraping bot that lets you view the output directly, without running it through an LLM, please let me know.

Getting past cloudflare can be a problem if you are from a less reputable country or a VPN or if you use a less conventional browser.

There is also a larger problem of a private entity being the MITM for a large portion of internet traffic. But i don't think this is the point GP was trying to make.

Most CF sites I try to visit only give me an endless captcha loop, so I cannot visit them at all.

I suspect it's simply because my ISP regularly rotates IPs, and so I unfortunately have to share "reputation" with other users who can't behave online.

In the USA, is it really that easy to find the home address of a business owner?

The EU briefly had a similar registry but that got shut down quickly.

Land records are public in most US locales. You can type in almost any residential address on homes.com and it will show you who owned it when and with what loan terms.
Not really, it looks like this guy originally registered the business at his personal residence which is not really common. Kinda surprised if he still lives there considering how FLOCK has expanded.
Yes, but only for the business directly owned. In the US, it's perfectly legal to run things through shell companies that make things much more difficult. E.g. instead of directly owning the company, he could put his share in fully-owned shell company, based in a country that doesn't report the owner.
(comment deleted)
Ironically most of the people reading this are doing so on an always connected phone with a fused battery, that they can't trust, because they don't control it. It also has significantly more capabilities that a flock camera, and they likely pay for it too.
That's not ironic, that's _hey, look over there!_
The article is very one sided, implying without evidence that Flock is for recreational tracking of individuals. With San Francisco SFPD’s ALPR cameras at least, this would be an abuse of the cameras according to the policy linked from https://transparency.flocksafety.com/san-francisco-ca-pd. Here are the Authorized purposes:

Locate stolen, wanted, and or other vehicles that are the subject of investigation

To apprehend wanted persons subject to arrest warrants or who are otherwise lawfully sought by law enforcement.

To locate victims, witnesses, suspects, missing children, adults, and/or elderly individuals, including in response to Amber Alerts and Silver Alerts and others associated with a law enforcement investigation.

To assist with criminal investigations initiated by local, state and regional public safety departments by identifying vehicles associated with targets of criminal investigations.

Counter-terrorism: Identify potential threats to critical infrastructure sites.

For other law enforcement purposes as authorized by law: Investigations of major crimes.

Which of these uses do people not like? Or which other policies are people concerned with in other jurisdictions?

> The article is very one sided

Of course it is. If we want a Flock press release we can just read one.

Plenty of things have lots of great upsides, and it’s the downsides that stop wider adoption and cause regulation and limits.

Why not just remove all our passwords on all forms of communication? Leave our doors open and remove the curtains?

Think how much safer we would all be.

It’s been interesting to see this vitriol towards Flock increase over the past couple of months or so.
What is interesting about it ?
[delayed]
I agree with the post, despite the sarcasm. But the one thing it's missing is how Flock uses AI to pass user data directly to law enforcement without a warrant. At least (most?) of other companies that comply with the said social contract wait for the warrant.
The speed of the surge + people feeling strongly enough about it that they destroy the cameras + events like the grand jury that refused the indictment. I usually just see this kind of vitriol remain online. That it’s crossed into the real world like this is interesting to see.
"Doxxing is bad except when it's against people I dislike"?

If people don't want CCTV, campaign to make it illegal.

Flock is not CCTV though. There's nothing 'closed circuit' about it at all, and that's the problem.
Okay, reading car plates. Again, campaign to make it illegal.
The irony is over the top with this guy. He says that Americans need to "compromise" on their privacy, but then absolutely loses it when the Panopticon is turned on him.