28 comments

[ 0.19 ms ] story [ 9.9 ms ] thread
It’s laughable to me that 404 Media is trying to get credit for this.
Which media source would you credit for investigating and reporting on Flock antics?
This is pretty expected from them as a framing. The gossip rag of news media themed after technology reporting.
404 (in collaboration with Benn Jordan) did a lot of the initial technical breakdowns and investigative research. Ofc many other journalists did a lot of incredibly important journalism around it but I don't think anyone went as deep into the security failures of the cameras as Jordan/404
Good luck! If this doesn't get an up/down vote, then there is always De-Flock America night this month. Many ways that the constituency can be heard.
Hopefully they are broad enough to curb surveillance cameras in general, flock is just one of the many repugnant actors in this space.
They don't usually write the legislation for these types of things targeting a specific brand. In this case it looks like Hawley's legislation targets "automated license plate readers", and some other articles mention "AI-Powered Cameras".
Specifically, it would "block federal funding from state and local governments that use the [ALPRs]" and "let Americans sue the federal government for violation of their rights through ALPRs". Also:

> The Stop Flock Abuse Act would require a written approval process for each search; force agencies to delete driver data after ten days, with exceptions for active investigations; and ban ALPR networks from incorporating facial recognition technology

It also seems specifically geared to prevent the recent uses by ICE to document anyone attending No Kings or anti-ICE protests

In the hearing with walmart, walmart was shown to be reading shopper's heart rates and temp to gauge if they would buy something.
Flock is proven to reduce crime. Trying to get rid of it without an alternate solution to stop crime shows that these politicians are controlled by or support criminals.
Is this just poorly worded, or a bad-faith argument? I read it as: "if you're against Flock cameras, you must be a criminal".

EDIT: Ah, the ninja edit. At least the edit clarifies that it's a bad-faith argument.

Being against laws that makes LE's job harder is not bad faith.
I mean, we could just make everyone wear ankle monitor trackers 24/7. That would trivially be proven to reduce crime.

Are you a criminal for not supporting this?

Perhaps there's a YC startup idea in there!
This is much more expensive and more inconvenient compared to what the standard is around the world of using cameras with facial recognition.
The idea that a for-profit company is allowed to scan licence plates and make this data available and searchable without restrictions seems ludicrous to me.

In The Netherlands, we do have ANPR camera's but they are run by the police and there are strict rules about data retention (no hit on a licence plate means drop the data). ANPR cameras aren't used as dragnet surveillance. The NL situation is not perfect, but it's on a different playing field.

With the absolute unregulated situation in the USA, the outcome has been predictable: cops stalking people and innocent people jailed for weeks due to mistakes.

I love Benn Jordan's work, including the video where they went to a Flock office building, filming employees. They didn't like being filmed, but it did not teach them a lesson unfortunately.

If you (still) work for Flock, don't think of yourself as a moral, decent person.

>> "which would prohibit federal agencies from using automatic license plate readers (ALPRs)"

...yup makes sense, no reason for federal governments to have unfettered access to this data.

>> "and block federal funding from state and local governments that use the cameras."

Wait..what? Why put this silly Poison Pill in the bill? So a city can't enforce its own traffic laws without having to put an over-zealous police force in the loop? The same guy that is handling drug dealers is stopping you for traffic tickets and people think nothing should go wrong?

Without cities adopting some massive road diet (fat chance) a reduction in ALPR's will kill people. Traffic deaths are at the same level as gun deaths in the USA.

Honestly, this warms my heart a little bit. Maybe American democracy isn't dead. If the citizens make enough noise, lawmakers do listen.
It only takes the combined weight of the entire free press, a complete social media blitz and hundreds to thousands of citizens risking felonies to just straight up destroy the cameras.
Democracy only working in the weeks and some months before an election is a major bug, though.
The Surveillance Accountability Act is better as it essentially restores the fourth amendment and would cover Flock but it's still amazing to see mainstream support for privacy laws.

https://www.surveillanceaccountability.com

It seems like it only restricts the spread of government surveillance networks.

I'd like to see a public-facing-camera-permit system where you have to disclose your data sharing practices up front and put some money into a whistleblower escrow account as a reward for anybody who can prove you've violated your data sharing policies.