Flock is canceled—and its competitors are profiting
Mother Jones
Flock is canceled—and its competitors are profiting
Other brands are still dodging the backlash around automated license plate readers.
log in to comment.
As far as I understand it, the alternatives do not include a nationwide search as part of their features. Flock is actually especially bad on that front.
That said, I think most of the emotional revulsion against Flock is just the idea of persistent tracking of everyone by your local police force, and that isn’t mitigated by a brand switch.
Given the Snowden leaks, it seems inevitable that if that data is being recorded and collected into the servers of a small number of US companies, that it will end up being used to enable nationwide searches regardless
Yeah I think people would feel much better if the cameras were operated by the local police department, and they were the only ones that had access to it.
ALPR (automatic license plate recognition) cameras have been around for a long time, but it previously wasn’t an issue because access to the data was restricted. Same with security CCTV cameras. Other jurisdictions had to subpoena the data rather than being able to instantly access everything.
Flock’s cameras are much more than ALPR though. They make a profile of every car they see, and can track cars even if they don’t have license plates based on identifying features (dents, big scratches, bumper stickers, etc).
The local police should also need to go to court to access their own cameras. The 4th amendment protects against police surveiling people without a warrant.
I’m pretty sure part of why this is all being done is because the police can’t legally do this. A third party company can though, and police can purchase access (in their theory at least, though this is being tested).
Maybe police shouldn’t be allowed to pay a third party to do something they themselves aren’t allowed to do. Just a thought.
Absolutely. It’s stupid that they maybe possibly can. It’s being tested in the courts. They definitely are allowed to abuse it to some extent, but maybe not like they are with these cameras. It doesn’t make any sense either way though.
The way phone data works, they have to get a warrant. They aren’t legally allowed to obtain it from phone companies until they have one, even if the company is more than happy to provide it. How this doesn’t automatically apply in the same way to these cameras is crazy.
I agree. I don’t like that a private company is involved, at all. Companies should just supply the hardware, and not have full access to the system.
Considering the ridiculous amount of stalking from cops using these cameras, no, I don’t think people would be OK with only local cops having access
If the cops were in control, they’d be violating the fourth amendment when they do that without going to the courts
Where as if it’s a private service the police department pays for, it’s a legal gray area
Stalking is also illegal. Doesn’t seem to stop them
I’m not saying I trust the police. I’m saying if it’s outright unconstitutional to access without the courts, the IT department is going to put checks in the system
It’s like how you can’t trust HR to protect you personally, but you can rely on them to protect the organization
I understand it is unconstitutional. My point is that it simply does not matter to the cops. Again, the easier thing is to not have cameras at all. Systems can be circumvented. Not having the cameras at all makes it so nobody can abuse them. Mass surveillance is not necessary or good.
I mean, not doing mass surveillance altogether sounds like a great idea… I’m not sure that’s directly possible right now though
My point is that it’s not just a worse version of mass surveillance, it’s orders of magnitude worse. It absolves everyone from any actual responsibility, and in doing so absolutely guarantees these systems will be abused by police
I don’t that level of faith in the court, especially the SCOTUS, to have that level of optimism.
It’s not about the court’s enforcement, it’s about responsibility
Every organization out there preserves itself. It’s why we have legal and HR departments. They don’t exist to protect their people, they exist to protect the organization
If a police department was caught wildly misusing unconstitutional searches, every case they tried in that period is opened to that exposure. That’s not just a huge embarrassment, it’s a massive amount of work that will tie up the local justice system for a significant period
That’s the kind of damage that can kill a police department wholesale, or at least cleanly sweep away all the leadership
The organization will protect itself against this kind of thing, not out of the goodness of their hearts, but because organizations must preserve themselves or fade away. They’ll put in checks that will leave an audit trail and/or require a document ID to use such a system, because that’s what it takes to protect the organization. They’ll offload the responsibility onto the officers, and enforce the rules (even if just a slap on the wrist). That’s simply how organizations act, descriptively
I’m not saying that police in charge would be better, so much as this situation is so much worse. No one has responsibility here. The private company is not limited by the Constitution, and the police are just using a subscription to a commercial service
No one has to take responsibility if this turns into an issue. It’s the same as consulting companies and AI rejections - the primary purpose is to make it so when someone creates manmade horrors beyond comprehension, no one is responsible
They should have to get a warrant, because of the fourth amendment.
Should, yes, but they won’t. Cops in the US are some of the most corrupt people. The simpler and safer solution is to not have the cameras at all. Mass surveillance is never the answer
that’s what palantir is for, unfortunately. I would be shocked if they didn’t already have a “solution” for this, or at least if they aren’t already working on it.
and Axon sure as shit ain’t broke, being the rebranded literal Taser company, they can afford the R&D to develop it, and will probably get free cash from the fascist government to do so in the near future anyways
Yeah, need to find a way to go after the government to stop using the tech rather than going after a single company. Eventually, Flock will just go bankrupt, the pieces will get bought up and either sold to a competitor or the VC that buys them will change the name and start a new company that’s basically the same and the executives from Flock will join that or go to competitors. There’s not much use attacking a single company these days. But it is good that attention is being brought to the technology in use and how the government is using it.
It is very revealing how the people rebelling against Flock isn’t seen as the people opposing mass surveillance and data being made available to all the cops without cause, due process, oversight, restrictions or consequences for abuse, but instead as the people being against Flock specifically and the same system with a different label would be peachy.
Either they are monumentally stupid or more likely they are corrupt as hell and/or evil.
What’s wrong with Motorola?
I believe Motorola already manufactured ALPRs for one of the other companies and decided to get into the ALPR provider business too.
Damn. Didn’t they also just sign a deal with GrapheneOS? Real disappointed in this duality.
Different companies now.
The original motorola basically only makes those and radios and other shit for cops/ems.
The cell phone Motorola is a division of lenovo.
Remember, your tax dollars are being wasted on this while you’re not able to afford a house.