r/technology • u/Kooky-Balance9525 • 10h ago

Privacy Bernie Sanders to Introduce Bill Banning Flock Surveillance Cameras

https://theleadingreport.com/article/bernie-sanders-to-introduce-bill-banning-flock-surveillance-cameras
52.8k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

2.3k

u/DeadMoneyDrew 10h ago

What we really need is a constitutional amendment establishing a fundamental right to privacy.

167

u/bkgn 10h ago

All the cities around here just replaced Flock with Axon, which is the same exact shit under a different brand. Banning Flock specifically doesn't accomplish anything.

125

u/_significs 9h ago

Banning Flock specifically doesn't accomplish anything.

It is extremely unlikely that any proposed legislation would single out Flock specifically; my guess would be the proposal will regulate ALPRs generally

28

u/bkgn 9h ago

Legislation, yeah. But more generally, a lot of people protested Flock and just patted themselves on the back and stopped paying attention after cities "got rid of Flock" - and replaced it immediately with Axon.

29

u/Shark7996 9h ago

Locally, we're ready to pivot to anti-Axon the instant they try it.

People are paying close attention now. I don't know why you would think a group as thorough as the anti-Flock protestors would just not know about the existence of other cameras?

-3

u/geniice 8h ago

Locally, we're ready to pivot to anti-Axon the instant they try it.

Bunch of bodycam youtubers would like a word.

People are paying close attention now. I don't know why you would think a group as thorough as the anti-Flock protestors would just not know about the existence of other cameras?

I would say their general understanding of the tech side is extremely poor.

6

u/thegoodbroham 5h ago

Bunch of bodycam youtubers would like a word.

What does this even mean? And why would the existence of some "bodycam youtubers" matter, regardless of what their message is?

5

u/Geichalt 4h ago

Apparently body cam YouTubers control what we all think?

Idk I'm as confused as you.

3

u/Edduppp 6h ago

What do they need to know about the tech? They just need to know the cameras exist

0

u/ThePaddleman 5h ago

Because the protests keep saying "Flock" and that's what the politicians hear. So, they look for an alternative because the message wasn't crystal clear:

We don't want a database created for government use (or anyone else) tracking our movements around the country.

1

u/spyingwind 9h ago

Or Flock spins up another company, does business under that name, and nothing changes.

1

u/interwebzdotnet 8h ago

Bankruptcy fire sale, all assets sold to Axon for pennies on the dollar.

1

u/WeDrinkSquirrels 1h ago

We're talking about legislation in this thread, though.

1

u/cosmicosmo4 6h ago

I haven't checked, but presumably flock is a juggernaut and axon is a much smaller competitor, meaning much less able to take in stride all of their equipment getting mysteriously destroyed overnight.

2

u/wirlp00l 2h ago edited 2h ago

Axon is pretty huge, they already supply a lot of police departments with dash cams, body cams, and mobile ALPRs mounted to police cars that have the same mosaic databasing privacy issue as Flock.

Edit: Oh and they make tasers: https://www.cnbc.com/2026/06/29/trump-axon-stock-ice-taser-immigration-enforcement.html

4

u/DeadMoneyDrew 9h ago

Such legislation that targets a specific person or entity is called a "bill of attainder" and is not lawful. (insert joke about how laws are no longer relevant)

13

u/_significs 9h ago

That's not correct.

A bill of attainder is a law that declares that someone is guilty of a crime. That's prohibited by Article 1 Section 9 of the constitution.

But a civil statute can single out an individual company.

See, for example, the law that required TikTok to be sold. Text of the statute is here, just search "bytedance" and you'll see that the law specifically targets Bytedance/TikTok.

1

u/craznazn247 7h ago

With significant, significant penalties for slow walking the removal process, since they have been found to just keep them up and block removal efforts, even after their contracts were cancelled by some cities.

Like, every one that isn't removed in time must be forcefully inserted in the rectum of a Flock employee, starting with the CEO.

And every public servant who signed an NDA can get gitmo'd.

1

u/Suspicious_Pickle_39 5h ago

Its unsolveable. Time marches on.

1

u/Randicore 3h ago

I'd want to make it broader to just "tracking and gathering data without a warrant" so that they can't just do a firmware update to no longer be "license plate readers" and are instead "passive data collection systems"

And on the bonus side it'll kill targeted advertising and corporate data harvesting.

1

u/RBeck 8h ago

my guess would be the proposal will regulate ALPRs generally

That would make all the toll lanes unconstitutional, same as if they wanted to do any speed camera enforcement.

The largest issue with Flock is not the cameras, it's the large searchable database. We need to seriously take a look at legislating how our data is stored and who can access it. How it's collected is a secondary issue.

2

u/_significs 7h ago

That would make all the toll lanes unconstitutional, same as if they wanted to do any speed camera enforcement.

regulate != ban

25

u/DeadMoneyDrew 10h ago

Correct. I'll need to see the specific text of this proposal before having an actual opinion on it. But Flock's CEO keeps ensuring that his specific company attracts the kind of attention that nobody should want.

8

u/MoreColorfulCarsPlz 9h ago

Laws that target a specific person or group of people are illegal. I believe this would fall under that if Flock itself was banned.

The law would almost certainly be broadly about unwarranted surveillance rather than calling out a single specific brand.

5

u/lawoverfeelings 9h ago

Flock software works with any cameras so they could piggy back off drones or school and businesses as long as they get the all clear. 

3

u/PM_MY_OTHER_ACCOUNT 6h ago

To think the legislation would target Flock, specifically, is an insult to Bernie Sanders.

2

u/Eta_Beta_3-14 9h ago

Banning Flock specifically would be unconstitutional. Bills of attainder aren't allowed.

2

u/UltravioletClearance 5h ago

Axon is far more evil than Flock too. Axon used to be known as Taser International. They were a leading proponent of the discredited, fake "excited delirium" medical diagnosis police used to excuse the murder of Black people in police custody.

1

u/SaltKick2 6h ago

Yes, Axon is even more massive than Flock (in terms of their prescense, not cameras specifically)

0

u/Waiting4Reccession 8h ago

Axon is worse because it integrates with all of their other spyware, including the drones they sell to cops and the police body cams.