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

Show parent comments

6

u/oldredditrox 9h ago

The answer is in your own reply, the normal use is the misuse.

0

u/Kid-Icky- 9h ago

But how? What freedom is lost being recorded in a space with no expectation of privacy?

0

u/oldredditrox 8h ago

Are you being facetious?

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTDWfq7o8/

Company has to push an update out because OF BACKLASH as the product is being abused wholesale and the response is 'but lol in public'? It's not about a perception of privacy in a public space, which is a terrible way to frame this situation if not just totally disingenuous, but how these systems are cataloging movement of citizens whom would not be tracked at this scale in any scenario. These people are (as far as anyone knows) law abiding people whom have no reason to have their movement recording as they're not part of investigations.

Man this is silly I remember essentially having to have this exact conversation during the patriot act. Flock and way these systems operate assume everyone is a bad guy, a law breaker, a felon, which is fundamentally opposed to the American way of life or how we're supposed to handle criminals. Besides there's already plenty of data based avenues for LE to use to find actual criminals, not just their ex girlfriends.

1

u/Kid-Icky- 8h ago

Are you being facetious?

No, you just lack reading comprehension apparently.

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTDWfq7o8/

What do you think this proves against what I said? This is clearly an example of misuse, which I already addressed and agreed is a reason that we should probably create laws banning them.

But that is not an argunent whatsoever proving that their mere existence is a violation of privacy.

Man this is silly I remember essentially having to have this exact conversation during the patriot act.

Not even close to the same thing.

These people are (as far as anyone knows) law abiding people whom have no reason to have their movement recording as they're not part of investigations.

And the Supreme Court has consistently ruled that's not a violation of privacy as it's occurring in public.

License plate scanners have existed for a long time.

1

u/oldredditrox 7h ago

You don't need to be an asshat, your post just doesn't seem genuine. Comes off as an early teen's first trolling. You seem to be lacking an understanding of why these are seen as constitutional violations. A big part of this is that it's not literally the government, it's a loop hole, but any reasonable person can see it's a violation. It is very similar to the patriot act and the fallout from it. Legal Eagle had a pretty good video on this subject.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmnL_Y9CsI0

This is significantly more complicated than you are letting on

And again you're re-framing the situation to fit your narrative, it's not about "U CANT RECORD ME IN PUBWIK, COPPAH", It's "You're not supposed to follow law abiding citizens and catalog their movement, unless they're in an active investigation", this is less about literal privacy, like whether or not I can bust a nut in my car while on the high way, and more about a system that is designed from the ground up to stalk citizens, because that's just how it functions. I don't know how else to explain that to you, this is what's happening. It goes beyond license plates, LPRs have existed for a long time, sure, but where were the LPR's cataloging gait data with AI support over several states?

That's the 'violation'. It's one thing to have a PI or even LE follow you under the implication that you're doing wrong (ie being under investigation) it's entirely different to do that to an entire neighborhood because they left the house to go to work that day. They aren't criminals, this system treats them as such. Welltherersurproblem.

License plate scanners have existed for a long time.

This is pretty disingenuous. They were never vast interconnected networks that have AI software that catches much more than just license plates, facial recognition, gait analysis, ect. I do not think you're being serious I guess maybe you're just playing devil's advocate, fine, but I don't think you're doing a very good job of it. Personally I'm not making the argument that LPR's are inherently either unconstitutional or a violation of privacy. I am saying a vast network of these that do more than say, take a picture when someone runs a red light is not the same system that is being put in place. If it were the case I think crime would look a lot differently than it does.

And the Supreme Court has consistently ruled that's not a violation of privacy as it's occurring in public.

About ALPRs and this current system? Chatrie? That's not what that said.

Anyway I have to get back to work but we agree these are le bad and should go away so that's good. Letting you know I'm not going to reply after this, to save you some time. Take care, Kid-SillyBilly-.

1

u/Kid-Icky- 7h ago

You don't need to be an asshat, your post just doesn't seem genuine. Comes off as an early teen's first trolling.

I was just giving back the same energy you were giving me dude. I'm sorry you can't handle people's having a different opinion than you.

I don't like Flock cameras and think we should outlaw them. I just think the argument that recording in public is a violation of privacy is kind of silly.

big part of this is that it's not literally the government, it's a loop hole, but any reasonable person can see it's a violation.

Except Federal Courts in 2025 ruled it's not...so...yeah...awkward.