zlacker

[return to "Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras"]
1. donmcr+G8[view] [source] 2025-09-26 05:24:17
>>ptk+(OP)
Even though it's become commonplace in the last 20 years, I'm still shocked to see how companies can pretty much ignore the law, do whatever they want, and have everyone involved shielded from any kind of significant consequences.

In situations like this, I think the person at the top of the chain that told employees to perform the illegal installations should be arrested and charged. On top of that, the company should be fined into bankruptcy. If the directors knew about it any companies they're involved with shouldn't be allowed to conduct future business in the municipality (or state).

◧◩
2. FireBe+8v2[view] [source] 2025-09-26 23:24:09
>>donmcr+G8
As an ex-employee of Flock, I can guarantee that this most likely came from the top down. The founder has a vision that isn't just aspirational, but literal, in his eyes, "Flock should help eliminate all crime." Very much Minority Report. He sees Flock as the unsung heroes of the community, and any collateral damage is an acceptable price to pay, despite lip service being paid to ethics:

For example, their "suspicious behavior". Cameras reporting to HOAs and to LE of vehicle behavior that is suspicious or aberrant to their AI (changes in parking behavior and times, for example).

Sharing of data between entities that aren't meant to be sharing (HOAs sending data to LE, for example, when prohibited by the state. Flock's position is "not our job to stop you, even if we know that your state says not to").

A very ... opaque ... "transparency report". In my county alone, there are at least four agencies using Flock that are not listed in their "Agencies using Flock" data.

◧◩◪
3. qmr+FO2[view] [source] 2025-09-27 04:44:32
>>FireBe+8v2
Why would you work for such a fucked up dystopian Orwellian corporation?

Appreciate any other insider details you have to share.

[go to top]