zlacker

>>hhs+(OP)
> You're thinking Chinese surveillance

> US-based surveillance helps victims and prevents more victims

— Garry Tan, Sept 03, 2025, YC CEO while defending Flock on X.

https://xcancel.com/garrytan/status/1963310592615485955

I admire Garry but not sure why there can’t be a line that we all agree not to cross. No weapon has ever been made that was not used to harm humanity.

>>scotty+Aj
I spent several years doing a bunch of work in my local muni that drastically restricted, and eventually booted (I'm not happy about this; long story) Flock. I feel like my Flock bona fides are pretty strong. I understand people not being comfortable with Flock. I do not understand this idea that it's an obvious red line.

People disagree about this technology. I live in what I believe to be one of the 5 most progressive municipalities in the United States† and I can tell you from recent experience that our community is sharply divided on it.

† (we're a small inner-ring suburb of Chicago; I'm "cheating" in that Chicago as a whole is not one of the most progressive cities in the country, but our 50k person muni is up there with Berkeley and represented by the oldest DSA member in Congress)

>>tptace+Jo
> I do not understand this idea that it's an obvious red line.

It's an invasive surveillance technology that contributes to building the pervasive surveillance day to day reality.

You're muddying the waters asking "why are you against this" without even hinting at an argument why anyone should not be against this.

You can already see the progression. What was sold as "only listens to gunshots" now no longer listens only to gunshots. The deal constantly gets altered.

>>buran7+1t
No I'm not. I actually do real political work on this issue, ran the commission process that restricted our cameras and created the only restrictive ALPR police General Orders in Chicagoland, and got us to pass an ACLU CCOPS ordinance --- the first municipality in Illinois to have one.

Whatever else I am, I'm not "muddying the waters". I'm commenting in good faith from actual experience. You're going to find my bona fides here are pretty strong.

>>tptace+mt
I'm an ex-employee of Flock who left when I learned just how empty their words about ethics and morality of increased surveillance really were.

They will happily look the other way when agencies share data that Flock knows they're not meant to be sharing.

They will happily "massage" data when needed to shore up a case (particularly with their gunshot detection).

Their transparency report probably lists only about 2/3 (at most) of the agencies that are actually using the system.

I asked lots of questions about ethics and morality in the recruitment process, got in, and rapidly learned that it was openly mask-off, surveillance state, Minority Report-esque mission.