zlacker

[return to "Flock's gunshot detection microphones will start listening for human voices"]
1. scotty+Aj[view] [source] 2025-10-04 17:19:05
>>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.

◧◩
2. tptace+Jo[view] [source] 2025-10-04 17:56:32
>>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)

◧◩◪
3. buran7+1t[view] [source] 2025-10-04 18:30:33
>>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.

◧◩◪◨
4. tptace+mt[view] [source] 2025-10-04 18:33:16
>>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.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. thakop+Sz[view] [source] 2025-10-04 19:23:44
>>tptace+mt
> I actually do real political work

I’m not even sure why but this sentiment rubs me the wrong way.

Perhaps it’s that what’s resonated most to me about democracy is the premise that it is all “for the people, of the people, by the people.”

There’s something exclusive about that statement.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. tptace+iA[view] [source] 2025-10-04 19:26:33
>>thakop+Sz
Yes. The people are supposed to do work. Believe me: ordinary people who strongly disagree with a lot of what's being said on this thread are doing the work, showing up and complaining about "defund the police" people being behind any limitations on ALPRs at all. I had to argue with them! You are responsible for engaging on this, because, contrary to the claim at the top of the thread, this simply is not a "red line".
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. thakop+bT[view] [source] 2025-10-04 22:02:28
>>tptace+iA
The work of democracy does not require action.

If you don’t respond to this comment, I’ll assume you agree.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. tptace+TU[view] [source] 2025-10-04 22:19:29
>>thakop+bT
Saying things like this is why you're losing.
[go to top]