zlacker

>>chaps+(OP)
For more context here Flock Safety is a YC-backed company [1][2]

[1] https://www.ycombinator.com/companies/flock-safety

[2] https://x.com/garrytan/status/1856016868580151615

>>kklisu+2m
And let me share this reply by Garry Tan, CEO of YC, after someone made a comment that Flock might be _pretty dystopian_ [1][2]:

> You're thinking Chinese surveillance

> US-based surveillance helps victims and prevents more victims

[1] https://x.com/neurajordan/status/1963303084609966288

[2] https://x.com/garrytan/status/1963310592615485955

>>kklisu+6o
I've never heard about this Tan guy before, I don't keep up with politics/corporatism anymore, but is that possibly sarcasm? It sure feels like it to me. But again, I don't know this person, but if I came across that by itself I feel like it's pretty clearly sarcastic, as Twitter tends to be. Maybe I'm just tone deaf myself to how tone deaf others could be?

>>embedd+np
He probably being sincere. If you're logged in (or use something like xcancel), you can see the full thread, where he starts off with

> Flock Safety currently solves 700,000 reported cases of crime per year, which is about 10% of reported crime nationwide

> And they're just getting started

His profile also says:

>President & CEO @ycombinator —Founder @Initialized—designer/engineer who helps founders—SF Dem accelerating the boom loop—haters not allowed in my sauna

>>gruez+Fq
It's really interesting the different cultures "YCombinator the startup incubator" and "Ycombinator/HN the internet forum has". A comment being so oblivious about surveillance would probably be flagged here, at least heavily downvoted, while this guy is actively the president and CEO of Ycombinator today?

pg, what happened? Ycombinator used to be a beacon of sense in a sea of uselessness, but now uselessness is running Ycombinator?

>>embedd+2x
> pg, what happened?

Don't look to pg for anything that can be seen as "woke" - he wants that mind-virus eliminated forever[0]. Many billionaires revealed their true colors after November 2024, remember this when they adjust their public posture to follow the political winds.

1. >>42780223

>>overfe+uE
This is not woke, no matter how large you define woke. You can see links with the ACLU or various human rights defense groups, but those groups may have become woke, without “global surveillance” becoming a woke topic.

Wokism is about making racist accusations of dominance over an audience who didn’t do it. It’s about unfairness and hyping factions against each other. The global surveillance is not about pitting groups against each other. To wit, 1984 has always been a very right-wing torpe.

>>eastbo+fO
"Wokism" is an amorphous culture-war weapon that can be anything an author wants it to be. Diversity is woke, equity is woke, inclusion is woke, non-heteronomative relationships are woke, movies that are barely critical of unbridled capitalism are woke. Not being onboard with "law and order" is woke - and not being 100% onboard with Flock can be reframed as being pro-Criminal and "woke"

> global surveillance is not about pitting groups against each other.

And yet this is exactly how the surveillance companies sell their global surveillance tools. Ring, Flock are all about keeping an eye on "outsiders" - see Nextdoor for examples on how people justifying surveiling others.