zlacker

[parent] [thread] 20 comments
1. Animat+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-09-26 07:17:10
There's a Flock camera at the end of my driveway. I'm next to a city line, so it's a reasonable location.

I wonder if I can file a CCPA request and get a list of my comings and goings.

replies(5): >>boston+A >>r2_pil+Fj >>segmon+FJ >>kstrau+pC1 >>apwhee+RF1
2. boston+A[view] [source] 2025-09-26 07:22:15
>>Animat+(OP)
…or someone could knock the damn thing offline.
replies(3): >>Slight+Ae >>DonHop+Jh >>tlavoi+ys1
◧◩
3. Slight+Ae[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-26 09:45:49
>>boston+A
No that’s vandalism, what you do is get a nice printout of the exact view the camera has and just plop it in front of the thing, like a for sale sign or something. Tape if you have to.
replies(2): >>potato+sh >>boston+681
◧◩◪
4. potato+sh[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-26 10:13:08
>>Slight+Ae
Engaging official channels instantly gets you on a list. These institutions aren't stupid, they're evil. Easier to just back a trailer into it or something. And if some scrappers haul the downed pole off a week after that you didn't see them.

Furthermore, it's beyond naive to care about whether it's technically vandalism. You can't beat the establishment within the law because the establishment makes the law.

replies(1): >>Slight+Uo
◧◩
5. DonHop+Jh[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-26 10:15:25
>>boston+A
Or dress up in a gorilla suit, then paint it in festive Halloween colors.
6. r2_pil+Fj[view] [source] 2025-09-26 10:36:58
>>Animat+(OP)
I'm basically in the same boat. There is no practical way for me to avoid having my picture taken 6 or more times every single day. I flip the camera off each and every time I drive/walk by it. It's infuriating.
replies(2): >>jeffra+f91 >>toephu+2r1
◧◩◪◨
7. Slight+Uo[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-26 11:28:44
>>potato+sh
In theory, constitutional rights would be the ideal tool of choice on your second point. Of course that requires a civil suit against the state and really expensive attorneys.

To add to your point, it’s naive to believe that those protections are effective for anyone who isn’t incredibly wealthy at this point. The issue is most people can’t afford to take a case all the way, let alone start one.

replies(1): >>mindsl+8Y
8. segmon+FJ[view] [source] 2025-09-26 13:54:39
>>Animat+(OP)
Yes you can, see this article

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/security/virginia-police-used-f...

◧◩◪◨⬒
9. mindsl+8Y[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-26 15:12:49
>>Slight+Uo
Our constitutional rights have been effectively nullified - first with a slowly creeping "it's fine if a corpo does it", then with "it's fine if the President directs it", and now recently with a shameless full-on embrace of both.
◧◩◪
10. boston+681[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-26 16:04:55
>>Slight+Ae
vandalism is kinda funny - personally, i’d rather see graffiti than billboards. but with that, my affinity for jaywalking, and willingness to smash surveillance devices well you can just call me a hardened scofflaw!
◧◩
11. jeffra+f91[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-26 16:13:09
>>r2_pil+Fj
Maybe you need to pick up a box of black plastic bags next time you pass by the grocery store?
◧◩
12. toephu+2r1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-26 17:57:43
>>r2_pil+Fj
Why do you care if you're not doing anything illegal?
replies(5): >>pavel_+tA1 >>r2_pil+o22 >>fruitw+cD2 >>AngryD+kD2 >>DaSHac+PT6
◧◩
13. tlavoi+ys1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-26 18:08:34
>>boston+A
It's almost like battery-powered angle grinders should be regular items in the neighbourhood tool lending library.
replies(1): >>toomuc+uA1
◧◩◪
14. pavel_+tA1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-26 18:55:25
>>toephu+2r1
This argument has been shot down so many times, it's a wonder anyone bothers to bring it up without googling it first.
◧◩◪
15. toomuc+uA1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-26 18:55:37
>>tlavoi+ys1
It takes no longer than five minutes to cut through the poles used to hold this equipment up with a sawzall, when metal straps aren't used to attach it to existing infrastructure, I've been told.

https://deflock.me/

16. kstrau+pC1[view] [source] 2025-09-26 19:09:10
>>Animat+(OP)
I think you can file a CCPA request to demand that they never store your data at all. Yes, that would be an utter pain in the ass for them, if so. And yet, that's their problem, not yours.
17. apwhee+RF1[view] [source] 2025-09-26 19:29:42
>>Animat+(OP)
You might reach out to the folks at the Institute for Justice, they have written letters to the cities to get the cameras taken down in these scenarios, https://ij.org/press-release/victory-arkansas-city-moves-sur...
◧◩◪
18. r2_pil+o22[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-26 22:14:11
>>toephu+2r1
In this particular case, because criminals can hack Flock's databases. You can tell whether I'm leaving to go to work, coming home for lunch, figure out my patterns, and schedule a robbery. There are PLENTY of other reasons why I don't appreciate having a camera sitting at the end of my driveway, I wasn't notified about their decision nor had any input so it feels a bit intrusive, but surely you can appreciate that no system is 100% secure and that's why these persistent surveillance gear are so troubling.
◧◩◪
19. fruitw+cD2[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-27 07:29:27
>>toephu+2r1
Show me the man and I'll show you the crime
◧◩◪
20. AngryD+kD2[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-27 07:30:48
>>toephu+2r1
So you would be okay with me personally tracking everything you do and recording you 24/7 then right? Because if you aren't doing anything wrong...
◧◩◪
21. DaSHac+PT6[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-29 04:04:07
>>toephu+2r1
Because I'm not a criminal, so why should I put up with being treated like one?
[go to top]