• deranger@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    61
    ·
    7 days ago

    Much like health insurance CEOs getting waxed, destroying flock cameras seems to be one thing almost everyone agrees on.

  • spacegoat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    6 days ago

    Funny how corporations and the government have us in a panopticon of virtual trackers, but only the flock cameras get pushback. Maybe it’s easier for people to comprehend and fight against because it’s a physical object.

    Some states have had these for years, with zero complaints. I know at least my home state had tracking by license plate and facial identification 10+ years ago.

    (I do not support Flock, but I wish people cared this much about all privacy violations.)

  • arc99@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    If hypothetically you’re going to destroy a camera, consider the determination of police to investigate and the criminal charges before choosing your method. Spraying them with varnish is a lot more low key than shooting at or burning them, both of which are likely to attract investigations and felony charges.

    • meco03211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      7 days ago

      That sensor node comes with lots of direct benefits for the person carrying it. Flock cameras have literally zero direct benefits.