?
(It would have been the same story -- just less biased against a single equipment manufacturer in a product category (Doorbell Cameras)...)
So, why couldn't the journalist simply have said "Doorbell camera" every time they said "Flock camera"?
?
And when isn't any public facing video camera a "surveillance product"?
?
???
Doesn't any public facing video camera (including camera doorbells, including the public facing video cameras on people's smartphones) -- contain the potential for for civil rights implications (and other problems) if misused?
?
Is the issue of civil rights implications really with Flock specifically?
Or does the issue exist more broadly with the usage of any public facing video camera where the misusage of that camera results in civil rights implications?
?
???
Instead of objecting to the article and what everyone is saying, do you not feel any responsibility to understand what you're talking about first?
The issue here is the Flock business model, which subsidizes the deployment of these cameras and encourages municipalities to use them in these dystopic ways.
Not to mention that you haven't even acknowledged being completely factually wrong in your understanding about the type of camera involved here. Instead of saying "huh, I didn't know that, TIL", you double down. It doesn't reflect well on you.
When is any public facing video camera (such as those in people's smartphones) not a "public street surveillance camera"?
?
Can we really change the function of a group of devices (which use the same physics and create the same effect), by labeling them something else?
?
To bring you up to speed, Flock cameras are typically mounted on poles throughout cities and towns, in partnership with local government and law enforcement.
There's a whole Silicon Valley techbro business model behind this, in which Flock charges the municipalities for access to the data and AI analyses, which tell them nonsensical things such as how this woman in her $70k Rivian is driving around the neighborhood as a porch pirate.
Perhaps now, you might have a bit more understanding of why the fact this was a Flock camera is relevant here.
Or that drones with video cameras might be used for that purpose in the future, in other cities?
Is your issue really with Flock cameras on light or utility poles -- or might there be drones (and other higher flying objects) that perform this same function, either now or in the future?
?
Also -- since you bring up AI analyses -- then whose fault for the alleged issue is it, really?
Was it the company's fault?
Or was it the AI's fault?
Or was it the Officer's fault -- for not performing prior due dilligence, and rushing to act on flaky data?
Who shall we blame, and why, specifically?
