You don't discuss anything with Flock.
You just run roughshod over all of their concerns, and smash their cameras.
Essentially, treat them exactly the way they're treating you.
this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2026
285 points (99.7% liked)
Technology
87469 readers
3441 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Definitely don't go buy a bunch of cheap hacksaws and hand them out to unhoused people with a promise of cash for each camera. And certainly don't tell them that the materials making up the camera are probably worth something and they can keep them after giving you proof of destruction.
This is great way to get people to build their own flock cameras they can "destroy" to get cash from you.
Why would they? It takes a long time to do that and there are a lot of flock cameras already there. Unless you're talking about hidden agents for the establishment.
A perverse incentive occurs when it's easier to game the system than to use it as intended. Most people don't put extra effort into gaming the system. And you could always just set the reward at less than the value of the raw materials, so that they'd only profit if they were taking someone else's cameras.
Not that you should do any of that, of course.
I was joking about building cameras.
But in reality you would face similar issues. How would people prove they destroy a camera? Show it to you? They would show you the same camera multiple times. You would mark it? They would remove the mark. You would take some crucial part with you (the lens?)? They would look for other cameras with same lens, maybe already broken ones. You could probably establish some working system but people are not stupid and they would try to game the system.
Yes please, use people in need to do the dirty job for you.
If two journalists testing cars are able to get targeted this badly by the police, what percentage of average citizens are going to be harassed by police using false data and fudged reports, where literally nobody in the command chain is ever held responsible?
How many people are going to get murdered in cold blood by police when they pull up with their guns drawn?
Hell, if I ever end up in a hit and run, I'm half tempted to be like "idk, it happened so fast but I think the plate was [old boss's plate]." Seems like open season on poison data with enough plausible deniability.
So, how hard would it be to get flock to flag their own CEO's car?
Very hard.
Because their system is secure, or because he doesn't have a car?
Because you don't know his license plane number. And I doubt he has a single car he drivers everywhere. And it's very probable he's on some VIP list police know not to touch.
So it's just a matter of putting the VIP list in the flagging one...
Are there any implementations of camera based traffic safety networks that are actually kind of good, in terms of privacy, responsible data handling, and effectiveness?
No and none of us should have to live with cameras constantly pointed at us.
I live in a place with a lot of traffic violence, and there's negligible enforcement. I'm looking for a practical way to keep drivers accountable and reduce the violence.
I think cameras on the intersections have to be part of that strategy. I'm inclined to believe a responsible implementation is possible, and I'd like to see more discussion of what that could look like.
What about a dashcam?
If I'm crossing the street and get mowed down in a hit and run, the car's dash cam footage probably won't be found.
What about a brick?
While tempting, there's a good chance the wielder would be literally killed in response. And unlike drivers killing people, the law would come down hard on someone damaging a car.
Radar traps. They only snap a picture if someone is going above the speed limit, in a wrong lane (e.g. bus lane) or over a red light.
Any arguments against them are usually analogous to sugar companies opposing a sugar tax because it would lead to poor grammy being unable to afford to sweeten her morning coffee anymore.
yeah I still can't believe these got banned in Ontario. so much more effective and safe in school zones than speed bumps or artificial lane narrowing
although fines should have been raised, like all vehicle fines, to a % of income/wealth
and I will admit that I don't know how you ensure that they don't become like Flock
Wait, how are they better than speed bumps?
speed bumps are distracting and pull driver's attention from their surroundings, result in people accelerating loudly from bump to bump, create inconsistent traffic from people constantly accelerating and decelerating, are annoying on bikes when implemented poorly, slow down emergency vehicles, are annoying for everyone when somebody is pulling a trailer, are annoying for drivers who aren't even speeding, create difficulty plowing...
a camera is just there and fines the owner of the vehicle
Ah yeah, the emergency vehicles thing is a very important one I forgot about. Thanks
Every separate violation should be a billion dollar fine, to go in the America First Fund, which will provide the seed money for social programs like Medicare 4 All, Free college/trade school, student loan forgiveness, etc.
That's also where we should put the fortunes we confiscate from Sociopathic Oligarchs, as well returned tariffs, corporate fines, etc. Don't just stick it in the general fund where it will be wasted on weapons of mass destruction.
excellent writeup
but nothing new. just lazy cops being lazy, seems like.
how many infractions before they get fired and blacklisted?