Being against mass-surveillance should be a bipartisan struggle. Given our political polarization, each side is highly distrustful about what "the other side" will do with mass amounts of data about their side. This should be a cause that unites everyone.
We do have some bipartisan initiatives, it’s just that they are not news worthy. Take for example the initial push for banning TikTok. It had unprecedented bipartisan support.
All the evil shit (war, funding genocide, mass surveillance, privacy invasions or curtailing free speech in the name of protecting children) nearly always has bipartisan support.
Having binged on a bunch of modern British detective fiction in the last year or so - Rhys Dylan as an example. The reliance on cameras in society, yes it is fiction, but there is also truth is an interesting thing in terms of what a society accepts.
Why does it matter his political party? Many otherwise good people have fallen for a con of some sort at least once at some point it their life.
The man has some time and uses it in a non destructive manner to do what he thinks will help his community rather than just posting nonsense online, that in itself is commendable . I find the article trying to forment division by naming him a Republican...who cares, human privacy and the imbalance of power is something every American and even non Americans should care about.
A persons political persuasion can tell you something about their values, and the policies they would prefer enacted for a given topic.
Republicans AFAIK have not been on the crusade to end mass surveillance or promote privacy laws to regulate big tech, so seeing a republican man stand up for this right might help you understand that the sentiment of the party is not unanimous.
“ The man has some time and uses it in a non destructive manner to do what he thinks will help his community rather than just posting nonsense online “
Because the media in the USA gives a good deal more credence and puts more importance on conservatives. They do the same for rural people. That's probably a reflection of our politics.
Because the modern GOP is itself a con.
Its great that he is protesting flock cameras but he should also be protesting his own party, which is engaged in unprecedented corruption, murders american civilians, attacks democracy, and seeks to disenfranchise our daughters and wives.
I cannot stand it that disingenous and ignorant people pretend this isn't the case, you can all go to hell.
> $300,000 for architecture, engineering, and environmental reviews, plus $150,000 for construction management. Multiple rounds of public feedback, commission reviews, and administrative paperwork required extensive paid city staff time.
WTF this is it! This is the solution. Every single Flock camera should be required to have an environmental review and multiple rounds of public feedback!
> “We’re private citizens; we don’t need this stuff,” Gunn told CL. “And they’re reporting now that the Chinese have already picked up all of our voter registrations. They’re picking up more information on us, on how we live, and you know there’s a reason for it.”
This is the kind of comment that makes me think that a person is old - and therefore has had their values shaped by the concerns of the mid-20th-century - gets most of their information about the world via cable news, and isn't thinking very carefully about what is and is not likely to be a problem in their life. My dad, of similar age to this person, constantly gets angry about the Chinese getting some kind of information about ordinary American citizens, while being unable to clearly articulate exactly what this information is and why specifically this is a problem.
Curious if hoisting an Ipad on the end of his pool skimmer that just showed a video of random cars and their license plates, causing the camera to register a bunch of false positives?
i've said this before on Hn but I called the sheriff to discuss these in our neighborhood and asked if they could search for our whereabouts and he said "only if there's an active crime for your plate", so I said "what if the governor imposes a 'bird flu curfew'?" and after some kerfuffling said in theory yes they could then use it to track offendors.
The other issue is that the company obviously has access to the streams nationwide, and they likely don't have the same oversight that a local police might have to document when/how they are used, if they have any oversight at all.
If done obliquely enough... e.g., just making a tracker and having the ability for people to report broken cameras, you're probably fine in theory. In practice, this is a litigious society, so you'd want to build this anonymously.
In a country where not attending a protest gets you 30 years in prison, and attending a protest where you set off a firework gets you 70, and where a government thug can pin you down and execute you on the sidewalk, and get recognized for his heroism and bravery... you tell me.
Hey if anything we should keep protesting. You should read about what the British did to Indians protesting for independence. Protest in spite of consequences is a singular act of bravery. The cops want people to give in.
In the US, someone got 30 years in prison for moving a box of zines. The zines were used to charge the person as a terrorist. Here are the zines that were moved:
The United States, the first two in Texas and the latter in Minnesota.
In that bit, an unarmed man was murdered, the killers scatter like roaches, the federal police is covering for them, while actively preventing the state from giving the guilty a fair trial and a swift sentencing and imprisonment.
(What they did is a state crime with a maximum penalty of life imprisonment, and also a federal crime that carries the death penalty.)
Anyone with eyes can see that those killers are guilty. You don't need to split hairs on that, you can look at the video yourself.
As anyone else, though, they constitutionally deserve a fair trial where the onus is on the state to prove that guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, before they can be sentenced. My assessment of their guilt has little bearing on the state's ability to do that.
Proving that guilt would be trivial if the federal government weren't actively complicit, by preventing such a trial from taking place. There's no need to cover for it, it's behavior is unconscionable and treasonous.
There was a protest in Texas. Some protestors set off fireworks into the air. One protestor brought and shot a gun at a cop. He got 100 years in prison. Everyone else who was there got 70.
One person in their signal group, who didn't even show up to the protest... got 30.
This is Soviet Russia, or Putin Russia-level insanity. Punch a fascist, go to a camp. A fascist punches you, he gets a medal.
I’m not really aware of any country when you can expect to shoot at cops, or be part of a group engaging in that activity, and not expect a harsh response from the state.
Shooting at cops is not a good way to protest. I don’t think any of that is comparable to Soviet Russia, though.
Why “republican” man?
Editorials like this piss me off. Just say “Man from Florida”. Why bring party politics into an article that isn’t about party lines?
If there was regular prejudice between 76 vs 77 yr olds, then yes. It’s similar to saying “white/black man”. It adds no value beyond sparking a prejudicial emotional response.
It’s CNN/Fox news style sensationalist entertainment writing rather than news/journalism.
If it helps, I have been in a work group on this issue locally for the last 8 months or so.
Most of the folks in that work group are to the left of Democrats, and most of the pro-flock folks here, locally, are Democrats and law-and-order GOP folks.
So to me, the (locally a-typical) political orientation of the person committing the politically-charged crime seems relevant.
Most of the people very against Flock are more left wing and I feel like another left wing protest about it isn't particularly engaging. I'm sure putting Republican there gets way more interest as Republicans turning against them is necessary to have anything actually happen.
The developments of political parties’ positions are themselves newsworthy, as well as the ways in which writers attempt to frame them. You’re right to notice it.
Better to say the current US government is run by authoritarians, doing everything they can to convert the US government into an authoritarian one. And they've gotten way farther than they should.
We're a backsliding democracy, and risk backsliding into fully consolidated autocracy, unless we mount effective resistance.
But this isn’t new. Government overreach has been a long recurring pattern throughout US history literally since we were born as a country. John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Lincoln, Woodrow Wilson, FDR, et al, exercised powers and authoritarian tactics that shocked their contemporaries just as much as Trump is doing today. Not using history as an excuse, just to point out that this is a feature of US politics not a bug. We have managed to remain a free society for 250 years despite all the horrible, anti democratic sometimes barbaric things our leaders did, because 1) every generation got organized to defend civil liberties and 2) our “system” was cynically and explicitly engineered with competing centers of power, among other things, under the assumption that every single leader would eventually try to grab power.
Last month I said to my wife that we should start paying homeless people to hold their signs while standing in front of the radar speed cameras the city has been putting up around our town.
Being against mass-surveillance should be a bipartisan struggle. Given our political polarization, each side is highly distrustful about what "the other side" will do with mass amounts of data about their side. This should be a cause that unites everyone.
We do have some bipartisan initiatives, it’s just that they are not news worthy. Take for example the initial push for banning TikTok. It had unprecedented bipartisan support.
All the evil shit (war, funding genocide, mass surveillance, privacy invasions or curtailing free speech in the name of protecting children) nearly always has bipartisan support.
In my state (Iowa), a bill making animal abuse a felony had bipartisan support, and went into effect a few weeks ago.
Not everything need be so cynical.
Having binged on a bunch of modern British detective fiction in the last year or so - Rhys Dylan as an example. The reliance on cameras in society, yes it is fiction, but there is also truth is an interesting thing in terms of what a society accepts.
Pretty much anything libertarians are for has bipartisan opposition, so at least we have some unity there.
I've seen Trump 2024 voters go to No Kings in 2026 because they fear being the victim of federal overreach as in ICE.
Why does it matter his political party? Many otherwise good people have fallen for a con of some sort at least once at some point it their life. The man has some time and uses it in a non destructive manner to do what he thinks will help his community rather than just posting nonsense online, that in itself is commendable . I find the article trying to forment division by naming him a Republican...who cares, human privacy and the imbalance of power is something every American and even non Americans should care about.
It is at least somewhat relevant.
A persons political persuasion can tell you something about their values, and the policies they would prefer enacted for a given topic.
Republicans AFAIK have not been on the crusade to end mass surveillance or promote privacy laws to regulate big tech, so seeing a republican man stand up for this right might help you understand that the sentiment of the party is not unanimous.
Man Bites Dog!
Nothing pro-/anti-human or dog in that headline, just increasing intrigue without resorting to clickbait. Assuming a man really did bite a dog (bad!).
I'd wager it has something to do with this: https://www.cltampa.com/news/creative-loafing-tampa-bay-has-....
nice. i just asked chatgpt for the lean and it said progressive so there ya go.
ya. classic tactic to label someone so there's pattern matching for readers. happens everywhere unfortunately.
“ The man has some time and uses it in a non destructive manner to do what he thinks will help his community rather than just posting nonsense online “
Best comment this week, so far.
Because the media in the USA gives a good deal more credence and puts more importance on conservatives. They do the same for rural people. That's probably a reflection of our politics.
Because the modern GOP is itself a con. Its great that he is protesting flock cameras but he should also be protesting his own party, which is engaged in unprecedented corruption, murders american civilians, attacks democracy, and seeks to disenfranchise our daughters and wives.
I cannot stand it that disingenous and ignorant people pretend this isn't the case, you can all go to hell.
I got news for you about the DNC as well...
These cameras aren't just invasive, they are expensive. Cities are paying a pretty penny to access a few web cams.
Last I looked it up, $2500 per year per camera in the surveillance area.
That doesn't sound expensive to me. Not compared to, say, a $1.7M public toilet[0].
To be clear, I do not support Flock cameras.
[0]: https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/san-francisco/san-fran...
> $300,000 for architecture, engineering, and environmental reviews, plus $150,000 for construction management. Multiple rounds of public feedback, commission reviews, and administrative paperwork required extensive paid city staff time.
WTF this is it! This is the solution. Every single Flock camera should be required to have an environmental review and multiple rounds of public feedback!
They are also installed improperly https://www.wate.com/news/tennessee/flock-cameras-tennessee-...
> “We’re private citizens; we don’t need this stuff,” Gunn told CL. “And they’re reporting now that the Chinese have already picked up all of our voter registrations. They’re picking up more information on us, on how we live, and you know there’s a reason for it.”
This is the kind of comment that makes me think that a person is old - and therefore has had their values shaped by the concerns of the mid-20th-century - gets most of their information about the world via cable news, and isn't thinking very carefully about what is and is not likely to be a problem in their life. My dad, of similar age to this person, constantly gets angry about the Chinese getting some kind of information about ordinary American citizens, while being unable to clearly articulate exactly what this information is and why specifically this is a problem.
Equally informative title: A 77-year-old lactose-intolerant man is staging a solo protest against St. Pete’s Flock cameras
It's relevant that supporters of the party of "law and order" and "tough on crime" are anti-Flock too.
Curious if hoisting an Ipad on the end of his pool skimmer that just showed a video of random cars and their license plates, causing the camera to register a bunch of false positives?
That's a fun idea! I wonder if it'd work if you just used something like an e-Ink screen and had it generate random license plates?
I suppose "blocking the view of surveillance cameras" is probably illegal though.
Waiting for the “obstruction of justice” suit. Probably won’t stick, but it’ll be a tremendous pain in the ass of the protester.
It's likely illegal in Florida (where this happened). They made it illegal to paint stuff on your cars that would trick ALPR or surveillance cameras
You US citizens don't seem to realise just how legal/lucky you are.
I'm Irish. We're way more legal than you.
Listen to anyone from China.
Thanks for acting out my daydream, Carl.
i've said this before on Hn but I called the sheriff to discuss these in our neighborhood and asked if they could search for our whereabouts and he said "only if there's an active crime for your plate", so I said "what if the governor imposes a 'bird flu curfew'?" and after some kerfuffling said in theory yes they could then use it to track offendors.
The other issue is that the company obviously has access to the streams nationwide, and they likely don't have the same oversight that a local police might have to document when/how they are used, if they have any oversight at all.
Other possible searches (in some areas):
https://www.404media.co/how-cops-use-flock-to-track-people-n...This post has just dropped from the top three to #72 on the third page (heavy downvotes/flagging?).
It's not flagged, more likely @dang or @tomhow got a call from Flock.
Hmm…
Also post no longer visible on first dozen pages if I’m not mistaken.
Spying on citizens just in case. Reminds me some countries.
If I made an app that showed their locations and gamified knocking them out (subtly), would that get me in legal trouble?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incitement#United_States
If done obliquely enough... e.g., just making a tracker and having the ability for people to report broken cameras, you're probably fine in theory. In practice, this is a litigious society, so you'd want to build this anonymously.
The article already links to a website that shows their locations: https://deflock.org/
It does not gamify or otherwise encourage damaging them, which would be legally risky.
I hope a (civil rights) lawyer will reply. I’m curious too.
No need to damage the cameras, just place some balloons in front of them.
In a country where not attending a protest gets you 30 years in prison, and attending a protest where you set off a firework gets you 70, and where a government thug can pin you down and execute you on the sidewalk, and get recognized for his heroism and bravery... you tell me.
Hey if anything we should keep protesting. You should read about what the British did to Indians protesting for independence. Protest in spite of consequences is a singular act of bravery. The cops want people to give in.
In what country did those things happen?
In the US, someone got 30 years in prison for moving a box of zines. The zines were used to charge the person as a terrorist. Here are the zines that were moved:
https://pnppl.cc/prairieland/
The United States, the first two in Texas and the latter in Minnesota.
In that bit, an unarmed man was murdered, the killers scatter like roaches, the federal police is covering for them, while actively preventing the state from giving the guilty a fair trial and a swift sentencing and imprisonment.
(What they did is a state crime with a maximum penalty of life imprisonment, and also a federal crime that carries the death penalty.)
> ... while actively preventing the state from giving the guilty a fair trial
Interesting.
Anyone with eyes can see that those killers are guilty. You don't need to split hairs on that, you can look at the video yourself.
As anyone else, though, they constitutionally deserve a fair trial where the onus is on the state to prove that guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, before they can be sentenced. My assessment of their guilt has little bearing on the state's ability to do that.
Proving that guilt would be trivial if the federal government weren't actively complicit, by preventing such a trial from taking place. There's no need to cover for it, it's behavior is unconscionable and treasonous.
So, a jury convicted them of not going to a protest?
I’m trying to understand your original claim.
There was a protest in Texas. Some protestors set off fireworks into the air. One protestor brought and shot a gun at a cop. He got 100 years in prison. Everyone else who was there got 70.
One person in their signal group, who didn't even show up to the protest... got 30.
This is Soviet Russia, or Putin Russia-level insanity. Punch a fascist, go to a camp. A fascist punches you, he gets a medal.
I’m not really aware of any country when you can expect to shoot at cops, or be part of a group engaging in that activity, and not expect a harsh response from the state.
Shooting at cops is not a good way to protest. I don’t think any of that is comparable to Soviet Russia, though.
https://pnppl.cc/prairieland/
In the United States
Make it a web app and host it in a different country? Probably also depends on the mechanics of the game though as well..
A different country... without an extradition treaty.
Oh like Snowden then… he or she just has to be okay living under those conditions…
Why “republican” man? Editorials like this piss me off. Just say “Man from Florida”. Why bring party politics into an article that isn’t about party lines?
Right, and also, a 77-year-old man in Florida means that adding "Republican" is just redundant.
DeSantis won with something like 50.1% of the vote. I think it’s a bit of hyperbole to claim all Florida men are Republicans.
If there was regular prejudice between 76 vs 77 yr olds, then yes. It’s similar to saying “white/black man”. It adds no value beyond sparking a prejudicial emotional response.
It’s CNN/Fox news style sensationalist entertainment writing rather than news/journalism.
Ikr, "Florida man" already has a distinguished pedigree
If it helps, I have been in a work group on this issue locally for the last 8 months or so.
Most of the folks in that work group are to the left of Democrats, and most of the pro-flock folks here, locally, are Democrats and law-and-order GOP folks.
So to me, the (locally a-typical) political orientation of the person committing the politically-charged crime seems relevant.
Most of the people very against Flock are more left wing and I feel like another left wing protest about it isn't particularly engaging. I'm sure putting Republican there gets way more interest as Republicans turning against them is necessary to have anything actually happen.
The developments of political parties’ positions are themselves newsworthy, as well as the ways in which writers attempt to frame them. You’re right to notice it.
Why "man"? Why bring gender into it?
Do you prefer collection of cells?
"ugly bags of mostly water" is the preferred nomenclature.
Republicans are not on the side of liberty and privacy. So emphasizing that he's a republican makes the case even more strongly.
You can argue that this shouldn't be about politics, but how many years of living under an authoritarian government do you need?
Everything is about politics now.
I grew up under an authoritarian government. The US is not an authoritarian government.
Better to say the current US government is run by authoritarians, doing everything they can to convert the US government into an authoritarian one. And they've gotten way farther than they should.
We're a backsliding democracy, and risk backsliding into fully consolidated autocracy, unless we mount effective resistance.
But this isn’t new. Government overreach has been a long recurring pattern throughout US history literally since we were born as a country. John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Lincoln, Woodrow Wilson, FDR, et al, exercised powers and authoritarian tactics that shocked their contemporaries just as much as Trump is doing today. Not using history as an excuse, just to point out that this is a feature of US politics not a bug. We have managed to remain a free society for 250 years despite all the horrible, anti democratic sometimes barbaric things our leaders did, because 1) every generation got organized to defend civil liberties and 2) our “system” was cynically and explicitly engineered with competing centers of power, among other things, under the assumption that every single leader would eventually try to grab power.
"Republicans are not on the side of liberty and privacy."
Moronic generalisation.
Florida Man is an overloaded term
He's a 77-year-old patriot o7
Flock enjoyers didn't like this one
A sledgehammer would be a better solution.
For the company Flock, yes.
For the community, the vandal, and progress, no.
Last month I said to my wife that we should start paying homeless people to hold their signs while standing in front of the radar speed cameras the city has been putting up around our town.