• renrenPDX@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 days ago

      This is a thing? How many zeroes to your net worth do you have to be to obtain this opt, or is this readily available to the masses?

      • Colonel_Panic_@eviltoast.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 days ago

        Fairly sure you can “opt out” from being shown if you live at an address and fill out some form. I think it’s available, but not exactly advertised or promoted as an option.

        I’ve seen random neighborhoods where 1 or 2 houses will randomly be blurred out.

  • Ashrakal@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    6 days ago

    You can’t earn so much money just to expect the responsibility won’t catch up with you. This one is a social responsibility for the impact caused.

    If he wanted a low profile, no risk job, he could always opt to not become an executive in the first place.

  • notannpc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    343
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 days ago

    He should just point a flock camera at his house. Then he’ll be 80% safer based on a study I just made up like the ones on their sales pitch.

    • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      112
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      Even better, a group should cut down several dozen of them and mount them all on poles outside his house during the night, so that he wakes up to them in the morning. No vandalism, no violence, no threats, just a blunt statement that the media couldn’t possibly ignore.

      Heck, no need to even risk collecting that many real ones. I hear there’s some fairly decent 3D printed fakes available.

        • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          29
          ·
          8 days ago

          Then you provide the enemy with ammunition.

          They claim that the purpose of the cameras is to prevent crime, and that the people who oppose them are violent extremists. They’ve even tried to label deflock.me as a terrorist organization.

          Don’t provide the enemy with ammunition.

          • shartgargle@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            61
            ·
            8 days ago

            To be realistic, they don’t need ammunition. They just make it up anyways. It’s not about being civil and cordial anymore. Points have to be made.

            “Not giving them ammunition” means getting ignored. We can’t afford to be ignored anymore. Shit is urgent. The Epstein class needs to be afraid or we wait until they build the technology and infrastructure that allows them to completely ignore our needs/demands forever.

            Especially when the right is also mad about the tech. Strike while the iron is hot. Now is the time to act, not just have discussions. And I don’t mean violence, but let them know that card is on the table otherwise we the people will continue being ignored.

      • CosmoNova@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        8 days ago

        I betcha if they set them up in his rich people neighborhood they wouldn‘t last for 2 days because someone with more money than him made a phone call.

      • Steve@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        8 days ago

        I love this. They are solar powered so everything would work. All you need is a post hole digger to build a little flock forest.

        • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 days ago

          Ooh, yes someone should do this not on any particular person’s property but as an avantgarde public art installation. Not with actual Flock cameras but just some replicas. Pop it up in a couple different cities around the world.

      • dangling_cat@piefed.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        8 days ago

        You are onto something. What if we just 3d print a bunch of fake cameras, wear a reflective vest, and install them in your nearby rich neighborhoods?

      • Cherry@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        8 days ago

        heads on spikes you say? i hope those models don’t look like billionaires…just kidding

      • artyom@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        18
        ·
        edit-2
        8 days ago

        a group should cut down several dozen of them

        No vandalism

        😐

        E: LOL downvotes for facts, I guess

        • atrielienz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          8 days ago

          Technically not theft. Technically not vandalism.

          “Vandalism refers to the intentional destruction or defacement of property”

          They relocated the item to its owners house. At best the cutting might be vandalism but you don’t have to cut them down. That just happens to be quicker.

          • artyom@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            8 days ago

            It is 100% vandalism, in every sense. I support it, civil disobedience and all that, but there’s no rationalizing it as anything else.

            • atrielienz@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              8 days ago

              Nice downvote.

              You didn’t look up the legal definition of anything before you posted this nonsense. Have a good day.

              • artyom@piefed.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                8 days ago

                Nonsense? You just posted a definition that describes this activity exactly…? So if anyone is posting nonsense, its you.

                • atrielienz@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  8 days ago

                  No. I did not. Relocation of the asset to the owners property means there’s no intent to deprive the owner of said property which means that it’s not theft.

                  The property has not been defaced, damaged, or destroyed so that means there’s no intent of vandalism. Therefore vandalism did not take place.

                  What you’re describing is criminal mischief, which I would agree this is.

                  I made a singular allowance in the case that the pole was cut (which counts as damage), rather than being dug up (which wouldn’t), which you appear to have ignored.

                  If you don’t like facts, that is a you problem.

                  You are welcome to kagi or whatever this yourself to see what I’m talking about instead of doubling down.

                  If you are incapable of that, don’t bother to respond to me.

        • chunk6235@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 days ago

          Heck, no need to even risk collecting that many real ones. I hear there’s some fairly decent 3D printed fakes available.

    • kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      edit-2
      8 days ago

      Would be a shame if someone created a network of cameras tracking his every move and posted it online for free in real time. Nothing illegal about that, right? No implicit threat in that, right?

  • Whostosay@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    153
    ·
    8 days ago

    concerns over privacy and potential police misuse.

    Couldn’t even go one sentence without propaganda. It’s very well documented that it is ACTIVELY being misused. Concerns is their “allegedly” to escape libel allegations, this was a choice.

    I’ll say this as many times as it takes. NEWSWEEK ISNT FUCKING NEWS. IT IS A TABLOID. IT IS LESS THAN NOTHING. STOP FUCKING POSTING IT AND GIVING THESE GHOULS MONEY.

  • godsammitdam@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    100
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    What’s the problem? I thought privacy was a small price to pay for “safety?”

    Sounds like that Kirk guy on guns.

  • Bluefruit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    88
    ·
    7 days ago

    Its almost like privacy is a good thing.

    Hope nothing bad happens to you. Surely not. Flock cameras make everything safer right?

  • BooBees@fedinsfw.app
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    78
    ·
    8 days ago

    “Backers of the technology say it helps solve crimes”

    Should be easy to list the crimes it’s solved, where’s that list?

    • Whostosay@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      8 days ago

      “critics of the technology say it violates their right to privacy”

      Fuckin fixed that real quick. Am I a journalist yet

    • turtlesareneat@piefed.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      8 days ago

      Back up to even having that be a point. We could solve a lot of crimes if everyone’s phone reported our location and recorded our voices for the police. We could solve a lot of crimes if the cops put cams in everyone’s house. Why don’t we do this? The constitution. I don’t care of Flock solves 100k crimes a year, it’s unconstitutional so it’s not an option.

  • the_riviera_kid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    67
    ·
    edit-2
    8 days ago

    Folks should show up at the edge of his property with lawn chairs and coolers and just “hang out”. Don’t speak to him or threaten him in anyway, just sit there and Document everything he does. When he complains tell him it’s for his safety and he should thank them.

    • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 days ago

      You’d need to get the attention of MAGA on this if you wanted people to do stuff IRL

      They’d drive a convoy around his block blasting Metallica for a week after coordinating with their friends in the police and bringing donuts to local tow companies. Maybe if you’re lucky someone on the left will flyer a coffee shop in Chicago.