HaJ3FgupAm8RrDJW3MHgT9X7Ft27eVaD
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 21 points 1 week ago (4 children)

If you think for about two seconds about the national security implications about this, this is extremely, extremely bad.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 week ago* (3 children)

    You're right, but Flock (and all of these cameras) is bad for the liberty of the people, so this is good. Any time a national security threat is found, it shakes the trust in these systems, so they're less likely to be trusted again.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    The worst thing is that this isn't exactly new. The house heard about the vulnerabilities of this system in May.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKSjlZ6xyDo

    Unfortunately, we're in such a state of plutocracy and regulatory capture that even stating how big of a national security risk they are did not make any movement until now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    In other words, it only makes movement when the general public finds out and starts sabotaging their cameras?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 5 days ago

    The damage really just amounts to insignificant outliers. There's so many cameras that the vandalized ones only make up a statistically insignificant portion.

    At the moment, I believe the actual movement is coming from the ground up, grassroots movements that are going to their town halls and telling their representatives that they want these cameras the fuck out of their cities, and it seems to be working, at least somewhat.

    I'd be lying though if I didn't feel some kind of justice and satisfaction every time I see that one dude in Florida carrying around a camera.

  • source
  • parent