1) Flock is helping police departments do mass license-plate surveillance. This has led to abuses and calls for banning Flock-type cameras (a.k.a. automatic license-plate readers).
To clarify this debate, I dug into two questions:
*Would banning Flock cameras make communities less safe?
*Can we prevent cops from using license-plate readers to stalk exes and dissidents by tightly regulating the technology?
My answers to both are: Quite possibly.
I go through the evidence in the piece. But will thread a couple points below:
Conversation
Post your reply
2) The (limited) available evidence suggests that Flock cameras help to deter and catch car thieves. Although, the impact is much smaller than Flock's rhetoric would suggest. vox.com/politics/50415
3) Why do Flock-type cameras (ALPRs) appear to have only a small impact on crime?
One answer: Cops often use them incompetently. In a study of Atlantic City's adoption of such cameras, the ALPRs issued 12,384 stolen vehicle alerts -- 12,332 of which the police missed or ignored.
So I know that you didn't actually do much thinking on this because the currently unpublished, non-peer reviewed working paper you cite in this article has major problems.
Regulation cannot fix this, they are a unique scourge that must be quashes before they further invade our
Piece is very explicit about the paper's limitations and (more generally) the frustrating dearth of empirical research on ALPR networks' effects
Quote
Eric Levitz
@EricLevitz
Replying to @EricLevitz
2) The (limited) available evidence suggests that Flock cameras help to deter and catch car thieves. Although, the impact is much smaller than Flock's rhetoric would suggest. vox.com/politics/50415
Thank you for writing this. I'm sorry that your mentions are about to be flooded by some of the most insane people on this website.
But why are u so convinced these are needed - have you so little faith in your fellow citizens ??
Why are you jews for mass surveillance of White people? Do you have flock in Israel? I also saw the entire upper west side is void of flocks.
Yeah that's really the cruxt of it. I have little problem with Flock's technology, but big problem trusting government with it.
To the first: a very shaky maybe.
To the second: A resounding hell no.
There are no circumstances where the cameras are compatible with a free society. They will always be tools of tyrants in the end.
think about the implementing if arguing that it's going to make communities safer but it's not the community using it as a security device it's being remotely monitored along with thousands of other live feeds if the goal is simply preventing crime why not internal video review
The median citizen has a greater risk of being impacted by police surveillance than by crime.
I have a problem with gauging surveillance measures as making communities more or less safe. We would all be more safe if everyone was required to wear an ankle monitor. Thus, not making this a requirement makes us less safe. So now what?
if we cant stop humans from abusing tech how can we stop tech from abusing humans? so much sophistry ...can or cant we blah blah
Go back ten years and post a speculative question to the American people.
Would you support having universal video surveillance of everywhere you go and everything you do in public, because it might help cops catch a few bad guys who District Attorneys routinely let go anyway?
Shop LEGO best sellers at Amazon
