14 pointsby chirau2 hours ago3 comments
  • an hour ago
    undefined
  • RussianBot9580an hour ago
    Keep in mind that the general public's sentiment on Flock is nowhere near that of the Twitterati. My HOA wants to pay for a camera. All the old folks that attend the meetings are excited and think the technology is cool. The only "crime" we get is a bunch of teenagers sneaking into the pool after hours.

    At the same time though, if a car that's obviously "not from around here" were to do a drive-by looking for open garages to grab some tools or a bike - I'd want that to be recorded and flagged.

    I'd get lynched for sharing a thought like this from a non-throwaway account, but: I don't get the ultra-liberal folks obsession with the skid row. For whatever reason they seem to think that low rank criminals should be allowed to continue living however they please. An attempt to clean up crime in Oakland - for example - is met with cries of gentrification! Think of the families! Somehow everyone focuses on the family of the drug dealer and not of the hard working single mom who doesn't want her kids to join a gang. Is seems that only those involved in petty crime are considered to be the valuable members of the local community, and only their values need protecting.

    • Liuser15 minutes ago
      I live in Oakland and this resonates true from what I’ve seen, where Flock is a deeply divided issue in Alameda county compared to the overall negative sentiment you find on HN.

      Listening in on city council meetings or even just perusing Nextdoor posts you’ll find there are many proponents for more cameras generally from folks tired of crime.

    • bumblehean26 minutes ago
      This entire post seems like a strawman? What do Oakland or Skid Row have to do with people not wanting Flock cameras installed in their communities tracking all of their movements?

      I don't care about Flock tracking petty criminals, I care about Flock tracking _me_.

      • RussianBot958023 minutes ago
        But why? For most people all they'll find out is "this guy commutes to work, goes to Costco, and has an affair". Big tech knows about the affair from text messages already.
        • codingdave4 minutes ago
          > all they'll find out

          Who is "they"?

          Flock collects data which is given/sold to police departments or other entities. Regardless of how you feel about law enforcement having this data, how do you feel about Flock being a middle-man who controls the flow of the data? How do you feel about knowing Flock is VC-driven and will be making decisions based on ROI, not societal benefit?

        • bumblehean11 minutes ago
          There are already numerous examples of law enforcement abusing data from Flock to track and stalk citizens who have done nothing wrong.

          There are already numerous examples of Flock misidentifying citizens as suspects of crimes and them being arrested or otherwise harassed by law enforcement.

          You can say that these are individual problems rather than systemic problems, but with the US' gradual descent towards authoritarianism and being a militarized police-state I do not see how this technology will be used to make a positive impact on the lives of everyday citizens (which IMO has been happening since the 80s at least before you just imply I don't like the current administration).

          I am personally willing to incur a higher risk of being the victim of a crime if it means government/police/private companies/etc. are not able to violate my privacy every waking moment of my life.

        • collingreen12 minutes ago
          The "you shouldn't need privacy if you aren't doing anything wrong" is such a tired yarn.

          There are many many many examples of abuse, both in the short term (flock gymnastics pedophiles, cop loveint, cross state abortion suspicion tracking) and long term (the "red scare", the administration performing loyalty tests). There are also plenty of discussions outlining how everyone should support privacy because some need it more than others and we're all on the same team.

          Pretending people who are against flock or government illegal surveillance care more about criminals then their families is so bad faith it makes them an asshole (not you but a comment above).

  • bell-cotan hour ago
    Is there some reason to believe that Y Combinator maintains "stances" on the 6,200-ish startups which have been through their program?

    If not - since YC is a for-profit business, what paths to positive RoI might you foresee if they did maintain such stances?

    • ArcHound42 minutes ago
      Yes. Their reputation is taking on the reputation of projects they support. If they want to keep good reputation, they should watch over their sponsored projects.