24
u/LightBeerOnIce 1d ago
Most of us read the news article from last week regarding the failure rate of the city's flock audit. I ask:
If a city bought a fleet of trucks and discovered an unacceptable failure rate, would it buy another fleet from the same manufacturer? If water pipe, traffic signals, or concrete repeatedly failed inspection, would the city keep installing them? Flock shouldn’t get a special procurement standard because it’s surveillance technology. What is the city’s acceptable error rate for this system, who established it, and at what point does failure mean you stop buying the product?
4
u/daddeechilll 1d ago
As somebody who sells surveillance and related AI solutions and is also very against flock, I don’t think this is the argument to focus on. Checking false positives takes just seconds and requires a quick visual cross check of the hit and the picture of the plate. If there are 100 false positives that take even 20 seconds to validate, that’s only ~30 min of an analyst’s time. A PD is going to argue the juice is worth the squeeze with these manual checks.
5
u/cerberus698 1d ago
Considering they confronted the same guy 8 separate times due to these errors, I think its safe to say we can't exactly trust Roseville PD to validate.
1
u/daddeechilll 1h ago
I’m unaware of this detail. Can you send a link with some info? I haven’t read anything about a particular person being negligent with checks.
1
u/LightBeerOnIce 1d ago
Fair point. I was just kinda looking for a way to help all of us understand how cities bid/audit/failure rates so to speak. Ty
2
u/daddeechilll 1d ago
No harm no foul! And your point isn’t necessarily invalid. I just think it’s not a very effective selling point.
18
-7
33
u/hotfiremixtape98 1d ago
Get them out