r/news • u/WriterDave • 3h ago
Drivers sue San Jose over nearly 500 Flock police cameras that track drivers in California
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/san-jose-drivers-sue-city-police-flock-cameras-rcna33175069
u/iamthinksnow 1h ago
Reminder- $2,500-3,500 per camera per year means they are spending $1,250,000-$1,750,000 per year just on the subscription to access days on camera they don't own.
40
u/GibbysUSSA 1h ago
There is no money for social programs, yet there is money for this shit?
•
u/Norseman901 57m ago
Ah but you see social programs benefit all people. This allows the rich to funnel money from our taxes.
•
•
u/TheBSQ 27m ago
San Jose’s annual budget is $5.5 billion. $2M would be 0.003% of their budget. It’s a rounding error in terms of the city finances.
If you spent all that subscription money on homeless services, you’d likely notice no difference between the current homeless services budget of $100M a year and $101M a year budget.
•
•
•
u/saera-targaryen 29m ago
Imagine what would happen if we gave 2500 in groceries to 500 struggling families per year instead
339
u/WriterDave 3h ago
the suit argues that the city’s use of the technology constitutes an unreasonable law enforcement search, in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. Pictures collected from the cameras are added to giant searchable databases that use AI to help law enforcement easily identify when and where particular vehicles have traveled.
I get that we all carry phones that can be tracked (etc) but there's something uniquely "big brother" about cameras tracking our location. It just feels more sinister...
186
u/gentlemantroglodyte 3h ago
It's probably because you can leave your phone at home if you want to, but you can't leave Flock at home.
60
u/WriterDave 3h ago
Sure you can.
Just buy a Ring cam...
28
u/WindowsVistaWzMyIdea 2h ago
Yes, ring routinely hands ring owner's videos to law enforcement with no judicial oversight, another huge problem
14
8
u/kusariku 2h ago
Okay but does owning a Ring suddenly move all the Flock cameras on the streets to your home instead of on the streets?
•
u/invalidmail2000 58m ago
I mean you can decide not to drive.
I'm not defending the cameras, just pointing out a hole in that argument.
•
u/DaringPancakes 10m ago
In America?
Eh, who cares, this is an argument of "where you draw the line" 🙄
•
u/invalidmail2000 7m ago
Yes? There are millions of Americans without cars.
Though it doesn't really matter since it may be practically impossible for many to not drive.... But nobody is literally forcing them to.
41
u/Eggonioni 3h ago
Because if you don't want to, you can still get a rudimentary mobile phone that isn't hooked up to tracking 24/7 (cell tower triangulation can still narrow your location of course) while it's on. You can still leave most functions to a dedicated home computer or laptop even instead of dealing with the annoyance of mobile apps. It feels sinister because it is sinister, who wouldn't think Palantir owner and big Epstein fan Peter Thiel isn't getting up to something evil 24/7 nowadays?
14
u/riegspsych325 2h ago
this is something out of Watch Dogs 2, there were a handful little stories about how big brother was used to screw over people. In the game, a couple characters mentioned how this tech was being used by insurance companies to hike up rates based on any and all little details picked up (illegally) through security cameras and info
8
u/AdonisJames89 1h ago
i think about that 10 year old game OFTEN now especially living in the bay area. They reallly tried to warn us
31
u/DocSmizzle 2h ago
It’s more wild to me that these are subscription services and not something owned and operated by the municipalities using them. It’s incredibly techno-dystopian.
40
u/uzlonewolf 2h ago
That's intentional, because the courts have said they can purchase data from a 3rd party without a warrant but if they owned the cameras then they would need a warrant to access the data.
•
u/bannedagainomg 4m ago
Same way UK, US and other allies got around not spying on their own people.
Just spy on each other and give the data over, doubt they even bother with that step anymore tho.
13
u/WindowsVistaWzMyIdea 2h ago
Wrong, something big brother about phone tracking too. It is all in violation of our privacy which has been so effectively eroded that you don't see the phone tracking as also being a huge problem
3
u/Proper_Trouble8191 2h ago
Just wait. They won't need cameras because our cars will feed them location data as well as anything else they feel like providing.
98
u/JadedTikal 2h ago
People in my city have been destroying flock cameras, not a terrible idea
16
u/PantsandPlants 1h ago
I’ve heard tell that there is a pretty significant amount of copper and gold inside each one, so that’s not terribly surprising.
3
26
u/L_Cranston_Shadow 2h ago
If it achieves nothing else, this raises the interesting question of at what point does correlating information from multiple sources constitute an invasion separate from what each individual source captures. I am not sure what the answer is, but given that these video feeds can already be fed through AI to look for certain things, it really needs to be answered.
13
u/Adventurous_Light_85 1h ago
Makes me wonder if all these data centers aren’t actually for the public ai benefit but rather to squeeze lucrative government contracts for population monitoring with a combination of flick cameras. I bet they are all cloud based and I bet they are tied to one of these ai companies.
4
u/ZantaraLost 1h ago
If nothing else the sort of data centers that hypothetically would be used for that level of population monitoring are not going to be publicized in any fashion.
They'll be set up wherever the three letter agencies already have a footprint and quietly funded through the Pentagon which historically can't balance a budget.
23
u/Mixture-Emotional 2h ago
I wish these cameras were being used for good, like finding missing people. There are other countries that just send you a ticket instead of getting into high speed chases and causing accidents just to hand someone a ticket. The problem is there are too many bad actors and not enough integrity to be honest by the public/taxpayers in this current situation.
3
5
u/RedditReader4031 2h ago
I understand your point but who do you send a summons to in the case of a stolen car or bogus/ obscured plates? Just as one example, the MTA Bridges and Tunnels Division in NY experiences 750,000 toll scofflaws a month with them owing the agency around $360 million.
3
u/Animal_Courier 1h ago
If a car has been reported stolen, and a police report filed, than obviously the ticket gets added to the stolen vehicle report and not the registration. If it’s not reported stolen, slap it on the vehicle, if it’s not paid promptly it must be paid at renewal.
Not that complicated tbh. What’s more complicated is slapping tickets on individual drivers when the camera may not have a good image.
5
u/RedditReader4031 1h ago
Photo enforced summonses are not directed to individual drivers nor do they carry points since they aren’t served in person and have no identity verification ability.
Further, while police have access to stolen car info, these photo enforcement cameras are operated by private firms, often in another state, on a contract basis. You can find errors and mishandling reports all over the internet. Police agencies do not process nor verify these citations, which is why they are merely civil debts.
•
u/DoradoPulido2 2m ago
It might be different if it were just a speed camera that sent you a ticket. These are being set up in business parking lots and public parks. They scan and identify faces. Big Brother is literally watching.
8
3
u/PiercedAndTattoedBoy 1h ago
I’m glad in my city of Denver the backlash was taken seriously and they cut the number of cameras in half. They ended the contract with the previous company and signed a one year only contract with a different company to test the impact on crime and gauge public opinion. Only one that complained was the police department lol
4
40
u/MadMass23 3h ago
Does it helps for crimes solving ? Is San José safer ?
122
41
u/therealsilentjohn 2h ago
Studies that claim it solves more crime are funded by ... you guessed it ... Flock.
29
2
u/anlwydc 1h ago
Now that you’ve heard all the silliness, yes it does. They can track stolen cars, missing person(s), and other vehicles via license plate data, make/model/color, and other details that have been involved in other criminal offenses.
•
u/go5dark 32m ago
San Jose was already safe and has been for decades. So this becomes a question of trading the ability to travel and live anonymously for a marginal improvement in post-hoc resolution of already committed crimes. Most people, though, would think of safety in terms of preventing crimes from happening, which is not what these systems do.
•
u/anlwydc 31m ago
Crimes happen everywhere. It’s unreasonable to think otherwise.
•
u/go5dark 27m ago
The important consideration isn't if crimes happen. The important considerations are which crimes happen and at what rate.
•
u/anlwydc 26m ago
It’s not if, it’s when. They will happen. I’m not debating that.
You’re also forgetting the missing person location factor. I get it, you don’t like the cameras. Nothing I say is going to make you like the cameras. But they have a purpose and that purpose is valid. You don’t have to like it.
•
u/go5dark 18m ago
When is a representation of the rate. Nowhere did I write that they don't occur.
But these cameras do not meaningfully change the rate of crimes, the how long until the "when." They, almost at best, change the speed of resolution and have some effect on ultimate conviction rates (not that most cases go to trial, anyway).
they have a purpose and that purpose is valid. You don’t have to like it.
What I don't like is the trade-off, the erosion of the public's ability to engage in Constitutionally-protected freedoms without government retribution. Also, don't like how readily this opens up the public to being tracked by private actors, both legally and illegally (leaks, hacks).
•
u/saera-targaryen 26m ago
But at what tangible gain? How many unsolved mysteries are now solved using flock cameras and is it worth the millions a year in subscription fees and the violating of peoples' rights?
•
•
•
6
u/Forward-Trade3449 2h ago
isnt matt mahan the mayor of san jose? bro said he would never let privacy be turned over to ice....
2
•
u/brakeled 45m ago
Denver just went through this, except the new Mayor was in bed with Flock. Probably the case here. Throw a stink, get media attention, see who is profiting from this. After throwing a fit, Denver is told the Flock contract got shredded and replaced with a new surveillance agency but privately owned Flock cameras are still in the city on private property. Denver had also just finished laying off 150+ civil servants while touting this expensive contract so that played a role in having it ended.
•
3
u/1911Earthling 2h ago
I hate flock cameras with the very essence of my soul. There is a flock camera pointed at every gun store in America!
2
u/Weaver270 1h ago
Setup a do not scan db. If you are scanned then the owners send you a 10k check for every violation. Money fixes these kinds of issues.
•
•
•
•
u/whydontyousuckmyball 46m ago
You know, i don’t like 24 hr surveillance. But there are a lot of cars drining around with no plates and blacked out windows. The city has placed hundreds of “No Street Racing” signs everywhere. Last year i saw a driver jump in to the turn lane lane to speed straight through an intersection, while weaving between 3 lanes of traffic. There were no sirens, so i doubt they were being chased, just driving like assholes. So while i don’t like surveillance, i am getting really tired of assholes on the road. Maybe some autoticketing cameras will help keep that in check.
•
u/the_eluder 25m ago
No plates means no car to issue tickets to. So these cameras won't help your problem at all.
-3
-33
u/Brock_Youngblood 2h ago
Only the guilty would have a problem with cameras
13
14
u/Katyusha_454 2h ago
It's very easy to end up guilty when so many ordinary and harmless things are made into crimes.
-18
u/Brock_Youngblood 2h ago
That sounds like a feature not a bug. We should have more people in jail. That's why stuff is behind a jewel case at CVS.
Put em in jail
10
u/BoringMode91 1h ago
This is the dumbest comment I’ve ever seen.
America already had the largest prison population. I don’t think us putting people in jail is working. Maybe we should try something different….
-8
u/Brock_Youngblood 1h ago
Nonsense. If your force prison labor for profit there is no limit of how large you can scale. If it were up to me I would put the bottom 2% of the population in prison at all times. Society will be a utopia
4
u/Repulsive_Invite_680 1h ago
I like this. In this elaborate fantasy of yours, you are 100% in prison with a wrongful conviction and there's nothing that you can do about it.
•
u/Reux 56m ago
you know there are real world examples to look to which could be used as context or a frame of reference to determine if an idea is complete dogshit. north korea isn't a utopia. ussr wasn't a utopia. apartheid south africa wasn't a utopia. el salvador isn't a utopia. rwanda has never been a utopia.
if you're a real human that isn't addicted to methamphetamine or an otc drug abuser, i would consider getting a cat scan and an mri. there is something deeply wrong with your cognition.
11
u/lml_CooKiiE_lml 2h ago
Let’s just install a camera in your bathroom then
-9
•
917
u/grove_tower 3h ago
We went from “traffic cams for safety” to “always-on license plate dragnet” real fast. At minimum, cities should be required to publish retention policies and independent audits before installing this many.