this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2026
247 points (98.8% liked)

News

38524 readers
2339 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Snips from the article below, but the full thing is worth reading.

My small town in South Carolina will soon have more Flock cameras than police officers.

the city council of my small town of Irmo, South Carolina, voted to install 22 new Flock cameras. That’ll bring the total up to 33. With a population of only 12,000 or so, it means there’ll be one Flock camera for every 300 residents. That means there will be more Flock cameras in my town than police officers.

The vote for the cameras was a hot topic in local news and South Carolina social media. The city council expected a lot of people to show and asked folks to sign up early if they wanted to talk.

I wasn’t the only person who decided to speak. More than 10 other citizens went to the podium and spoke out against the cameras.

“I’m pretty enthralled by all the pushback you’re getting on the cameras you installed without asking a single member of the community if they wanted them installed,” said another resident, a man in a T-shirt and shorts. “If you give the government a tool, they will misuse it. Period. End of story. Get rid of them or we will get rid of them for you.”

For a bit, I thought it was possible that the town might not install these cameras. Then the police chief stood up and explained how he’d used Flock to capture pedophiles and I knew that was probably the end of it.

Police chief Bobby Dale has long been an advocate for the expansion of Flock in town. He told local outlet News19 that 33 cameras will allow him to see all the entrances and exits. “That would ultimately cover pretty much every nook and cranny, every entry point into the town,” he said. “That's what we want. As the chief of police, I've got to make sure our town is safe. I'm learning that with these cameras, with these license plate readers, we're solving crimes and solving them quicker.”

During the city council meeting, Dale explained that Flock cameras had been instrumental in a To Catch a Predator style sting operation Irmo PD conducted. “During an internet crimes against children operation hosted by a department, 15 adults traveled to our community believing they were coming to meet children for sexual activity," Dale said. “Fourteen of those 15 suspects were not from our jurisdiction.”

“So you lured them here. Into our town. Genius,” the T-shirt and shorts guy shouted from the back of the room. This was the guy who’d said the community would remove the Flock cameras if the city didn’t. The mayor had police escort him from the meeting. He left without a fight and Dale finished his speech praising Flock.

Mayor Bill Danielson opened his portion of the Flock discussion by talking about how he’d recently commiserated with other mayors at the conference about how mean people were on Facebook.

“I came back with a renewed vigor to be the mayor of this town,” he said. “And knowing that I’m not the only one being abused on Facebook, social media, by some people in this room. It’s going to take a whole lot more than that to sway any position I may or may not have on behalf of these citizens.”

“Every one of those mayors either wanted Flock, was trying to figure out how to budget for Flock, or had Flock and was figuring out how to increase their presence.”

My city council voted 4 to 1 to increase the presence of Flock in this small town of 12,000 people. Police chief Dale will soon have more cameras than officers. And, if they can get money from the state, they may also purchase a drone from Flock to use as part of the company’s “drones as first responder” program.

top 42 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Railing5132@lemmy.world 52 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Your flock post reminder that they aren't just license plate readers. They capture Bluetooth and wifi MACs, NFC IDs, and cellphone IMEIs, scan for wifi ssids (exactly like a WiFi Pineapple, to further fingerprint a device) from every device within range. They also do facial recognition of everyone within view of the lens. All that information is sent to flock for sale to any government agency,

[–] MonkeMischief@lemmy.today 12 points 6 days ago

All that information is sent to flock for sale to any government agency,

Don't worry... I'm more than willing to bet it was bought up by commercial interests as well! Can't leave all that money on the table when interfering with the exploitation of people is a crime in itself, now, can we?

[–] OwOarchist@pawb.social 9 points 6 days ago

for sale to any government agency

And probably a few private agencies. And foreign governments, too. Anybody with money.

[–] custom_username@reddthat.com 6 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Not that I totally trust my phone's OS, but do you think bluetooth and wifi MACs are discoverable when they are toggled off?

[–] Railing5132@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago

I don't believe so, but I also don't trust the toggles. Remember that Google's Android and Apple (to a lesser extent but still) are willing participants in the surveillance economy.

[–] ramble81@lemmy.zip 4 points 6 days ago

Maybe not directly but other parts are:

  • Your phone is broadcasting its IMEI
  • Your car (if newer than 2002) also has an IMEI most likely for services like OnStar, live traffic, OTA updates or mobile hotspot
  • That same mobile hotspot broadcasts an SSID/Wifi MAC
  • If you’re connected to your car using Bluetooth those are transmitting a BT MAC… each, so not only can they track cars they can track who is in a car
  • if you’re connected via wireless car play or wireless Android Auto, it’s also transmitting WiFi and BT MACs
  • if you have a smart watch (of any type) it’s broadcasting a BT MAC, and in some cases its own IMEI

And that’s just stuff off the top of my head.

[–] 79WistfulVista@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

On Android devices there is a setting to allow WiFi scanning even when WiFi is toggled off. It's under the Location settings iirc. Also a similar setting for bluetooth.

[–] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 31 points 6 days ago (2 children)

12,000 people?! My hometown was 15,000. Shocker, there is no crime except the random methhead. Nothing ever happens in towns like that! These are the most paranoid fucking cops, bored out of their minds wishing and hoping for someone to do anything so they can go beat the shit out of them.

My town we would see all of their SUVs parked at the gas station, all idling, wasting money, fuel, and our sanity.

What a collossal waste of funds. Everyone should be voted out. But I know how small towns work. Mayor is some uncle to some family dynasty who are big fish in small pond, and they will maintain their power.

[–] EvilBit@lemmy.world 14 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Didn’t you read it though? If you lure a bunch of pedophiles to the town, you can catch most of them.

It is crazy how many fish they can catch when they lure them from all over the lake to one spot.

[–] P00ptart@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Small towns are the most paranoid about crime. They act like it's everywhere and lurking in every shadow. I moved from a city of 450k to 4k in highschool and the rules in the small town were much more strict. We couldn't even wear hats in high school cause "gangs" or something. Band shirts weren't allowed, chain wallets, basically everything that nobody cared about in my previous school.

[–] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I remember that. Small town living is resentful of teenagers. Small kids are of course fine and adorable and cute - until they are teenagers. Then they don't want to see you, they don't want you to exist at all. You are in the adults and more likely, the elderly's way.

So they will police everything you do as a teenager in your small town, exactly like you said. I remember I was driving home (from the gas station ironically from above) and suddenly noticed headlights were following my car. My friends and I were spooked, so we pulled into a parking lot to stop and hopefully they'd drive by. Turns out it was a cop, because of course it was. We were "acting suspicious". Which yes we fucking were because we had an unknown car following us at night. He "let us off with a warning".

I remember they built a brand new "youth center" for teenagers and kids to hang out at. Of course during the day it sat unused, so the old people started using it. Then the rules started coming in. Then we weren't allowed to touch their things. Then you know it, they banned the kids altogether and it became a second community center, with teenagers not welcome. Took them a few years but they got it.

Then they wonder why kids act out. They're micromanaged, they're not allowed anywhere, they're told to shut up and not be seen. So kids loiter, they get bored, and that leads to petty crime because there is nothing to fucking do in a small town. And adults are just baffled at the concept.

Here I am, 25 years later and I'm still livid at the "local leaders" of the small town. Their royal fiefdom in the middle of fucking nowhere, surrounded by cornfields. Got the hell out of there. May they rot there in their piercing agony of boredom.

[–] P00ptart@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago

Yup , and you ask why would anyone say Anna live here? And you always get "it's a good place to raise a family" yeah if you want kids drinking at 14, pregnant at 15, etc.

[–] d.rizo@piefed.social 23 points 6 days ago

It's funny that "they" are against solar... until "they" need it.

[–] Etterra@discuss.online 15 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Sounds like anybody running on a policy of removing all the flock cameras will have a pretty damn good chance of getting elected.

[–] mohammed_alibi@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

Just say Flock is sponsored by Democrats. That'll get the small towns to stop using them.

[–] DillDough@lemmy.zip 7 points 6 days ago

Eh people from the southern us are some of the most pro authority people on the planet, I really don't think that would be the slam dunk you think it would be. Minimum 1/3 of them will be rabidly screaming about how that candidate is pro crime and anti cop/justice...this 1/3 is also the main voting group btw lol.

[–] Fmstrat@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

The other thing the mayor learned is that everyone loves Flock. “There was not a mayor at that conference that I touched bases with […] that did not use Flock, did not use Motorola license plate readers,” he said, referring to another company that sells similar technology (we’ve reported ICE is offering demos to its agents to use a Motorola license plate reader app). “Every one of those mayors either wanted Flock, was trying to figure out how to budget for Flock, or had Flock and was figuring out how to increase their presence.”

Oh no. Just as the GrapheneOS phone gets rolling, Motorola does this. Sigh..

[–] cannedtuna@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago

Oh boy, do I got bad news for you.

Motorola has made cameras for a long while now. One of their main products, Avigilon is a security camera system that boasts extremely powerful AI tracking. You can set search filters like shirt and pants color, or vehicle color and it will pull related clips easily. It’s also great at tracking cars, even across multiple cameras.

There was a demo I’d seen where a skyscraper with a busy road all around it and cars parked along the street tracks a single vehicle that circles it. The car goes out of frame in some blind spots, but the cameras quickly pick it back up as it comes back into view and marks it as the same car seen previously.

The license plate readers have been a thing for a long while.

[–] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago

Just keep voting for the MAGA fucknuts and their version of freedom.

[–] N0t_5ure@lemmy.world 51 points 1 week ago

The article the other day stated that the cost of flock vandalism wasn't borne by flock, but rather the city that has them under the contracts. Look like that city council has opened up a potential budget draining risk by installing a buttload of cameras the people don't want. Given the tight budgets of small towns, the city could be broke in short order if pissed off citizens rise up and start vandalizing them.

[–] kahjtheundedicated@lemmy.world 33 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Those things are everywhere, and if you get caught “un-installing” one, they will probably ruin your life. We’re so cooked. Actually living in a really really boring cyberpunk dystopia

[–] DudeImMacGyver@kbin.earth 19 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Uninstalling one is only a misdemeanor IIRC, but I'm not even sure putting plastic bags on stuff ia a crime at all. Littering maybe?

[–] IamSparticles@lemmy.zip 13 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] FirstCircle@lemmy.ml 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Is it vandalism if one does something that stops an X from working temporarily even if one doesn't damage the X at all? It's an interesting question, I'd always thought vandalism = causing damage to a thing.

[–] IamSparticles@lemmy.zip 8 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Tampering with equipment (intentionally altering or interfering with operation) generally falls under the same statutes as vandalism.

[–] FirstCircle@lemmy.ml 11 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Interfering with operation ... hmm... you've no doubt seen (at least if you're on FB) the photo of the guy sitting outdoors on a chair next to a Flock device, and blocking its camera using a sign (or something, can't tell) that's mounted on a pole at FlockCam height. He's not touching the Flock gear but he's presumably interfering with its photo/video taking ability in a mostly passive way. Vandalism? Or does vandalism actually involve making physical contact with the vandalized object? I could imagine him arguing that he was just holding a sign up for the world to read and didn't intend to interfere with the FlockCam. Still vandalism? Or could people put up objects (signs, flags, stuffed animals, Diaper Baby effigies) on poles very close to FlockCams (but not touching them) that happened to prevent those cams from doing visual surveillance, all without being vandals?

[–] Professorozone@lemmy.world 9 points 6 days ago

Use American flags.

[–] kahjtheundedicated@lemmy.world 12 points 6 days ago

Who knows what kind of bs they could pin on you. Under this administration, I wouldn’t be surprised if they start handing out terror charges for destruction of surveillance equipment.

That’s worst case scenario, but tbh I’d be more worried about bullying from the local cops.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 10 points 6 days ago (2 children)

If they don't install them right, they have like a 180-degree blind spot. That's not great for their protection.

Think a b-b will take out the lens?

[–] _deleted_@aussie.zone 7 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Be careful not to aim a laser pointer into the lens, because it will be magnified and damage the digital camera inside.

[–] kahjtheundedicated@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago

You will likely need a high power laser to do any actual damage. Class 3b or higher. The kind you need to wear laser goggles for so you don’t blind yourself.

[–] meaansel@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago

Don't high-power lasers get reflected from any slightly shiny surface in an unpredictable manner and damage vision of random passerbys?

[–] _deleted_@aussie.zone 2 points 6 days ago

I thought I had read that ordinary laser pointers were enough to damage cameras, which is why I cautioned not to use them.

[–] YerLam@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

There was a guy who took out CCTV at my school with paintballs, at the least they would need to be cleaned off by someone.