So, to compare logic, people selling chocolate bars and cigarettes are calling the health industry terrorists. Profit should always come first. /s
Flock is a terrorist organization.
I don’t know why I thought of this, but they make telescoping poles for wasp spray. I wonder if any other type of aerosol can would fit in them, or why you would even want to do that?
Paintball guns are very effective in (temporarily) blinding these cams and you can keep your distance.
Also harsh cleaning chemicals like Windex with Ammonia will degrade the IR/anti-glare coatings horribly and will lead to unusable shots within a season or two.
Add HIM to The List.
It’s always projection with them isn’t it?
Yes. Always.
flock feeding the videos to palintir calling people a terrorist orgniazation
It’s a wonder people haven’t started throwing water balloons filled with mud and flour at the cameras. Perhaps he should be grateful that’s not a trend?
I think a drone with a remotely-actuated spray can of black paint would be more fun. Come down from above so nothing is caught by the camera. Control it by a fiber link so that there’s no signal to identify the drone.
Funny you should ask, yeah, I was discussing this the other day with some fellow techies down the pub.
I would’ve guessed that wireless would be the way to go since a fiber cable is quite literally a physical trace to your position. Are drones that easily identified by their wireless signal?
setting up 2 recievers to calculate the signal source position is significantly easier than tracing a cable as thick as spider’s web
So don’t do it from your house, go to a remote, unrelated location. By the time they get the video, analyze it, track back the signal, the camera is painted, and you’re long gone.
Of course there may be cameras near that remote, unrelated location, so be careful of anything identifying, like a vehicle or your face.
Have you seen those 50W burning lazers? I wonder if one of those could fry sensors.
Terrorist calls man stopping their terror a terrorist.
Can someone explain how this makes any sense? They were ordered legally to deactivate and remove, unilaterally decide to put them back up and reactivate, the authorities (whomever those are) resort to covering them instead of removing and destroying them because “removing them is illegal”?
What the actual fuck is this?
My guess (emphasis “guess”) is either some contractual bullshit or a result of state law superseding local law.
This is why when my city installed them (with a 3-2 vote from Council) they required them to all be installed in the Right-of-Way, which gives the city more authority to remove them if the contract is terminated (which it likely will be soon).
The word ‘terrorist’ has lost all meaning at this point.
I had to double-check what Deflock was for:
DeFlock’s mission is simple: to shine a light on the widespread use of ALPR technology, raise awareness about the threats it poses to personal privacy and civil liberties, and empower the public to take action.
This app makes it easy to view and report AI powered surveillance cameras, automatic license plate readers (ALPRs), and other surveillance infrastructure near you.
Sharing information about where cameras are located is terrorism now?
🙄
Careful! I think logic and questions are the new terrorist things to do! Oooo scarey!
Shit I just had a thought
Better ask chatgpt what to do about that.
You jest but this is my default behavior now
“Things you couldn’t get me to publicly admit for $500, Alex”
That is not healthy, and you should stop doing that.
That’s really concerning. Like, if a loved one told me that I’d express serious concern for their mental health
What is this pic from exactly?
Believe it or not, jail
Don’t turn off your telescreen
Shit from the title I thought they were going around smashing the cameras and that it was an exaggeration, but I was clearly wrong on the scale
Be the change you want to see in the world
Eh no I’d rather stay out of the US at the moment
We have such sort of cameras in Europe as well. Some even use a Service provider from china; literally Surveillance as a Service.
It’s a surveillance company, stoking fears of terrorism is just good business, especially if it’s not true
It means “me no like.”
This is just a play out of the rules for radicals playbook: accuse others of what you are doing.
DARVO
It lost all meaning the second Bush declared the “War on Terror”.
It means ‘Enemy of the rich’ now
e: important clarification, by rich I mean billionaires who own the majority of everything and not successful doctors, engineers or movie stars. Know your classes, kids
That’s partly the point. Use words that accurately describe your evil group to incorrectly describe other groups and all of a sudden the words lose meaning and nobody can call you that anymore. Hooray!
It never had any meaning. Reagan had them redefine it in a way that didn’t implicate America.
In the UK the term is defined by the government as anyone who is deemed by the government a threat to the government or the people or someone’s property or the predominant local religion. But recently it’s been exclusively used for the first one. In this country state law is valued higher than corporate, moral, ethical and religious laws, so YMMV
"
Terrorism: interpretation. (Terrorism Act 2000)(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where— (a)the action falls within subsection (2), (b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and ©the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [, racial] or ideological cause.
(2)Action falls within this subsection if it— (a)involves serious violence against a person, (b)involves serious damage to property, ©endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action, (d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or (e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
(3)The use or threat of action falling within subsection (2) which involves the use of firearms or explosives is terrorism whether or not subsection (1)(b) is satisfied.
(4)In this section— (a)“action” includes action outside the United Kingdom, (b)a reference to any person or to property is a reference to any person, or to property, wherever situated, ©a reference to the public includes a reference to the public of a country other than the United Kingdom, and (d)“the government” means the government of the United Kingdom, of a Part of the United Kingdom or of a country other than the United Kingdom.
(5)In this Act a reference to action taken for the purposes of terrorism includes a reference to action taken for the benefit of a proscribed organisation.
"It’s so broad, they can accuse anyone of it, and that’s the point. Both parties have long supported these over broad laws too, because they are not on our side, they want the ability to bring the power of the state on the heads of any groups that might not be breaking the law in a way any reasonable person would condemn but still scare those aritstocrats.
In the UK it means the cop wants your ID and is willing to pretend your camera is a gun to get it.
Fatal police shootings in the UK are getting more common. In 2019 one man was “lawfully murdered” because an officer said the victim’s mobile phone looked like a handgun. In 2024 it was announced the officer would not be prosecuted. Not one police officer has been found guilty of illegal murder as of yet.
The UK isn’t the US (at least in this context) almost nobody has guns.
In very limited situations the police can, but it’s not the norm.
Don’t get me wrong, ACAB, they just don’t generally use guns a as a pretext, perhaps a knife, or perhaps there is more than an arbitrary number of people grouped together so they can claim an ‘illegal’ protest.
It never had meaning. To instill deep fear. Doing violent acts with the purpose of achieving a political end.
It’s always been super broad and just waiting for a domestic party to adopt the tactics of Israel’s occupied territories here in the US, that’s where this was always heading.
Does he care to explain why they leave town when cities or states simply tell them that all the data they collect becomes public domain?
Oh, so they aren’t providing a public service, the only thing they care about is selling my data and keeping it secret.
“Everything I don’t like is terrorism.”
What is this, 2001 again?
Did it ever stop?
It’s accelerated: In 2001, technology companies were forced to collect user data and realized it could be a goldmine. Today, technology companies are being forced to collect people’s IDs… I’m sure this will end up just fine.
“Forced” -> paid.
Spoken like an antifa, uh, 3 star general. Get him boys! /s The future is a lot dumber than we might have thought.
Hey, man. I am four stars at least.
Since Flock CEO wants to give this movement some press
Here’s Benn Jordan, he’s done a series of videos on the cameras, demonstrates their vulnerabilities, and talks about how Flock has been deploying secretly by co-opting local municipalities to subsidize their national rollout.
First video, the one seems to have started the major anti-Flock push: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pp9MwZkHiMQ
Follow-up showing how easy they are to hack: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uB0gr7Fh6lY
More live demonstrated vulnerabilities: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vU1-uiUlHTo
Not as directly related, but he discusses a way to use generative AI models to create noise masks for your specific plate that will disrupt the OCR process that ALPRs use. (Key term: Adversarial Noise) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_F4rEaRduk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKr3Acrovio
This dude also has some solid videos on flock (and other things). Everyone should know that cities and towns are kicking flock out left and right. Use this momentum to organize against them in your town too!
This guy is the coolest type of hacker.
Flock is a terrorist organization.
Flock is a state sponsored terrorist organization.
