Flock: Our Flock cameras keep all of us safe!
-
Flock: Our Flock cameras keep all of us safe!
Americans: Can we see how Nolan Wells died?
F: NoAmericans: Who left bombs on the Capitol on 1/6?
F: NoAmericans: Who actually lynched 75+ Black people?
F: NoAmericans: ID ICE fascists who arrest people without a warrant?
F: NoAmericans: How every alleged Trump assassin got past security?
F: NoAmericans: Then how exactly does Flock keep us safe?
F: We used 83K cameras to track down a woman who got an abortion!
@QasimRashid And even if they *did* see all that: cameras can't do anything. They only register. They can't prevent anything. Yes, it makes it easier to track people down, but that's *after* they've done something.
-
Flock: Our Flock cameras keep all of us safe!
Americans: Can we see how Nolan Wells died?
F: NoAmericans: Who left bombs on the Capitol on 1/6?
F: NoAmericans: Who actually lynched 75+ Black people?
F: NoAmericans: ID ICE fascists who arrest people without a warrant?
F: NoAmericans: How every alleged Trump assassin got past security?
F: NoAmericans: Then how exactly does Flock keep us safe?
F: We used 83K cameras to track down a woman who got an abortion!
@QasimRashid is this post about Florida
-
@benroyce @QasimRashid nice! I'm glad their security is crap...
-
@QasimRashid @octothorpe We do not want the level of surveillance necessary to answer yes to all your questions. But yeah, those examples are deeply unjust and I do get and agree with your point but it’s very much a ‘be careful what you wish for’ situation and your framing is used by many to wish for more surveillance.
It’s counterintuitive but “universal” surveillance is more unjust than the persistence of SOME injustice.
@jon_alper @QasimRashid @octothorpe
Sorry, but gotta dissent a tad on this.
NO, Flock should not be used to surveil everyone, especially those who do no harm and commit no crime. But, those cases described by Qasim are legitimate examples of actual crimes being committed where targeted surveillance could be used to apprehend perpetrators and hold them accountable for their crimes. To say that the Right should be allowed to escape justice just to maintain...
[Edited to soften the critique]
-
@jon_alper @QasimRashid @octothorpe
Sorry, but gotta dissent a tad on this.
NO, Flock should not be used to surveil everyone, especially those who do no harm and commit no crime. But, those cases described by Qasim are legitimate examples of actual crimes being committed where targeted surveillance could be used to apprehend perpetrators and hold them accountable for their crimes. To say that the Right should be allowed to escape justice just to maintain...
[Edited to soften the critique]
@jon_alper @QasimRashid @octothorpe
...an absolutist "no surveillance EVER" stance without understanding the political and social context of who use and profit from mass surveillance as well as who is directly (and who is NOT) targeted, is near-sighted and inconsistent. There is a fundamental difference between spying on average law-abiding folk for violating their privacy, and targeted surveillance used to catch actual criminal acts or the covering up thereof.
-
@jon_alper @QasimRashid @octothorpe
...an absolutist "no surveillance EVER" stance without understanding the political and social context of who use and profit from mass surveillance as well as who is directly (and who is NOT) targeted, is near-sighted and inconsistent. There is a fundamental difference between spying on average law-abiding folk for violating their privacy, and targeted surveillance used to catch actual criminal acts or the covering up thereof.
@jon_alper @QasimRashid @octothorpe
Of course, it goes without saying that the use of Flock in this case to hunt down and prosecute this poor woman for exercising her perfect right of bodily autonomy and refusing to carry out an unwanted pregnancy to her abuser, is beyond repellent and is exactly the kind of right-wing targeting abuse of mass surveillance that should be opposed by any decent person.
-
B bettina@mastodon.nu shared this topic
