Funny thing, UK camera’d up London in the aughts on the pretense of fighting crime.
That didn’t work either.
That would be terrible news if their purpose was fighting crime.
That was never the objective in the first place. Blanket surveillance and getting people used to the idea of zero privacy, ever again.
“Under observation, we act less free, which means we effectively are less free.”
-Edward Snowden
Warning extreme sarcasm and satire here.
Simple guide to getting away with crime in areas monitored by flock (Warning: do not actually do this as it is a Felony offense to possess or distribute CP in any form. and anyone who produces or consumes such vile filth should be shot in the head on sight.): put up a small solar powered video player in front of every flock camera with CP on loop. the Flock operators will be too busy masturbating to their second favorite porn, to report your nefarious deeds. (rape of ICE detainees being their first favorite form of entertainment).
Really good at helping cops commit crimes though
Sure would be a shame if someone pointed lasers into them.
Thanks to signal trace, they don’t need functioning cameras so…good news everyone!
You’d need a laser powerful enough and those are hard to get. Those are super dangerous I’d recommend people stay away from them if they don’t know about how they work.
Absolutely. 500mW+ lasers can injure human eyes in a fraction of a second, even from a reflection, similar to how they can destroy a camera sensor.
They’re not particularly hard to get online in the USA though.
Spray paint poles are cheaper and safer. Tungsten carbide sawzall blades aren’t that expensive either
just use a circular saw with a medium tooth count blade designed for metal.
a six inch circular blade can cut up to 300 times more than a reciprocal saw blade when you compare tooth to tooth.
They also cut faster, though are loud as hell.
That’s a bad idea. You don’t want to get a stranger, or yourself in the eye.
Anything that would do meaningful damage to a camera sensor will easily do that to human eyeballs if it refracts or gets reflected.
Especially for cheaper high-power lasers, which may not properly filter out invisible wavelengths like IR.
Anything that would do meaningful damage to a camera sensor will easily to that to human eyeballs if it refracts or gets reflected.
I don’t think that’s true? The lidars on Waymo have been known to damage camera sensors but are safe to the eyes. By damage, like a pixel or two go out, but that’s from a random hit. If you did it right you could do more damage.
Interesting. I would have expected cameras to be more resilient between both their internal filters and the sensor material being tougher than human eyeballs, so anything that could overwhelm that and burn out a camera sensor would be able to ruin someone’s vision almost instantly.
This says its about the specific wave lengths and our eyes are okay with the ones bad for cameras
https://www.faceofit.com/lidar-camera-sensor-damage/
If I hadn’t heard of this happening before though I wouldn’t have guessed this to be the case.
Just like most AI, it makes the user lazier. And I’m someone who is forced to use AI for work and I can confirm.
Why would police actively try to solve a crime when they could lean on flock? Even if it gets it wrong they can say they tried and then move on.
They’re to prevent justified civil unrest
The police have been yelling for years that fighting crime is just an unwanted side effect of their actual jobs; protecting capital and killing brown people.
One of these days we should believe them.
Yeah, we know. Is the FBI now just the FB?
