[Zigurd]

Before posting that you couldn't Google the Milwaukee cop who got busted for abusing Flock camera access? From just a week ago?

If you want an absolute torrent of abuse search for cops running the IDs of their exes. That's why it's dead certain that Flock cameras will be routinely abused.

[k33n]

So then we need better access controls, and apparently the people who abuse it to stalk exes and such are already being prosecuted.

Doesn’t seem like the technology itself is the core issue here to me.

[Zigurd]

So you think you can solve police accountability and keep the cameras? I admire that level of ambition. Have you got the Nobel prize nominations lined up already?

[lokar]

Police in the US very rarely face accountability for misconduct.

[pc86]

The only way you could have moved this goal post faster is if you had edited your original comment.

[k33n]

I’m a problem solver.

[nyc_data_geek1]

If a technology, backdoor or capability exists, it's not a question of if it will be abused, but rather when, how, and by whom.

Stop being obtuse.

[k33n]

Technophobic take tbh

[nyc_data_geek1]

No, this is an entirely pragmatic take. Show me where it's not been proven correct.

It's in fact an argument in favor of strong encryption, privacy by design, and security by default.