It has no case. Where I live, there are two of them on a rural highway in a no-crime area, one at a signaled intersection whose highlight is the gas station and Subway, and two more on another rural highway near absolutely nothing. They're not there to prevent crime and assist in it; they're simply tracking people for no good reason.
Plus, per United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012), "The Fourth Amendment provides in relevant part that “[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.” It is beyond dispute that a vehicle is an “effect” as that term is used in the Amendment." Flock is, in effect, a private search, and that's a rights violation that is quite defensible.
The people taking these things out are true patriots.
Exactly. The cameras are carefully placed to cover all ordinary routes in or out of all areas in a city. In safe low-crime neighborhoods there are very few cameras, but that doesn’t matter if the routes in and out of the neighborhoods are covered. When I started looking at the map I found that every route I travel has at least two cameras.
I agree, and would request that those who do, perhaps provide some pointers on successfully accomplishing this. Per the map, there are quite a few "targets" 'round these parts, be nice if there were another site, "flocked-up cameras" or something. Perhaps if enough are destroyed, the project becomes too expensive to maintain. Wonder what network they're on, how they communicate etc....
The company’s next product, Nova, promises to knit police records together with Social Security numbers, credit histories, and property data into one AI-searchable whole.
That's a gross invasion of privacy, not to mention a major violation of the 4th amendment.
Once some entity collects information, the possibility of it being misused is created. Privacy regulations would be Important, I agree. But I feel like they don’t offer that much comfort given how corrupt our law enforcement system appears to be these days.
Since I work in LE, I begrudgingly agree that flock cameras ARE useful (tracking down stolen cars and in one case, tracking down a guy that was driving from the east coast thru my state to get to CA with a 💣 ) BUT a lot more guardrails need to be put in place.
Even so, that's not as concerning as the Clearview AI that my city now wants to put in place to track people's FACES... you can change a car, you can't change your face!
Who makes the Clearview product? Is it an independent company? It sounds like a Palantir product.
I’m not a fan of biometric surveillance or a country that monitors every citizen. The possibility for misuse by law enforcement personnel, politically connected individuals, etc., is huge. Victims of domestic abuse by such people are at especially high risk.
It's an independent company... but Thiel has invested in it.
And I agree about the potential for misuse, also because the software is still pretty bad at facial recognition of black and Asian people. If someone is misidentified, an innocent person could be getting their door kicked down and
Thankd God tgere will always be someone creating something to circumvent these blatant rights and constitutional violations, but the police and military will always help enforce these illegal things.
I think it decreases safety! The potential for misuse in today’s society is huge. This is no longer a society in which we can rely on goodwill or personal integrity.
No. They already proved who they can lock down and who they can't. It's not about 'NWO' or anything like that. It's simply about picking pockets while there's still pockets to pick.
Okay, go on and believe that. That's why they're going to link all pf your data together which will be accessible just by scanning your license plate or your face.
The problem with modern conspiracy theory is that its become a haven for narcissists who think their existence is so important that 'they' must be watching them.
At this point, conspiracy theory has ceased to be an approach to understanding public affairs and turned into a narcissistic cult.
They can collect all the data they want. It doesn't make any difference if, when they use that data, you don't care or, better yet, simply execute their physical agents.
Worrying about surveillance is just a kind of self-induced impotence.
Blah blah blah, your ignorance isn't my narcissism. They have actually said what they plan to do and have done so for 100 years so it's not a conspjracy theory at all. If a bunch of demonic psychotic lunatics say they wantto tske everyrhing you own, control every aspect of every person amd create complete transhumans to do what they want and get you to take kill shots for made up viruses, you might want to pay attentiin.
I don't mean to be *that* guy, but... uhhhh... wasn't it just a few years ago that now when all kinds of government people, along with government-private partnerships, and "experts" in a, uhhhh, another very closely-aligned, government-adjacent [cough, PHARMA-FUCKING-CEUTICAL] industry told us that violating our rights was for our own good? Anyone remember how that all turned out? It was only gonna be necessary for a coupla weeks...? ANYONE FUCKING REMEMBER THAT!?! YOU DUMB FUCKS!!!
They've been doing shit like this for 100 years. People don't want to admit their gubbermint is at war with them. Ever wonder why the US peace time flag is never flown?
Relies on public institutions to purchase their products.
And tracks public traffic habits and more as “their product”.
But if anyone from the public seeks to avoid this, it’s “causing chaos” and in one instance, the clown called it “terrorism”.
What a lazy thing, modern surveillance salesmen have become.
*sidenote
It’s BEYOND ironic that to comment on the actual post, you have to update your account and subscribe, so the author can keep better track of their subscribers.
That happens on just about everything, but only on the computer (IE, accessing Substack from a browser), if you're on the app, it doesn't happen. I'm commenting just fine, and have not had to do anything special, already logged in, not subscribed. I don't think it has anything to do with the author, I've had to log in and re-subscribe to stuff I'm already subscribed to, on the PC, just to respond to comments I've already made. Substack is kind of optimized for the mobile app, and the PC seems more of an afterthought code-wise.
Me too, my current box is fairly new, wanted power to spare, tons of memory/space, connections for peripherals, expansion room etc, I kind of multi-purpose built it, for "creation"- multimedia, HW synthesizers, also digital art, and-or coding/ programming, (whatever I wanna do), best one I've had yet, I absolutely prefer it to the phone, which is the opposite of that, cause all the money went to the pc.
Actually took a while to unravel this place, I detest mobile tech (IE, phone is cheapest one I could get, no data/talk & text, only use wifi) BUT, I smoke, so end up using it on the patio, cause I don't smoke indoors lol.
Originally created two accounts, one on PC, and another using a tablet, THEN found out they were not the same account, tried to merge them, merged them into THIS one, and meant to do it the other way, lost all my followers, saved some subs, but it was a huge pain in the ass. And the whole time, I was cursing SS for (apparently), spending way more time in the mobile API, than they do with the website's UI. I've always found that kind of bizarre for a site about writing, like, you really expect me to write 3000+ words, on a device the size of a half slice of Wonder bread? 🤣🤷 Seems a bit nuts to me....
Well, I mean, I'm still commenting, still on the app, and still not subscribed, but I NEVER have to sign in again on the app, only on desktop. If I'm for example, accessing SS with Firefox, or Brave, and click ON the comment box underneath the piece, it opens another page, with no "dark mode" background, meaning, I am outside of my "account" per se, there, since it's outside of my settings inside SS, I'm not subscribed, or signed in.
Try this: To avoid trying to comment there, I go back, to where the piece is, in the feed, and click slightly to the left or right of where the picture, or title appears, like each item in the feed is a square, click slightly outside of that, where the cursor's not ON the piece, but still has focus. This opens the comments without taking you to that outside page. You know it's an outside page, cause it gives an option to "also post this to the newsfeed", or whatever it says. HTH
I can reply to you from the “activity” portion of substack, but if I click on the link to reply from the comment section, it needs me to sign in and subscribe.
I have noticed that even while signed in on some ‘stacks (like Jeff Tiedrich’s even though I am a paid subscriber it always makes me resign in to comment. it says ‘subscribe’ but I never have to actually resub up just resign in with my password, I think it might be a security feature, and many ‘stacks’ like Wonkette, when not signed in will let you click “no just let me read it.”
I followed the civil litigation case launched by Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis who would leave the privacy of her upper eastside home and deliver her face in public, usually on the sidewalks of NYC. Her suit sought relief from the Paparazzi, who made big money by capturing her image out in the public. She did not win a decision that granted her privacy in a IV Amendment standard in public places. Here is the case but not from SCOTUS
The U.S. Supreme Court has never directly ruled on a case involving Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis and the Fourth Amendment. However, her name is famously associated with the landmark privacy and paparazzi battle Galella v. Onassis, which explored the constitutional bounds of privacy, though it was decided by federal appellate and district courts rather than the Supreme Court.In the 1972-1973 Galella decisions, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals issued sweeping injunctions against freelance photographer Ronald Galella. These courts found that Galella’s aggressive stalking and relentless photography constituted harassment and an invasion of privacy.In the lower court's opinion, Judge Cooper noted that individual privacy derives protection from several constitutional sources, including Fourth Amendment restrictions against unreasonable searches and seizures, combined with First Amendment rights of free association. The court ultimately concluded that the First Amendment does not provide a license to harass, endanger, or constantly shadow public figures. The Supreme Court declined to hear Galella’s final appeals, allowing the strict restraining orders against him to stand.
Let me guess. 99% of revenue comes from government contracts. IMO, private military and surveillance companies and their investors are the real terrorists.
The Oregon Lottery has approximately 10,500 surveillance bot slot machines in 1800 private restaurants, bars, and strip mall casinos. There are no warnings to citizens. This private player and customer data is then stored at the State agency Data Center headquarters in Salem, Oregon. It was announced and confirmed May 29th, 2026 in the Lottery annual meeting.
Like everything invented I am totally against improper use by anyone. There seems little doubt this is a good tool to thwart certain crooks. It requires statutes or licenses to use. One size does not fit all.
I am an anti crime zealot, however Flock crosses the line, and has intentions of crossing further to the extreme limits of violation of citizen personal privacy rights. If this technology is going to be allowed at all, it must be regulated tightly to protect the privacy of non criminal citizens. In the absence of this regulation, we are allowing the existence and growth of a dystopian police state. It’s never a case of if, but only when, this authority will be misused. History, time and time again, illustrates this truth.
Couple observations. I ran deFlock for my zip code, one covering a small town and a very large rural area in two counties. Five cameras. Two near one another out in the sticks, on intersecting highways. One on a state highway on the opposite side of the zip code in the next county. Two in the same Lowe's parking lot. Lowe's no doubt teamed up with Flock and local PD to address theft.
I'm retired LE, started back in the late 80s. Training gave no doubt even back then that you had to have a good reason to query LE databases. A criminal history? You'd better have a case number if it was for a criminal investigation. Or be doing a bone fide assigned background check. Audits were done where the state and sometimes feds came in. Looking up a case that's not yours, trying to access the a narrative report? It flags. Look up porn? It flags. People got disciplined as they should have been. Stalking someone? Our local sheriff discussing Flock cameras publicly stated if he caught a deputy misusing the Flock system like that, he'd fire them. I have no doubt he would.
Sadly, in Kentucky the AG has allowed LMPD to keep flock camera locations secret, and the LMPD has already been caught misusing the information from Flock cameras to stalk ex romantic partners. Warrants don't mean much to the LMPD.
Horseshit. This goes waaay beyond some local yuck yuck sherrif. It's a rughts violation and certainly a biolation of the 4th. Maybe you live under a rock but by 2030 the new world order will be implemented and they olab on breaking people financially until yoy're willing to live in their concrete block room and show your digital id with all of your vax shots for made up pandemics. Leo and the military will be right there with them to help enforce it too!
It has no case. Where I live, there are two of them on a rural highway in a no-crime area, one at a signaled intersection whose highlight is the gas station and Subway, and two more on another rural highway near absolutely nothing. They're not there to prevent crime and assist in it; they're simply tracking people for no good reason.
Plus, per United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012), "The Fourth Amendment provides in relevant part that “[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.” It is beyond dispute that a vehicle is an “effect” as that term is used in the Amendment." Flock is, in effect, a private search, and that's a rights violation that is quite defensible.
The people taking these things out are true patriots.
Exactly. The cameras are carefully placed to cover all ordinary routes in or out of all areas in a city. In safe low-crime neighborhoods there are very few cameras, but that doesn’t matter if the routes in and out of the neighborhoods are covered. When I started looking at the map I found that every route I travel has at least two cameras.
Yes, same in my little town. 3 of them at the ingress points.
I agree, and would request that those who do, perhaps provide some pointers on successfully accomplishing this. Per the map, there are quite a few "targets" 'round these parts, be nice if there were another site, "flocked-up cameras" or something. Perhaps if enough are destroyed, the project becomes too expensive to maintain. Wonder what network they're on, how they communicate etc....
Worthy of portable grinders
Exactly! There’s some on roads in the middle of nowhere? WTF are they tracking?!
Fuck Flock. Don’t want to live in a surveillance state.
The company’s next product, Nova, promises to knit police records together with Social Security numbers, credit histories, and property data into one AI-searchable whole.
That's a gross invasion of privacy, not to mention a major violation of the 4th amendment.
Agree 100%. What an invasion of privacy. We have HIPPA laws in place for medical information, so these should have their own privacy regulations.
Once some entity collects information, the possibility of it being misused is created. Privacy regulations would be Important, I agree. But I feel like they don’t offer that much comfort given how corrupt our law enforcement system appears to be these days.
SO TRUE! Everything is corrupt. I worry we will never recover.
Since I work in LE, I begrudgingly agree that flock cameras ARE useful (tracking down stolen cars and in one case, tracking down a guy that was driving from the east coast thru my state to get to CA with a 💣 ) BUT a lot more guardrails need to be put in place.
Even so, that's not as concerning as the Clearview AI that my city now wants to put in place to track people's FACES... you can change a car, you can't change your face!
Who makes the Clearview product? Is it an independent company? It sounds like a Palantir product.
I’m not a fan of biometric surveillance or a country that monitors every citizen. The possibility for misuse by law enforcement personnel, politically connected individuals, etc., is huge. Victims of domestic abuse by such people are at especially high risk.
It's an independent company... but Thiel has invested in it.
And I agree about the potential for misuse, also because the software is still pretty bad at facial recognition of black and Asian people. If someone is misidentified, an innocent person could be getting their door kicked down and
Thankd God tgere will always be someone creating something to circumvent these blatant rights and constitutional violations, but the police and military will always help enforce these illegal things.
Surveillance does not produce safety. Neither do the police. Flock is just another tech boondoggle scam.
I think it decreases safety! The potential for misuse in today’s society is huge. This is no longer a society in which we can rely on goodwill or personal integrity.
And a step towards the nwo and locking people down.
No. They already proved who they can lock down and who they can't. It's not about 'NWO' or anything like that. It's simply about picking pockets while there's still pockets to pick.
Okay, go on and believe that. That's why they're going to link all pf your data together which will be accessible just by scanning your license plate or your face.
The problem with modern conspiracy theory is that its become a haven for narcissists who think their existence is so important that 'they' must be watching them.
At this point, conspiracy theory has ceased to be an approach to understanding public affairs and turned into a narcissistic cult.
They can collect all the data they want. It doesn't make any difference if, when they use that data, you don't care or, better yet, simply execute their physical agents.
Worrying about surveillance is just a kind of self-induced impotence.
You don't need to stop the surveillance.
You just need to stop the agents.
Blah blah blah, your ignorance isn't my narcissism. They have actually said what they plan to do and have done so for 100 years so it's not a conspjracy theory at all. If a bunch of demonic psychotic lunatics say they wantto tske everyrhing you own, control every aspect of every person amd create complete transhumans to do what they want and get you to take kill shots for made up viruses, you might want to pay attentiin.
Thanks for helping to deflock Oregon!
You’d have to be the most naive person born to think this tech won’t be misused. Government never does underhanded shit. 🙄
Exactly. They never do anytung above board or without a hidden agenda.
This leads Nowhere Good.
I don't mean to be *that* guy, but... uhhhh... wasn't it just a few years ago that now when all kinds of government people, along with government-private partnerships, and "experts" in a, uhhhh, another very closely-aligned, government-adjacent [cough, PHARMA-FUCKING-CEUTICAL] industry told us that violating our rights was for our own good? Anyone remember how that all turned out? It was only gonna be necessary for a coupla weeks...? ANYONE FUCKING REMEMBER THAT!?! YOU DUMB FUCKS!!!
They've been doing shit like this for 100 years. People don't want to admit their gubbermint is at war with them. Ever wonder why the US peace time flag is never flown?
Flock used public tax money to get set up.
Relies on public institutions to purchase their products.
And tracks public traffic habits and more as “their product”.
But if anyone from the public seeks to avoid this, it’s “causing chaos” and in one instance, the clown called it “terrorism”.
What a lazy thing, modern surveillance salesmen have become.
*sidenote
It’s BEYOND ironic that to comment on the actual post, you have to update your account and subscribe, so the author can keep better track of their subscribers.
What a wanker.
I had to sign into substack, but not subscribe.
That happens on just about everything, but only on the computer (IE, accessing Substack from a browser), if you're on the app, it doesn't happen. I'm commenting just fine, and have not had to do anything special, already logged in, not subscribed. I don't think it has anything to do with the author, I've had to log in and re-subscribe to stuff I'm already subscribed to, on the PC, just to respond to comments I've already made. Substack is kind of optimized for the mobile app, and the PC seems more of an afterthought code-wise.
I attempted to reply to a comment here, and since I wasn't in the app, I got only an option to sign up. That never happens while in the app.
2026 substack is a different creature
Interesting analysis, you are probably right, I nearly always prefer my pc, and so rarely, unless I’m waiting a the dentist, use the mobile app.
Me too, my current box is fairly new, wanted power to spare, tons of memory/space, connections for peripherals, expansion room etc, I kind of multi-purpose built it, for "creation"- multimedia, HW synthesizers, also digital art, and-or coding/ programming, (whatever I wanna do), best one I've had yet, I absolutely prefer it to the phone, which is the opposite of that, cause all the money went to the pc.
Actually took a while to unravel this place, I detest mobile tech (IE, phone is cheapest one I could get, no data/talk & text, only use wifi) BUT, I smoke, so end up using it on the patio, cause I don't smoke indoors lol.
Originally created two accounts, one on PC, and another using a tablet, THEN found out they were not the same account, tried to merge them, merged them into THIS one, and meant to do it the other way, lost all my followers, saved some subs, but it was a huge pain in the ass. And the whole time, I was cursing SS for (apparently), spending way more time in the mobile API, than they do with the website's UI. I've always found that kind of bizarre for a site about writing, like, you really expect me to write 3000+ words, on a device the size of a half slice of Wonder bread? 🤣🤷 Seems a bit nuts to me....
It’s just this one account that needs me to sign in and subscribe, just to leave a comment
Well, I mean, I'm still commenting, still on the app, and still not subscribed, but I NEVER have to sign in again on the app, only on desktop. If I'm for example, accessing SS with Firefox, or Brave, and click ON the comment box underneath the piece, it opens another page, with no "dark mode" background, meaning, I am outside of my "account" per se, there, since it's outside of my settings inside SS, I'm not subscribed, or signed in.
Try this: To avoid trying to comment there, I go back, to where the piece is, in the feed, and click slightly to the left or right of where the picture, or title appears, like each item in the feed is a square, click slightly outside of that, where the cursor's not ON the piece, but still has focus. This opens the comments without taking you to that outside page. You know it's an outside page, cause it gives an option to "also post this to the newsfeed", or whatever it says. HTH
I can reply to you from the “activity” portion of substack, but if I click on the link to reply from the comment section, it needs me to sign in and subscribe.
I’m using pc, as you intuited.
Thanks for the advice; I’ll try it out.
I have noticed that even while signed in on some ‘stacks (like Jeff Tiedrich’s even though I am a paid subscriber it always makes me resign in to comment. it says ‘subscribe’ but I never have to actually resub up just resign in with my password, I think it might be a security feature, and many ‘stacks’ like Wonkette, when not signed in will let you click “no just let me read it.”
I meant, "respond to replies ON comments I'd already made", didn't make sense the way I wrote it lol.
🎯 wanker lol dont do it
I followed the civil litigation case launched by Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis who would leave the privacy of her upper eastside home and deliver her face in public, usually on the sidewalks of NYC. Her suit sought relief from the Paparazzi, who made big money by capturing her image out in the public. She did not win a decision that granted her privacy in a IV Amendment standard in public places. Here is the case but not from SCOTUS
https://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/torts/torts-keyed-to-franklin/galella-v-onassis/
From AI,
The U.S. Supreme Court has never directly ruled on a case involving Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis and the Fourth Amendment. However, her name is famously associated with the landmark privacy and paparazzi battle Galella v. Onassis, which explored the constitutional bounds of privacy, though it was decided by federal appellate and district courts rather than the Supreme Court.In the 1972-1973 Galella decisions, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals issued sweeping injunctions against freelance photographer Ronald Galella. These courts found that Galella’s aggressive stalking and relentless photography constituted harassment and an invasion of privacy.In the lower court's opinion, Judge Cooper noted that individual privacy derives protection from several constitutional sources, including Fourth Amendment restrictions against unreasonable searches and seizures, combined with First Amendment rights of free association. The court ultimately concluded that the First Amendment does not provide a license to harass, endanger, or constantly shadow public figures. The Supreme Court declined to hear Galella’s final appeals, allowing the strict restraining orders against him to stand.
I went to the DeFlock website and tried to download the map multiple times. Each time it failed. Hmm. I wonder why?
Let me guess. 99% of revenue comes from government contracts. IMO, private military and surveillance companies and their investors are the real terrorists.
I agree. These days ‘security’ personnel seem to be thugs or thug wanna-bes who suffer from an excess of testosterone.
The Oregon Lottery has approximately 10,500 surveillance bot slot machines in 1800 private restaurants, bars, and strip mall casinos. There are no warnings to citizens. This private player and customer data is then stored at the State agency Data Center headquarters in Salem, Oregon. It was announced and confirmed May 29th, 2026 in the Lottery annual meeting.
Like everything invented I am totally against improper use by anyone. There seems little doubt this is a good tool to thwart certain crooks. It requires statutes or licenses to use. One size does not fit all.
I am an anti crime zealot, however Flock crosses the line, and has intentions of crossing further to the extreme limits of violation of citizen personal privacy rights. If this technology is going to be allowed at all, it must be regulated tightly to protect the privacy of non criminal citizens. In the absence of this regulation, we are allowing the existence and growth of a dystopian police state. It’s never a case of if, but only when, this authority will be misused. History, time and time again, illustrates this truth.
You are correct.
Couple observations. I ran deFlock for my zip code, one covering a small town and a very large rural area in two counties. Five cameras. Two near one another out in the sticks, on intersecting highways. One on a state highway on the opposite side of the zip code in the next county. Two in the same Lowe's parking lot. Lowe's no doubt teamed up with Flock and local PD to address theft.
I'm retired LE, started back in the late 80s. Training gave no doubt even back then that you had to have a good reason to query LE databases. A criminal history? You'd better have a case number if it was for a criminal investigation. Or be doing a bone fide assigned background check. Audits were done where the state and sometimes feds came in. Looking up a case that's not yours, trying to access the a narrative report? It flags. Look up porn? It flags. People got disciplined as they should have been. Stalking someone? Our local sheriff discussing Flock cameras publicly stated if he caught a deputy misusing the Flock system like that, he'd fire them. I have no doubt he would.
Sadly, in Kentucky the AG has allowed LMPD to keep flock camera locations secret, and the LMPD has already been caught misusing the information from Flock cameras to stalk ex romantic partners. Warrants don't mean much to the LMPD.
Sounds like your local sheriff had some integrity. Many don’t.
Horseshit. This goes waaay beyond some local yuck yuck sherrif. It's a rughts violation and certainly a biolation of the 4th. Maybe you live under a rock but by 2030 the new world order will be implemented and they olab on breaking people financially until yoy're willing to live in their concrete block room and show your digital id with all of your vax shots for made up pandemics. Leo and the military will be right there with them to help enforce it too!