Hacker News Reader

>> False, he is forcing Flock on EVERYONE

>> No one has permitted themselves to be surveilled

> As much as I dislike Flock, this is bad logic. There's no such thing as opting out of surveillance in public spaces.

You're agreeing that he is forcing flock on people. Legality doesn't make it not-forced. Not needing consent is different from receiving consent.

View on HN

I mean, he's not. Police departments and other organizations who buy and install Flock cameras are the ones doing the "forcing".

Again, I'm pretty anti-Flock, but place the blame where it's due and use good logic to support that.

But Flock is happy to see them installed that way. They are collaborating and all responsible.

I don't understand this argument. How is Flock "collaborating" by selling their product? Sure they're happy their product is selling. How does that imply collaboration?

I mean, you're welcome to buy an Apple Vision Pro, but you making poor decisions with your money doesn't make Apple responsible for that.

When a government department takes down Flock cameras why does Flock put new ones up?

I mean, that's a really good question.

Do you have an answer? I certainly don't

Because they are building a global mass surveillance network to track everyone all the time, not helping out cities.

Except that's a conspiracy theory, not reality?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com