190
Flock is canceled—and its competitors are profiting (www.motherjones.com)
submitted 2 months ago by to c/technology@beehaw.org
25 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 14 points 2 months ago (3 children)

I'm pretty sure part of why this is all being done is because the police can't legally do this. A third party company can though, and police can purchase access (in their theory at least, though this is being tested).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Maybe police shouldn't be allowed to pay a third party to do something they themselves aren't allowed to do. Just a thought.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago

    Absolutely. It's stupid that they maybe possibly can. It's being tested in the courts. They definitely are allowed to abuse it to some extent, but maybe not like they are with these cameras. It doesn't make any sense either way though.

    The way phone data works, they have to get a warrant. They aren't legally allowed to obtain it from phone companies until they have one, even if the company is more than happy to provide it. How this doesn't automatically apply in the same way to these cameras is crazy.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent