all 21 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 26 points 2 months ago

How about no?

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    How's "no"? Does "no" work?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Amazing how since the beginning of policing, officers have managed to do their work without these cameras. Maybe they should just do that for the safety part and flock should just stop existing as a company for the privacy part.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Flock Safety faces a growing public outcry over concerns that its surveillance technology could be misused has already been repeatedly and predictably misused.

    FIFY

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    how about flock stop working with the government and sell a product instead of a bullshit service

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • Our comprise: we'll only guillotine you, instead of you and your family

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago

    People will stop tearing down cameras, and in exchange, flock will do it themselves. Sounds like a solid compromise to me.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (7 children)

    No kidding. Their proposed safety features to stop police stalking make the police accountable to themselves. Oh, and the police can shut off some of those safety features, and again, it's up to the police to catch them.

    The world is one big kangaroo court and we gave all the children guns.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago* (6 children)

    Let's be clear, the kids with guns we're focused on (as a "country") are the ones bringing them to school, and it's the no-dick "adult" backbirths with guns who're the salient problem here.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (5 children)
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (4 children)

    Which part? The kids shooting up their schools or the "police" who piss themselves when tasked with actually doing their fucking jobs? 😅

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    Oh I see, you're off on your own tangent here. I was wondering why you responded to me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago* (2 children)

    Nope.

    No kidding. Their proposed safety features to stop police stalking make the police accountable to themselves. Oh, and the police can shut off some of those safety features, and again, it's up to the police to catch them.

    The world is one big kangaroo court and we gave all the children guns.

    ☝🏼

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago

    I'd be down for a compromise

    However that's probably not what Flock wants

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago

    Might be off-topic, but back in my youth, the night before Halloween was Devil's Night: when Detroit was lit by the flames of ill-conceived arson & related "pranks". 🤷🏼‍♂️

  • source
  • 222 comments in c/technology@lemmy.world view that post
    11 comments in c/technology@beehaw.org view that post