Ring is terminating its partnership with police tech provider Flock Safety, the Amazon-owned company announced Thursday.

The partnership between Flock and Ring came under scrutiny after the Amazon doorbell company ran an ad during the Super Bowl that touted a “Search Party” feature that uses AI to help locate lost pets. When a user initiates the feature, it activates a network of participating Ring cameras, which scan footage for images resembling the missing dog. The Electronic Frontier Foundation called the feature a “surveillance nightmare.”

Flock, meanwhile, operates a network of automated license plate readers, and sells access to that software to customers that include law enforcement agencies.

Ring’s decision to cancel its partnership with Flock comes as tech companies face growing pressure to reexamine their work with federal agencies including Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Earlier this week, Salesforce employees pressed CEO Marc Benioff to cancel “ICE opportunities,” CNBC reported. More than 900 Google employees also asked their company to divest itself from ICE and U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

all 6 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 31 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Friends, this is PR. wait til next quarter when they are exchanging data and learned not to make a fuss about it.

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

    I'm more curious to see if they're working with Palantir than Flock. There's already a lot of push back against Flock, and some places actively working to ban it. Palantir isn't in the spotlight as much, and without a doubt much worse.

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

    They're all heads of the same hydra but with different names. All invested in each other, able to fall and the capital reabsorbed and redistributed. But I do agree Palantir, and especially the figure heads involved, need a little more public ire

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 8 months ago

    *slow clap*

    Now they’ll just quietly re-write it into the terms of service, send you a notification you’ll ignore and - bingo

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 8 months ago
    [–] 5 points 8 months ago

    Interesting

  • source
  • 37 comments in c/technology@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 142 points 8 months ago (10 children)

    I’m just glad people were smart enough to realize the implications of “finding lost dogs”. I immediately thought this implied terrible surveillance uses. I asked my wife about how she thought this would work and she thought it was very sweet (she and I are both dog lovers). I said so how are they “identifying these dogs?” She went through the mental process… “they just take the footage and use the same facial recognition to see if a dog matches a missing one…. Oh yeah, that’s bad”.

    I guess a lot of other people did the same thing.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 8 months ago (9 children)

    Does facial recognition even work on animals? I seriously doubt it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    Depends on how sophisticated it is. My iPhone has been able to correctly identify and tell apart different cats for about 3 years now and gets it right 90% of the time.

    And before I get the comments: yes, I’m about to fully leave the Apple ecosystem.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago

    Yes absolutely it does. If you use Google Photos or Apple Photos they will handily identify every instance of your dog’s face. It’s not quite as accurate as people, but they’re perfect capable with little effort.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 192 points 8 months ago (8 children)

    Not buying it.

    The product leadership, directors and executives who dreamed this nightmare up and believed in it enough to make it a reality are still there.

    Never trust them again.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 72 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    This happens every time there is blow back on something like this.

    They will reverse course and slow walk it a bit every 3 or 4 months and we will be back here in a years time.

    Someone's bonus depends on this deal at Amazon, they are still going into work tomorrow and they still want that bonus.

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

    It feels like the cat’s out of the bag and they will just go ahead with whatever they planned on doing with this partnership, but not be as open about it. Bury it somewhere in the user agreement.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Agreed. For anyone not already following Louis Rossmann, he's a right-to-repair guy on an anti-surveilance arc and is always posting good information that will make you seethe.

    His city tried to buy Flock cameras and he organized enough resistance that they cancelled... but then they are trying again a while later, assuming the scrutiny is off: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MiLiQ6olkI

    Ring will do the same thing.

    Microslop, Meta, Google, et al will get their hands slapped when they are too proud about how they are fucking you, and then will issue a retraction, but only long enough to let the anger die out before doing it again more quietly.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    They can also be, not to put too fine a point on it, petty dicks about it.

    My city banned Flock cameras. So there are a bunch of them juuust outside the city limits. Since official city limits lag behind development they're at intersections you would otherwise think were in the city.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 89 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    “Following a comprehensive review, we determined the planned Flock Safety integration would require significantly more time and resources than anticipated,” Ring wrote in a blog post. “As a result, we have made the joint decision to cancel the planned integration.”

    Not necessarily because of privacy concerns.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 47 points 8 months ago

    Absolutely not because of privacy concerns. But definitely not about a resources or time issue. This is them responding to the negative backlash without acknowledging their tone deaf Superbowl ad. If there was time or resource issue they wouldn't have dropped tens of millions of dollars bragging about it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago

    They are all over the place with their communication. I checked specifically when they first announced this partnership. And it turned out that when you share your videos with public safety, it was also being shared to Flock. And only the specific videos you choose to share. So I thought it was a big nothing before all this — just don't share videos with public safety. I never have and never will.

    But to walk their cooperation back must mean they got significant complaints and need to do some PR. Or they tried some shit that wasn't spelled out in their privacy statement.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 59 points 8 months ago
    [–] 48 points 8 months ago

    They already lost a bunch of people, some destroyed the devices too so no secondhand market customers from them either.

    That leopard is gonna get diabetes from all those sweet faces it's eating.

  • source
  • [–] 31 points 8 months ago

    No they didnt

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 8 months ago

    Who gives a shit if they cancelled thier flock partnership, they're still partners with ICE.

  • source
  • [–] 38 points 8 months ago

    Cancel your prime membership!

  • source
  • [–] 28 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Huh. Looks like public outcry does work. I'm sure doomers will try to pretend this was a one time fluke.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 18 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Still absolutely blows my mind people willingly install these

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago

    That was an interesting move by them, considering they’re seeing in real time the short term effects - when did target “rebrand”?

  • source