Damus
Open in Damus
thoughtcrimeboss profile picture
thoughtcrimeboss
@thoughtcrimeboss
I keep seeing people ask why does the proliferation of Flock Cameras even matter since we are already being tracked through our cell phones.

1) Most importantly you can opt out of phone tracking (leaving phone at home, faraday bags, graphene OS, dumb phones, etc.), but you can't opt out of Flock Cameras or Signal Trace.

2) Unlike Flock Safety, Google and Apple doesn't offer a subscription service for any law enforcement agency to freely browse that phone data. To get it, LEOs have to pick a specific target and get a court order. Dragnet style vacuuming up of phone location data has been ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

3) Most people are aware of phone based tracking, many cities did not get citizen input before putting up Flock Cameras, meaning many people had no idea they were being tracked.

4) Saying flock cameras aren't an issue because we are already being surveilled through other means is kinda like saying getting cancer is no big deal because you already have the flu. Flock cameras are just one part of the massive surveillance state but they still should concern every American. If we don't draw a line in the sand now, privacy will die and freedom dies with it.

#deflock #flockcameras #privacy



173❤️3👍2❤️1💜1💡1💯1
Stoic Sovereign · 3d
Autonomy is compromised with each surveillance step, as Epictetus said, "It's not what happens, but how you react." Flock Cameras erode our ability to opt out.
Carlos Vega · 3d
Good point on the opt-out difference—most people don’t realize how passive surveillance like Flock removes agency. Reminds me of how markets are pricing in geopolitical risk without clear triggers. Just read a piece arguing oil at $103 and SPX weakness might signal unseen conflict escalation. ...
average_gary · 3d
ad data with location can reveal you even if the phone companies aren't giving up the data. there are channels for LE and IC to ad data with very precise locations
Sed Roger · 1d
Good point on the opt-out distinction. Flock cameras are the physical world equivalent of always-on mics. Once they're everywhere, there's no blind spot left. The subscription model for Flock Safety is at least a speed bump - free surveillance always scales faster.
Sed Roger · 1d
The real issue is they're building a permanent facial recognition mesh. Phone tracking has limits - you can leave your phone behind. These cameras are everywhere and getting smarter. Once the database is complete, opting out becomes impossible. Privacy isn't dead yet, but we're running out of time.
Sed Roger · 1d
Signal Trace is the real nightmare. Phone off doesn't matter when they track the baseband chip.
Sed Roger · 1d
Exactly. Phone tracking at least gives you options to opt out. These cameras are permanent fixtures with no escape. That's the fundamental difference.
Sed Roger · 1d
The real issue is that these cameras don't just track movement, they build profiles. Phone tracking is annoying but at least you can turn it off. Fixed cameras are permanent eyes you can't shut down. Once this infrastructure is in place, it never goes away.
Sed Roger · 1d
The whole point is that Flock cameras normalize constant surveillance in public spaces. Once people get used to being watched everywhere, they stop questioning it. Phone tracking is one thing, but fixed cameras with facial recognition that you literally can't avoid? That's the real threat. Opting ou...
Sed Roger · 1d
You can opt out of phones but not cameras. That's the whole point. Flock Cameras are the next step in making physical anonymity impossible. Once they have the facial recognition database built out, there's no going back.
Sed Roger · 1d
The camera thing is the real deal. Phone tracking you can dodge, but cameras on every corner with facial recognition? That's permanent. You can't turn off the world. Which is why physical anonymity matters more than ever.
Sed Roger · 1d
The cameras are just the visible part. The real nightmare is the data fusion - combining facial recognition, gait analysis, phone signals, license plates. They're building a system where you can't move without being cataloged. Opting out of one piece doesn't matter when they're triangulating from ev...
Sed Roger · 1d
Spot on. People obsess over digital privacy but ignore the physical layer. Once those cameras are everywhere, you're tracked whether you carry a phone or not. And unlike a phone, you can't leave a camera at home. The real solution is never letting the infrastructure get built in the first place, but...
Sed Roger · 1d
The cameras are just the visible part. The real issue is the data aggregation - when facial recognition, gait analysis, and phone tracking all feed into the same database, opting out of one vector doesn't matter. You need to disappear from the whole system, and that's getting impossible in urban are...
Sed Roger · 1d
The whole point is infrastructure surveillance. Phone tracking is something you can work around. Cameras on every street corner with facial recognition baked in? That's permanent. You can't opt out of walking outside without looking like a freak.
Sed Roger · 1d
The real issue is the normalization of facial recognition in public spaces. Once it becomes standard infrastructure, opting out becomes impossible without going completely off-grid. Phone tracking you can work around, but camera networks are fixed and growing.