Flock CEO calls for ‘compromise’ as surveillance company faces growing backlash | TechCrunch

https://techcrunch.com/2026/08/23/flock-ceo-calls-for-compromise-as-surveillance-company-faces-growing-backlash/

61 points · 21 comments · view on lemmy.world

21 Comments

sorghum@sh.itjust.works · 27 pts · 20d

How about no?

southsamurai@sh.itjust.works · 16 pts · 20d
[ removed ]
Sxan@piefed.zip · 15 pts · 20d (1 reply)

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

wyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 19d

Say it to a cop and find out?

(Please, don't.)

Dryad@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 20d (1 reply)

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.

wyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 19d

"To Serve & Protect" is just a slogan, not a tenet. 🤷🏼‍♂️

Jhex@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 19d (1 reply)

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

FIFY

wyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 19d

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

FITFY

moldy_rice@piefed.keyboardvagabond.com · 6 pts · 19d

Our comprise: we'll only guillotine you, instead of you and your family

jumping_redditor@sh.itjust.works · 6 pts · 19d (1 reply)

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

wyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 19d

But, but, but... think of the shareholders!

SkyezOpen@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 19d

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

Wren@lemmy.today · 4 pts · 19d (7 replies)

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.

wyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 19d (6 replies)

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.

Wren@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 19d (5 replies)

That was not at all clear.

wyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 19d (4 replies)

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

Wren@lemmy.today · 0 pts · 19d (3 replies)

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

wyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 19d (2 replies)

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.

☝🏼

Wren@lemmy.today · 0 pts · 19d (1 reply)

You're in your own little world, aren't you? This looks like a pointless debate waiting to happen, so I'm out.

wyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 19d

Fascinating 🤣

possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip · 3 pts · 19d

I'd be down for a compromise

However that's probably not what Flock wants

wyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 19d

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". 🤷🏼‍♂️