Comment by lubujackson

> Did you see the other post about this where the guys showed a Flock camera pointed at a playground, so any pedo can see when kids are there and not attended?

If it's inappropriate for any pedo to see when kids are in a park then certainly it should inappropriate when those pedos just happen to be police officers or Flock employees. The nice thing about the "everyone has access" case is that it forces the public to decide what they think is acceptable instead of making it some abstract thing that their brains aren't able to process correctly.

People will happily stand under mounted surveillance cameras all day long, but the moment they actually see someone point a camera at them they consider that a hostile action. The surveillance camera is an abstract concept they don't understand. The stranger pointing a camera in their direction is something they do understand and it makes their true feelings on strangers recording them very clear.

We might need a little bit of "everyone has access" to convince people of the truth that "no one should have access" instead.

If you're that worried about child molesters knowing where the kids are, I've got very bad news for you: https://www.statista.com/statistics/254893/child-abuse-in-th...

Turns out, 95% of the predators already know exactly where the victims are, usually because it's their kid. Probably we want to worry about that a lot more.

Doubly so since, y'know, this only works if the predator lives close enough to act on the information before it changes - so the tiny possibility of a predator, a tiny possibility that they didn't already know this, and a tiny possibility of being able to act on the information...

> so any pedo can see when kids are there and not attended?

Sure. It also lets parents watch. Or others see when parents are repeatedly leaving their kids unattended. Or lets you see some person that keeps showing up unattended and watching the kids.

> Or how it has become increasingly trivial to identify by face or license plate such that combining tools reaches "movie Interpol" levels, without any warrant or security credentials?

That already exists and it is run by private companies and sold to government agencies. That’s a huge power grab.

> The best defense is actually the glut of data and the fact nobody is actively watching you picking your nose in the elevator. If everyone can utilize any camera and its history for any reason then expect fractal chaos and internet shaming.

This argument holds whether it is public or not. It is worse if Flock or the government can do this asymmetrically than if anyone can do it IMO, they already have enough coercive tools.

There are sites that index thousands of public live streaming cameras, with search fields where you can just enter "park" and get live cams with kids playing, because people have specifically arranged for those cameras to exist.