Comment by mlmonkey
8 hours ago
This wouldn't be a story if the cops did not put the wrong license plate in the system. How is it Flock's fault? Flock is just doing what it is being asked to do!
Let me put in simple terms: Flock flags license plates that are given to it. Someone, somewhere says, license plate "ABCD1234" has a warrant out. And guess what, if Flock sees that plate, it _will_ flag it each. and. every. time!
Tomorrow, say an "Amber Alert" is issued for a pink Ford Taurus with plate "PINKLADY" (when in fact it was a red Taurus with the plate "MADLAD"). Don't you think anyone driving around in a pink Ford Taurus with that plate should be pulled over?
How are all these dead baby seals Flock's fault? They simply released the Auto Baby Seal Clubber 9000 on beaches that have baby seals. It's the people that keep submitting "club baby seals" to the system that are the problem.
What I want to know is who is manufacturing these police cars that let these cops travel to execute unlawful warrants. "Oh, but it's not our fault. We just built due-process-violation machines. It's the police who are driving them to citizen's locations and violating due process." Come on.
Once? Maybe. And then the cops do their jobs and determine that PINKLADY is not who they're actually looking for, and they go on their way.
Multiple times? Police laziness fueled by AI incompetence
The people getting caught up in this have been pulled over multiple times.
"They can't remove it without knowing who the warrant is for" is absolutely Flocks problem.
They're alerting on a license plate but yet somehow they can't turn off that license plate alert using just the license plate number? Fucking bullshit
Wouldn't it be the purview of the cops to update Flock that the plate is no longer of interest and to stop alerting on it? I'm no fan of Flock, but let's put the onus where it is deserved.
> Flock is just doing what it is being asked to do!
Well then clearly they are not a problem.
Hmm, I wonder what Flock proponents would say when immediately asked about guns, after all, it's just a machine doing what it is being asked to do!
This is precisely what they mean when they say "guns don't kill people, bad people with guns kill people"
1 reply →
Are we up in arms about gun manufacturers selling guns to the police because police sometimes misuse them?
they'd only support fully AI-driven guns with zero oversight
Pigeonholing responsibility onto one party is what allows these mutually-dependent systems to point fingers at one another to escape blame. Rather, the responsibility here is shared. If you want to focus your call for reform on the police (for both making an overly-broad list, and also for harming innocent motorists without compensating them for the damage), then I agree that's more appropriate for this particular problem. But don't absolve Flock.
>Pigeonholing responsibility onto one party is what allows these mutually-dependent systems to point fingers at one another to escape blame
Exactly. The responsibility can't all be pinned on one party and divided no party has enough of it.
Collective guilt needs to make a comeback. Make people and systems have an incentive to associate with malicious or shoddy people or systems.
I think if you are driving around in a pink Ford Taurus you are definitely guilty of something even if the plate reads MARYKAY
bad taste isn't a crime lmao
Tell that to the fashion police.
If Flock flags license plates at the request of the government, it is acting as an agent of the state and is required to meet governement/constitutional requirements.
How does flock get around this? It can't be an agent of the state AND be private and exempts from 4th amendment/all constitutional requirements?
https://www.fletc.gov/audio/definition-government-agent-unde...
Solari: No sir, unless he was for some reason acting on behalf of the government or had been asked by a government agent to do that. Unless that were the case then if that person was acting in his own private capacity as a UPS or FedEx employee then he would not be a government agent for 4th Amendment purposes.
Miller: Can private parties ever trigger the 4th Amendment?
Solari: Yes, as we discussed, if a private party were to be acting at the behest of the government -- if a government agent were to ask that FedEx person to open up a package and look inside, or to ask someone’s girlfriend to go through their things looking for evidence to turn over to the police, then that would be government activity. That would be the actions of a government agent because government agents can’t ask private parties to do something they themselves couldn’t do under the 4th Amendment, so in that type of instance it would be extended to that private party.