Birbla

Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

Sign in
  • Hacker News
  • As much as I dislike flock, this only seems like an indictment on the police.
    by demibabs
  • Surveillance cameras (not Flock, sounds like) are what allowed the police to spend ridiculous amounts of the city's time chasing (checks notes) $295 of damage to a swing from totally normal use by a couple of pre-teens.

    Swings have always broken. Before widespread surveillance the swing would have just been replaced or not and everyone would have moved on.

    by demosthanos
  • > They tell me in a lengthy statement in part that the department would never issue an ultimatum of pay for the damage or your children will be charged. They tell me quote, "We simply don't operate that way." Rather, the department's approach was consistent among the five juveniles involved in the incident. The damage was divided equally and an opportunity was provided to address the matter through restitution rather than unnecessarily continuing juvenile proceeding.

    Lol. The same thing, but obfuscated. It's not "pay for the damage"; it's "an opportunity was provided to address the matter through restitution". It's not "or your children will be charged"; it's "rather than unnecessarily continuing juvenile proceeding". Add extra fluff at the start to bury the lede, then avoid the trigger words and pretend it's something different.

    by jolmg
  • "Your children won't be charged! They'll just be arrested"
    by saghm
  • Three questions:

    1. Why is the city creeping on children with surveillance cameras? I'd be tempted to run for city council and beat that drum until the head broke (but then I'd have to serve on the city council).

    2. How did they identify the children enough to come to their home? Might have read the license plate, but reporting is unclear.

    3. Why is our municipality buying such crappy equipment that it fails when kids do what kids have done with swings for 100 years or more?

    by mikestew
  • I'm getting really fed up of this. It's it about time we the people rise up and make it clear how appallingly unacceptable it is to hold your lavalier microphone.

    But on topic, it's amazing they're getting these things through budget meetings. Are Flock just giving them away in Y1? They're ~$3k including installation and that clip showed several in one area overlapping. Even for legit crime-fighting, that's a lot of taxpayer green on the line for a park.

    "We caught the culprits for damaging a $10 swing chain and spent $3000 surveilling them, $200 demanding three settle and $500 prosecuting one in court."

    All for doing something that every who's ever been on a swing has done. Everyone involved in taking this to court should personally pay damages and lose their job.

    by oliwarner
  • Bulk of these cameras are actually installed at the behest of the control freaks sitting on HOAs. They are the real target audience for these cameras because they love the power trip over other people. It seems if you don't get enough attention as a child, you will just grow up to become a control freak.
    by neya
  • Its just a lot (a lot lot lot) of people think that they have the right to own/control/manage all other people around them. Then, beyond that, there's this super pernicious idea that you're a kid until you're like 33 or something.

    Meanwhile, my grandad lied about his age to go kill Nazis as a teenager. This infantalization of grown-ass people is distressing.

    by piloto_ciego
  • We talked about them in my neighborhood mainly because of package theft. If I ever thought there was a real chance of enforcement action, I’d be in favor.
    by y1n0
  • There are plenty of people here working on surveillance tech. Is this the world you want to be building?
    by fedpost
  • I’d say a lot of people don’t care if it doesn’t affect them directly, and if they can exploit a moral boundary to get rich they’ll do it.
    by MiscCompFacts
  • How much money did they waste in police and court resources over a swing obviously in disrepair if it broke so easily? How much resources/money did they waste having someone create invoices for numerous children/families? How much resources/money did they waste on harassing/tormenting children and their families instead of just fixing the damn thing?

    So nice to see such enormous time and resources being spent on catching actual criminals

    by aspbee555
  • right, it probably cost two new swing sets in people's time to make this even happen.
    by kraken_cult
  • To be fair, the powers that be do see children and their families as "actual criminals." They literally charged them with a crime!

    This is their idea of what counts as a real criminal. Instead of, say, someone who rapes children. They'll vote for that person!

    by riskable
  • If the chain broke from twisting it up and letting it go, it was in disrepair before the kids started using it. Maybe the city admin should be charged with negligence for letting the infrastructure crumble.
    by donmcronald
  • Child endangerment
    by downrightmike
  • I don't think we understand yet the kind of world we are building.

    All the small decisions we are making will shape our future: algorithmic decision making, social network broadcasting and "self-reporting", light-speed meme transmission, always-on audio and video surveillance... the list goes on and on. One day we'll wake up to see we've build a jail around us we can't escape.

    by nomagicbullet
  • The consumer chooses convenience for skill/knowledge and then complains about the outcome of their choice.

    It's wild.

    by chneu
  • "One day"? You're years late I'd say. Enjoy the downhill ride, it's not about to end.
    by hollow-moe
  • The vermin that are building it understand it just fine.
    by vkou
  • Oh, many of us understand quite clearly what world was being built. I'd argue most members of marginalized groups knew damn well what kind of world was being built by those in power.

    That being said, one of the best ways to fight surveillance as a concept is authenticity. The goal of the watchers is enforce constraints - limit where you go, who you talk to, how you dress, how you behave, etc - and remaining defiantly authentic lets them know those tactics won't work while simultaneously broadcasting to others that you reject the power those cameras have over you.

    Surveillance succeeds because of fear, and it always falls because of authenticity.

    by stego-tech
  • I was thinking few days ago something that is very common feature in my city, which made us unsafe in the name of safety without most of us realizing at all.

    So, in my city each and every window has metal grills, without anyway to open them, nor we have fire exit, except very few. So, the only way out is the frontdoor. Reason being, It's unsafe to have open windows because of robbers, thieves, rapist etc, which is legit safety concern. But you only have one way out of your safe heaven, the frontdoor, so what happens the day your stairs caught fire? Or earthquake blocks the front door? Or someone just sits there with a gun? You have no way out of your own home.

    We really have built jail around us, that we can't escape.

    by t_mahmood
  • When I was a kid twisting a swing so you could ride it as it untwisted was something that happend dozens of times every recess. This was something every kid did. If your playground equipment falls apart as a result of the standard way kids use a swing then I think that is a manufacture issue not criminal behavior by a 10 year old
    by uberman
  • It's marginally cheaper to install flimsy chains and surveillance than to pony up for a slightly thicker gauge chain get out of here with your common sense /s
    by smalltorch
  • Yep! We used to call it "twist and shout". Tons of fun.
    by rpdillon
  • Right? Growing up in the eighties we'd twist, stand on them, double up, back flip out of them.
    by swader999
  • Why is a 3rd party company keeping videos of people's children? Why aren't the parents concerned about this?
    by Avicebron
  • https://www.yahoo.com/news/us/articles/pennsylvania-girls-10...

    "The borough also says visitors encounter its "Play Smart Rules" when entering the park, including a specific instruction: "Do not twist chains.""

    So the town buys crappy swings, knowing full well that kids are going to spin them (who hasn't done this a million times as a kid?) Then they slap up a sign telling the kids not to do that. Basically entrapment.

    Here's an idea for them: maybe the town shouldn't cheap out on unsafe equipment for children...

    by GlibMonkeyDeath
  • That link is an activist YouTube channel. Closest I could find to a news organization reporting on this:

    https://www.wtae.com/article/springdale-playground-swing-cou...

    by neilv
  • No mention of Flock anywhere in the text
    by sparkling