3 monthsNot buying it.
The product leadership, directors and executives who dreamed this nightmare up and believed in it enough to make it a reality are still there.
Never trust them again.
- tempest@lemmy.caEnglish3 months
This happens every time there is blow back on something like this.
They will reverse course and slow walk it a bit every 3 or 4 months and we will be back here in a years time.
Someone’s bonus depends on this deal at Amazon, they are still going into work tomorrow and they still want that bonus.
- devedeset@lemmy.zipEnglish2 months
Or they’ll just build a backdoor into it (it probably already exists) and never talk about it again.
- Ugandan Airways@lemmy.zipEnglish2 months
It feels like the cat’s out of the bag and they will just go ahead with whatever they planned on doing with this partnership, but not be as open about it. Bury it somewhere in the user agreement.
- korazail@lemmy.myserv.oneEnglish2 months
Agreed. For anyone not already following Louis Rossmann, he’s a right-to-repair guy on an anti-surveilance arc and is always posting good information that will make you seethe.
His city tried to buy Flock cameras and he organized enough resistance that they cancelled… but then they are trying again a while later, assuming the scrutiny is off: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MiLiQ6olkI
Ring will do the same thing.
Microslop, Meta, Google, et al will get their hands slapped when they are too proud about how they are fucking you, and then will issue a retraction, but only long enough to let the anger die out before doing it again more quietly.
- turmacar@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
They can also be, not to put too fine a point on it, petty dicks about it.
My city banned Flock cameras. So there are a bunch of them juuust outside the city limits. Since official city limits lag behind development they’re at intersections you would otherwise think were in the city.
- D_C@sh.itjust.worksEnglish2 months
Ok, keep on distrusting them like before…but this time do it with a bit more pizzazz. Maybe do some jazz hands?
- billwashere@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I’m just glad people were smart enough to realize the implications of “finding lost dogs”. I immediately thought this implied terrible surveillance uses. I asked my wife about how she thought this would work and she thought it was very sweet (she and I are both dog lovers). I said so how are they “identifying these dogs?” She went through the mental process… “they just take the footage and use the same facial recognition to see if a dog matches a missing one…. Oh yeah, that’s bad”.
I guess a lot of other people did the same thing.
- 3 months
Does facial recognition even work on animals? I seriously doubt it.
- Oak_Kitten@slrpnk.netEnglish3 months
Depends on how sophisticated it is. My iPhone has been able to correctly identify and tell apart different cats for about 3 years now and gets it right 90% of the time.
And before I get the comments: yes, I’m about to fully leave the Apple ecosystem.
- Oak_Kitten@slrpnk.netEnglish3 months
My current cats are pretty different: 1 tux and 1 brown tabby. However in the past we’ve had another 2 tuxes. Those are usually where the mixups happen, between the 3 tux cats. But even those tend to work out most of the time.
- Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
Yes absolutely it does. If you use Google Photos or Apple Photos they will handily identify every instance of your dog’s face. It’s not quite as accurate as people, but they’re perfect capable with little effort.
- 2 months
It’s not just facial recognition anymore, though, they’re looking at all kinds of other stuff, even how you walk.
- sunbytes@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
“Here are 4000 images we took of quadrupeds within 5 miles of your house.”
- Renorc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
“Following a comprehensive review, we determined the planned Flock Safety integration would require significantly more time and resources than anticipated,” Ring wrote in a blog post. “As a result, we have made the joint decision to cancel the planned integration.”
Not necessarily because of privacy concerns.
- III@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
Absolutely not because of privacy concerns. But definitely not about a resources or time issue. This is them responding to the negative backlash without acknowledging their tone deaf Superbowl ad. If there was time or resource issue they wouldn’t have dropped tens of millions of dollars bragging about it.
- Evotech@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
They can’t say that out loud of course. They do the same thing.
But it’s obviously to mitigate the current shitstorm
- MagicShel@lemmy.zipEnglish2 months
They are all over the place with their communication. I checked specifically when they first announced this partnership. And it turned out that when you share your videos with public safety, it was also being shared to Flock. And only the specific videos you choose to share. So I thought it was a big nothing before all this — just don’t share videos with public safety. I never have and never will.
But to walk their cooperation back must mean they got significant complaints and need to do some PR. Or they tried some shit that wasn’t spelled out in their privacy statement.
- db2@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
They already lost a bunch of people, some destroyed the devices too so no secondhand market customers from them either.
That leopard is gonna get diabetes from all those sweet faces it’s eating.
Huh. Looks like public outcry does work. I’m sure doomers will try to pretend this was a one time fluke.
Who gives a shit if they cancelled thier flock partnership, they’re still partners with ICE.
- AndyMFK@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish2 months
Still absolutely blows my mind people willingly install these
That was an interesting move by them, considering they’re seeing in real time the short term effects - when did target “rebrand”?
