[text0404]

Even more concerning is that Ring is partnering with Flock [1], which has been the subject of quite a bit of controversy recently [2][3][4], with the CEO lashing out at critics with inflammatory language [5][6].

[1] https://www.flocksafety.com/blog/flock-safety-and-ring-partn...

[2] https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/flock-roundup

[3] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/feb/10/ice-school-c...

[4] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/12/effs-investigations-ex...

[5] https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/flock-ceo-goes-...

[6] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46903556

[whatthe12899]

> the reduction in crime is not solely due to Flock, but is has definitely helped.

what's the theory? murderers see flock cams and decide not to murder? most of the general public doesn't even know what these cameras are (or that they even exist).

[dyauspitr]

That has always been the question. Are you willing to be constantly surveilled for marginally more security?

[wat10000]

Of course they do some good. You could improve things even further by implementing a system like Judge Dredd, and we'd save a ton of money as well.

This is the problem with limits on law enforcement. There are tradeoffs, and people really don't like tradeoffs. Many people prefer to just assume that law enforcement will use their powers for good, rather than have to think about whether any given change will do more harm than good due to enabling bad law enforcement.