bko

> A small sample of this is people cutting down Flock cameras. That's a "crime" that wouldn't even exist had these mass surveillance networks not been constructed in the first place.

You can't destroy public property because you disagree with a policy. Let me give you an example.

Suppose I am against abortion. Firebombing an abortion clinic is a "crime" that wouldn't exist had these places that kill unborn children not been constructed in the first place.

Do you get it now?

I am a pro-flock real person. I'll get down-voted and likely flagged for saying this so you may believe I don't exist but I do.

Crime has gone down considerably in the last two years.

> The declines were reflected in several of the FBI’s long-term measures. The 2025 robbery rate of 49.4 per 100,000 was the lowest in 20 years, while the rape rate of 36.1 was the lowest since 2012. The murder rate was the lowest in the past 20 years.

I imagine giving police the ability to apprehend violent criminals through technology is driving this reduction in crime. Not a stretch. You can think that this is not worth the tradeoff, but if you think giving police a tool like Flock will not have an impact of apprehension of criminals you have your head in the sand.

https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/violent-crime-falls-at-hist...

https://www.richardhanania.com/p/flock-mass-surveillance-and...

What does this mean? Flock CEO will start... killing people?

I don't think the equivalent of waiting periods make sense.

If anything they should just ban advertising. Simple, worked for smoking for the most part, and we have precedent as it's harmful. Why does every sporting event have so many ads and sponsorships by these betting companies.

The worst thing about these sites is that they're necessarily net negative. If you win regularly, you'll be kicked off these platforms. They only want dumb money. True prediction markets are different since they're don't market makers and just enforce the contracts and there are people on each side. But the whole draft-kings type gambling markets are just awful

> First off, $2k is the price of the new iPhone Duo. Suggesting that that is basically the same thing as a $500 Android phone is... strange.

Okay fine, it's $1,400 for a latest iPhone Pro with 512gb of storage. Point still stands.

> Most of it comes from enterprise contracts. Those might be more price sensitive because the CFO gets a say in which vendor they choose.

I think enterprise contracts are even less sensitive to price than consumer. That's the whole idea behind enterprise pricing. You'll see companies charge multiple times as much just for SSO for instance.

There are limits to this obviously, but to think that major commercial enterprises will switch over to some Chinese models to save some money is laughable.

The online crowd harping on about Chinese models is disconnected from reality imo.

I won't use a Chinese model. Why would i bother? I pay $100/m for the frontier model, understanding it's marginally better than much cheaper alternatives. I get so much value from the product it's not worth shopping around

Think of it like apple and android. Plenty of people pay 2k for their iPhone every few years when android at 1/4 the price is just as functional. Why? Because they get so much excess value from the device it's not worth shopping around. For most people it's their only personal computer. From booking airfare, to filling out their kids permission slips, it's a device they use 10+ hours a week. They don't bother, until a paradigm shift happens and something is 10x better than the iPhone. I imagine llms will follow the same trajectory

The S-1 is already out of date. Q3 revenue is $16.8b compared to $11.6b in Q2 (reflected in the S1).

I get why revenue blew up from say from Q4 2025 to Q1 2026, but this was surprising. 45% QoQ growth. When does it stop?

I think that's related to the snarky "controversial" takes that humans are way too into group acceptance and irrationality.

It's irrational to return the wallet if you were to consider just your well being. However, being we value being part of a group, and that group is the kind that returns wallets it finds.

Overall most of the answers are pretty much reddit tier cringe, but I guess here it's just echoing what is found online. LLMs are capable of novel insights but to produce them, you have to let the LLM grind a bit. I would be curious if someone asked why or what are the implications for a few hours.

> Humans are more loyal to belonging than to truth

> Why?

> Belonging to a larger group is advantageous to survival and reproduction

> Why?

> ...

There's two ways arresting people safeguards society. You mentioned meaningful redemption. The other is removing the criminal from the general public which prevents them from harming others. Time takes care of a lot as it's overwhelmingly < 50 year olds that commit violent crime.

At 18 he hit his father in the head with a baseball bat. Not sure if he killed him.

That's all the info in the first chapter of his book. It's kind of gross gleeful description of the act. Don't think the book is for me.

In the comment he says he was homeless at 19 so at most he got less than 2 years prison.

Why are you "holding the bag" You're early career math students. I know a lot of industries that would love to hire you.

Even if you want to work in research, AI offers a lot of opportunities to do even more research, and less grunt work

This is cool, but isn't owning property bordering public land undesirable?

Sure, there's the ability to hike directly from your home, but I imagine you'll regularly have people wander on to your property. And if something illegal happens on your property by a different party, you might be liable.

Seems like the cons outweigh the pros. Or is there something I'm missing?

I think most Americans think we should have a sensible border policy and some way to identify and remove the 5-10m illegal immigrants that came in over the Biden administration.

You should rethink your position as it's not going to give you the electoral wins you think it will.

> I've never seen this much outrage over flock cameras on here or on most tech forums.

Are we on the same platform? Search Flock on HN, below are the top results

Stop Flock

Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves

This Flock Camera Leak is like Netflix For Stalkers

US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

Grand jury declines to indict Ohio man charged with destroying Flock camera

YouTuber Says Cops Visited Him After He Built a Flock-Style Camera to Track Cops

Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

Flock CEO calls Deflock a “terrorist organization” (2025) [video]

I wrote to Flock's privacy contact to opt out of their domestic spying program

Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women Shows Why Warrants Are Needed

An interactive map of Flock Cams

Flock and Cyble Inc. weaponize “cybercrime” takedowns to silence critics

Hackers Got Inside a Flock Camera

Ring cancels its partnership with Flock Safety after surveillance backlash

Amazon’s Ring to partner with Flock

Flock Wants a Closely Surveilled World with No Exit

Flock Hardcoded the Password for America's Surveillance Infrastructure 53 Times

https://hn.algolia.com/?q=flock

If they offer you two prices, one month to month and and other for 1 year, and the 1 year is discounted, I would think that the 1 year one is a commitment. Is this not the case? Why would they offer a discount compared to the month to month if there is no difference as to whether you can cancel?

Vendor disputes literally happen every day. There's likely billions of accounts payable overdue on any given day. It sounds like you're not familiar w this space.

Yes, they are held to a higher standard. That's why the surveillance tools police rely on are strictly controlled and monitored, unlike what this guy is doing.

So it appears we agree.

This is Canada so there is no Flock. Try again.

There are things that cops are allowed to do (surveillance) that citizens are restricted to do.

It's not complicated or some gotcha. I'm fine with police cameras that whose access is strictly controlled, monitored and used to fight crime, rather than some creep taking pictures of me and doing God knows what with it.

Isn't this like every other dispute that goes to a public forum and gets resolved? You see these every other week where Google or some other company locks someone out of their account and then they make a stink and then it gets resolved.

Why is some random vendor dispute newsworthy?

I miss real journalism. I don't know what the hell this is

Government tried to ban encryption when it was first developed. Private organizations had to fight hard to make encryption standard. Still do in places like Europe

I have all these things in the US and get paid a lot more even when you include social benefits

Businesses should be able to communicate with policy makers especially when it impacts their industry.

In other words who would you trust to create a sensible encryption policy, Google executives or Chuck Schumer?

I know who I would pick

> Current problems with EU lobbying: Corporate lobbying is over 60% of registered lobby spending.

Ah yes, Europe, famously friendly to business interests. Hence so many large multinational influential corporations domiciled in Europe and being started every day

Seems really unfair to early stage employees as without this they would be much less likely to receive equity from employers. I guess it would force some companies to go public earlier but at the expense of employees who would get virtually none of the upside, and startups can't compete for talent.

I think they would have kept it under 500 if they had to. I doubt this is the determining factor. In fact a lot more than 2k investors have exposure through SPVs or holding companies on top of holding companies. So no, I don't think this was the determining factor that allowed OpenAI to stay private longer.

What are you talking about?

Losses are much more privatized staying private. Instead of hitting people's 401k or pension fund, this is mostly contained to a concentrated set of VC and PE investors, not large public markets.

What regulation makes it so that a large private company would have to go public? You have it backwards. Increased regulations make it more burdensome for a company to go public, driving companies like OpenAI to remain private. If you made it less expensive and burdensome to IPO (decreased regulation), you would see companies go IPO earlier.

This also coincides with a growing market for private credit and VC which certainly helps companies stay private for longer.

I don't know, it seems like it's just fun thing to play around with. I don't think serious things are meant to be built on this.

I often want to play simple games like Pacman, space invader, breakout, tetris or some other random iteration. Sometimes there are non-spammy simple versions of this game but often there aren't. This seems like a pretty cool fix. And if they disappear in the future, who cares?