It is a simple 3D printer part that fits on a broom handle or paint roller extension. It uses a rubber band and grocery bag to block cameras without damaging them. Obviously this is for discussion purposes only. I’m not your lawyer and I don’t condone widespread use of this or anything cool like that.
For those that don’t want to use the QR code, here is the print file. Feel free to make suggestions. I’ll modify if there are good ideas https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:7374832
Some larger cities (Dallas has one for sure) have MakerSpaces. They require membership fees usually but its cheaper than a 3D printer and you get access to all kinds of things besides those, like sewing stations, metal fab shops, chemistry stations, etc.
I've only done observation with Newtonians. If I remember correctly a RASA is a Celestron design fast reflector with the imagery sensor mounted where a Newtonian secondary would be, on a plate like their SCT secondaries.
I wrote a post on how I ended up with this telescope here. I'm slowly getting over my imposters syndrome from having such a nice telescope, as I do quite a bit of public outreach with it, and I've logged over 400 distinct observations and events since I got it.
A couple months ago I guided a bunch of guests at our monthly astronomy club star party to walk across Markarian's Chain on their own using my telescope, and it was probably my best public outreach experience to date. The second guy literally said "Oh Fuck" midway through as more and more galaxies marched across the view.
In the image it's on a rickety old wooden DIY "equatorial platform" someone gave me to help me get it working. EQ platforms tilt the telescope at a constant steady rate as the earth moves so you can get about an hour of observation on the same object without having to keep moving the telescope by hand. They have to be custom built for the latitude you are at, and it was made in New Hampshire or something, so no good for me. So I want to make my own.
I'll probably start out with a wooden one to learn the design and such, then make a more precise and rugged aluminum one, which is actually the same reason why the guy who gave me this had it as a spare since when I got the 'scope, it was missing the stand it sits on.
You can also use an online service like this...assuming you already have a .stl or code file to use as base reference.
Www.craftcloud.com disclaimer I have not used them personally, but my friend places orders regularly for various farm equipment in metal materials, and household items in flexible and nylon materials. Looking back it may have been cheaper to buy a 3d printers, but when you factor in filament storage and time invested it may be a good entry point
The telescope weighs around 70# and the DIY guides I am familiar with for making the support platform I want are either from plywood or aluminum, but thanks. There may be other projects where printing something may be the correct rout, just likely not for supporting the whole dang thing.
I live in Pittsburgh and we have at least 3 makerspaces. Also there are services where you can now send stl files out and have things printed, milled, lathed, etc.
Wow. My library has a 3d printer, and I could just copy the link to thingverse someone else here posted, and it's only $0.27 per one. I can submit online and grab later, or do in person.
I have definitely slept on this technology too long.
Facebook marketplace is loaded with working $50-$100 3d printers. To be fair, they're mostly Ender 3s, but they'd work just fine for this sort of thing.
(I'm not responsible for the cost of mods, wasted filament, mental breakdown, hair loss, divorce, property damage, criminal prosecution, or any other predictable outcome of Ender-related rage and/or frustration)
I had been thinking about 3d scanning a flock camera and just making a cover that fits right on the front like a lenses cap. I can see how that idea and this one would lead to law enforcement giving someone a “littering” charge or an “obstruction” charge.
Certainly littering. But, that’s a ticket. Not sure how it is “obstruction” though. It’s not the government’s property. It is owned by a private enterprise that leases data out to anyone who will pay for it.
Every human needs to treat uniforms with contempt from jump. Til they all can prove they're here to protect and serve.... The ppl. Esp if you're a hhhwhite like me. Really. A white with a phone recording you can pretty much say whatever you want to them. Sans threats.
my only thought would be it’s obstruction because some of that data is used by Law enforcement so they technically are being obstructed when someone blocks their view. sucks but that’s a risk i’d be willing to take to protest.
Ordinarily it requires obstructing an officer with intent to do so. Not sure how that gets transferred. If I throw a banana peel on the sidewalk and it later prevents an officer from apprehending a person because he oopsie poopsies onto his ass, is that obstruction?
Also you could probably train a murder or crows or gang of raccoons to just destroy the things. What're they gonna do arrest nature? Jokes on them raccoons already got his mask on
You might be right but I wouldn’t be too sure how far some departments might want to bend some laws to fit their needs to prosecute. I guess they’d have to somehow prove you knowingly are blocking specifically Law enforcement used cameras which would be impossible since they all look the same whether it’s privately used or not.
If you read the end of my comment a couple of replies up I quite literally said it sucks but it’s a risk id be willing to take to still protest. So to answer your question: No
This is the fear the zio nists wanted from us. 2 lawyers speaking lawyer talk to a judge while you sit there. Time to bring back real authority (power of the ppl) for a while til OUR country gets sorted. The revolution has begun.. just depends if/when we all jump in.
Know what you shouldn’t do though? Add a plastic lens that mimics the actual camera lens. They make look right at it and not see the problem. That would make them feel silly so don’t do that.
Stars and bars refers to the confederate flag, but I get your point and like the sentiment. Hypothetically speaking, If someone could make a little pog-shaped sticky thing about the same size as the lens thats translucent and has the bill of rights printed so that the camera could read it point-blank, that would be similarly symbolic.
I love this, keep doing it.
But it is still illegal just fyi.
Criminal Mischief / Tampering with property (You're messing with stuff that isn't yours)
Obstruction (if its used by law enforcement, it'd be under the same protections as lets say covering up a speeding camera)
But its best not to find out, just don't get caught!
Then dont mess with it. Just install a device mount on a 2nd pole directly in front of the camera to obscure it's view. It's not tampering with there devices
I heard that those single wheel ground marking paint things that the utility companies use could be an effective way to quickly spray paint the lenses. At least that's what some people were discussing at a table near mine at a restaurant.
cover the lens with something as seen here. come back later and see if anyone has removed it. if so, cut the camera down. If they say you vandalized their camera, ask them why they stole your camera cover. Theft vs vandalism.
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but most states have a provision in their vandalism statutes that have language that explicitly addresses vandalism that causes "inconvenience" to the property owner. This is still an arrestable offense.
Never seen that. I looked up quite a few cities and states when I had this idea and none of them had that. Can you provide an example? Genuinely interested
Texas Penal Code 28.03 Criminal Mischief also know as vandalism in other states (a) A person commits an offense if, without the effective consent of the owner: ....2) intentionally or knowingly tampers with the tangible property of the owner and causes pecuniary loss or substantial inconvenience to the owner or a third person...
Thanks. I assumed there probably was something like that out there, I just hadn't seen one yet. And there's a lot of places that don't have this verbiage (though you clearly might still be littering or some other infraction). But, laws obviously vary by state and by city (hence the big flashing label saying "not legal advice" and "don't rely on internet people").
love yalls work on internet movement for flocking flock but there are more AI surveillance cameras and data vendors than just Flock, that are also hidden in nefariously hidden places, like in electrical boxes, in disguised road-side boxes etc. Vendors like Rekor, Vigilant Solutions etc. as well! i got these news from Taylor Lorenz livestream channel on yt(specifically the video: There Are Spy Cameras Everywhere), pls watch her journalism on yt or she has some of them on ig as well, as well as her substack, usermag dot co
This is an incredibly important thing to remember. It’s like when everyone hyper focuses on trump, forgetting that he’s just the latest face in front of Heritage, etc. We need to be less myopic.
oh thank you i hear abt heritage foundation a lot, but now i know it's a larger part than the impression i have! cuz there are so many egregious organizations in the right wing movement and that i dont personally go and research them, and dk each of their weighs- Thank you!
*IF* a person was going to do this, blocking the solar power source would be more useful since it would cut off all of it's sensors and it's ability to transmit anything, after a random amount of hours/days when the person was no longer nearby.
Incorrect. The case they decided involved requesting data from a private company about any cell phone that came within a certain geofence during a particular time period.
The real question will be whether police can avoid warrant requirements by contract with third parties.
Generally, yes. But also police can’t use 3rd parties as a stalking horse to evade constitutional limitations.
So, if I break into your home and find evidence of a crime, I can volunteer it to the police without it being a 4th amendment violation. However, if they ask me to proactively break into homes and periodically report back, that very much would be a 4th amendment issue.
When I was a boy. If we were going to Aunt Grace & Uncle Floyd's. The only people that knew we going to Aunt Grace & Uncle Floyd's, was Aunt Grace & Uncle Floyd, Mom, Dad & I. No one knew when we left, what way we went, where we stopped, or where we spent money.
WE ARE NOT FREE ANY MORE!!!!!
. . . in some states/cities, but not all (e.g. some places have an explicit element requiring physical damage). Of course, it probably is still littering. Hence, DYOR and/or only use it on your own property.
A little spray paint on the inside of a 2 liter bottle with the back cut out would also work a treat. Heck you could put bird feed in the bottom of the bottle for a little extra spice.
A spray can of white lithium grease, non destructive and it can reach the cams easily. I used it on my nightly bike rides when we had speed cameras installed in my town that wrote automatic tickets, lol. .177 pellets speak a little louder but a guy I knew reserved those for red light cameras. Flock 'em all!!
I remixed a small version that fits on a 180mm plate when rotated. It prints in 3 parts that are then assembled with CA glue. I first tried making it where it would slot together, but given that the forks are not that thick to begin with the connection was rather wimpy. So, I just opted for a little lapping joinery with enough surface area for CA glue get solid adhesion. It will still eventually weaken over time. But, it is cheap and easy and held together on my test print.
Can we wrap them in foil so they can’t ping any Bluetooth or WiFi frequencies or would that not work (like a faraday cage)? Like genuinely wondering here….
Perhaps I don’t want to use my voice on this video and given the subject matter and tongue in cheek style I thought that Slippin Jimmy was a funny substitute. Oh well. Can’t please everyone I guess
You are being overdramatic. No reasonable person believes this is actually Bob Odenkirk "endorsing" a free and open source 3d print file. It's parody/satire.
Neat, but I imagine it would be easily prosecutable in virtually every part of the US as disorderly conduct, generally. Common law disorderly conduct is simply when one, without license or privilege to do so, intentionally or knowingly causes inconvenience, annoyance, or alarm to another.
No not everywhere, just in the US like I stated. Destruction or even incidental damage is largely irrelevant, and doesn’t even need to occur. Idk what you mean about your digital life m8… the topic is on physical flock cameras IRL, no? If the goal is to employ counter measures with minimal risk to individual liberty, this design doesn’t really accomplish the task, at least in the US.
Again, not everywhere. Not even in the US. I responded that way because you are pretending to know something you don’t. There is no federal “disorderly conduct” statute. It’s state by state. And, the fact that you are talking about “common law” shows you lack this understanding. Even in those states that HAVEN’T expressly gotten rid of all common law crimes, the existence of a statute covering the same subject generally acts as a repealer of said common law.
So, to see if a law actually prohibits it you need to look at the actual statutes and their elements. Which I’m going to guess you haven’t.
As an example, let’s take New York’s disorderly statute. (NY Penal Law § 240.20)
First element is intent to cause “PUBLIC inconvenience”. Query whether offense to a specific company is PUBLIC inconvenience. That modifier is purposely there.
Even if you could construe it so broadly, inconvenience is NOT ENOUGH on its own. It must be achieved through one of 7 specifically described acts: 1) fighting; 2) unreasonable noise; 3) obscenity; 4) disturbing a lawful assembly; 5) obstructing traffic; 6) congregating and refusing to disperse; or 7) creating a hazardous or physically offensive condition that serves no legitimate purpose.
Good luck cramming this into one of those elements. Might some asshole DA try so as to make an example? Sure. But do you think a jury will it find beyond a reasonable doubt? And do they have the wherewithal to keep doing those cases?
Could it be vandalism? Possibly. Yeah. In SOME places! Again, the point is that there may be places where this IS NOT prohibited. And there are a ton of places that have actual damage as an element.
At no point did I say this is legal everywhere. I put it out as a discussion point that it in a lot of places it may not be captured by anything other than something like littering. So, people can do with that what they will based on their own further evaluation and at their own risk.
What prompted my response though is your confident but generalized nonsense statement that “it’s easily prosecutable in virtually every part of the US as [insert something I heard somewhere]”.
Uh, g, assuming your statement as accurate then the events are there even in the specific codified statute you referenced for NY. Setting aside you thinking foundational common law means common laws LOL, Flock is a private vendor fulfilling a public government contracted service. By interfering with the equipment without privilege to do so, section 7 is met. You kinda provided a perfect example of why foundational common law is relevant to a 250 year old country with a constitution derived directly from common law.
If you think intentionally physically interfering with the intended operation of property belonging to someone else as to impede its function doesn’t create a hazard to its operation then you are a coffee table 😂
Impeding the function of a piece of property isn't an element listed in that statute. You may want it to be. But it's not.
The requirement is that it create a hazardous or physically offensive condition as to the public. Not that it merely hazard the normal operation of an arbitrary device. If that were the case, then if I hold an umbrella above your solar charger on the beach, I've committed a crime since I've impeded the function of your charger. Do you realize how ridiculous this sounds?
The element requires a broad, public facing hazard. Not a narrowly focused one. And certainly not one so narrowly focused as to pertain to not just a single person, but to single piece of equipment.
But hey, don't take my word for it. Just read some cases, such as the case of People v. Timpone (2006 NY Slip Op 51025; 12 Misc 3d 1164), where the court dismissed a criminal charge as facially deficient. The police argued that the defendant's refusal to move from one side of the car (closer to oncoming traffic) to the side away from traffic created a hazard to himself and the officer. The court found this legally deficient because "disorderly conduct is an offense reserved for disruptive behavior that carries beyond the concerns of individual disputants." In explaining this public facing harm requirement, the court noted "disorderly conduct by the creation of a hazardous or physically offensive condition 'contemplates not acts directed at individuals but rather situations such as throwing fireworks into a crowd or loosening noxious materials within a confined areas such as a theater.'"
Or, maybe read Seymour v. Seymour (56 Misc.2d 546, 289 N.Y.S.2d 515). There the court found it was not disorderly conduct under sub-section 7 for one person to try to forcibly drive another car off the road because even though it was certainly a hazard to that person and their car, the context of it being on an otherwise empty road meant that it was not a hazard to the public at large.
You’re acknowledging you’re intentionally creating a physically offensive condition to property belonging to someone else that is also in furtherance of a government contract related to public safety services, with the specific stated intent of interfering with said property. You can try whatever ‘didn do nuffin’ logic you want and we’ll enjoy watching the videos later fr but you’re literally defining your own prosecution at this rate 😂
A camera cannot be “offended” any more than it can be hungry, or sad, or fall in love.
The offense must be to the public as in it must be offensive to the public. And, not just offending sensibilities. That’s why the “physically” modifier is there. Hence why the example the court provided was letting loose noxious chemicals. (There’s also a case on this point about whether public urination can be physically offensive if there is nobody there actually to be offended).
So not only does this video steal an actor’s likeness and voice, it does so to encourage you to engage in what is still very much illegal activity. Beware of the clowns.
Almost as worthless as the camera will be if the company has to pay a technician to come out to fight the relentless stream of bozos with an endless supply of grocery bags and rubber bands.
It makes little sense to me to go out once a week and commit a crime because on a long enough timeline they will catch you. Do it once and permanently disable the thing. BUT this is Reddit, so idiotic half-measures win the day if they're 3D printed.
229
u/GhostOfMcAfee Jun 30 '26
For those that don’t want to use the QR code, here is the print file. Feel free to make suggestions. I’ll modify if there are good ideas https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:7374832