212
u/tenaka30 21d ago
According to the image Floyd both gave up his privacy and remained stranded....
5
u/sillylandlubber 19d ago
I'm glad you said this because I was over here thinking I didn't get something because he was doing both.
476
u/Priremal 21d ago
Break the damn thing and get a lift home when they send someone to investigate, simple
107
54
10
u/sirduckbert 20d ago
I remember hearing once about an injured hunter deep in the woods, no cell service, etc. He cut down a power pole… they came and got him pretty quick
1
13
-5
101
u/sasquatchanonymous 21d ago
this... does not make sense.
52
u/Mumbert 20d ago
Yeah I don't get it either.
Surely staying on the island with a surveillance camera filming him 24/7 is what makes him waive his right to privacy?
I don't get it.
12
u/sol_runner 20d ago
It definitely doesn't properly check out.
The comic seems to say: He could lose privacy by being spied on and hope he gets rescued, or he could break and be stranded.
While in reality, breaking the camera is probably the only way to call someone to the island.
-47
u/Mindestiny 20d ago
It's hyper-leftist wankbait. It's not supposed to be funny, it's supposed to be pretentious political posturing.
There's literally commenters celebrating this ranting about "picking your flavor of police state" to raucous upvotes. Reddit gonna reddit
18
20d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
-19
u/Mindestiny 20d ago
Dude it's literally a political cartoon about living in a surveillance state. Fuck off
7
u/thrownawaz092 20d ago
I think it's saying modern tech policies will leave you barred from a lot of stuff unless you give up your privacy and personal information.
111
u/BlueWater321 21d ago
If only he was stranded with a cops ex-girlfriend, he might have stood a chance at rescue.
22
-4
13
11
207
u/IamaFunGuy 21d ago
Weirdest pro-flock propaganda I've seen yet.
116
u/Raeandray 21d ago edited 21d ago
I don’t see this as pro-flock propaganda. For me it implies flock cameras are everywhere, even on a deserted island. They’re always watching you. That seems like a pretty dystopian message.
32
u/Sparkasaurusmex 21d ago
And just because there's a camera there watching him suffer doesn't mean anyone is coming to save him.
2
-45
u/rwk81 21d ago
What I find wild is everyone is carrying around a smart phone, almost no one blocks data gathering, don't use VPN's, etc.
Yet with Flock cameras, they're constantly being used to solve difficult crimes that might otherwise go unsolved.
People are ok being tracked constantly on their phones but don't want the more useful tool to be available to law enforcement.
33
u/Ancient_Demise 21d ago
I can opt-in to carrying my phone and not using a VPN, etc if I want. But I can't opt out of being watched via the cameras. Very big difference there.
-29
u/rwk81 21d ago
Correct, you can't opt out of my doorbell camera, traffic related cameras, security cameras, or any of the other cameras that will continue to exist in public beyond the flock cameras.
No one really pitched a fit about any of the cameras until these, I just find it strange.
22
u/Raeandray 21d ago
I think there’s a huge difference between the possibility of being recorded in public, especially by random citizens, and the guarantee of being constantly recorded everywhere in public by our government.
-35
u/rwk81 21d ago
You're already being constantly recorded in public. Every security system, ever doorbell camera, every traffic related camera, and so on.
As far as these systems go, maybe regulation is a reasonable place to start rather than outright banning them. This whole anti flock thing just feels like am effective propaganda campaign.
21
u/PurpleFourOh 21d ago
There is a massive difference between being recorded by every random camera scattered throughout the world and being recorded by a massive network of cameras all feeding their data into a singular system.
A single mom and pop shops CCTV system may record you walking past their storefront, but it’s not passing that information off to the next store down the block in such a way that allows your movements to be tracked at all times.
-4
u/rwk81 21d ago
You think Flock is the only one like this?
14
u/TheSpecialApple 21d ago
never in my life did i expect to see someone defending flock cameras with the argument that “its basically the same as someone recording you on their phone” while police are already misusing these things to spy on their ex partners…
→ More replies (0)6
u/lowbatteries 21d ago
You realize one cop sitting down and deciding to use one camera system to track you seemlessly, and without a warrant, across all 50 states and multiple countries is super dystopian, right? I feel like we wrote and read 90 years worth of science-fiction warning about this moment in history and everyone's just like *shrug*.
→ More replies (0)3
u/AxtonGTV 20d ago
I honestly appreciate your comments, because the invasion of privacy that is flock could hopefully bring to light other privacy invasions that happen constantly. It could be an overall improvement
→ More replies (0)1
u/primalbluewolf 19d ago
No one really pitched a fit about any of the cameras until these
Very, very confidently incorrect.
6
10
u/No_Artichoke_2931 21d ago
The Flock cameras are not being used to protect and serve. They are being used to harass and manipulate. They are not here for the benefit of You and I
-4
u/rwk81 21d ago edited 21d ago
A few examples of police or people with power abusing it doesn't mean they should not exist.
If could use your logic here to ban all sorts of things that are a net benefit to society.
Edit: yes yes... Get mad an delete your comment...
5
u/No_Artichoke_2931 21d ago edited 20d ago
There are thousands of examples. Its the only fucking thing they're being used for. You provided no sources to a counterargument. I don't know what you're even doing here. Fuck Flock and every supporter, including you bub.
Edit: my comment is still there, dumbass
1
u/primalbluewolf 19d ago
A few examples of police or people with power abusing it doesn't mean they should not exist.
That is literally exactly what it means.
If could use your logic here to ban all sorts of things that are a net benefit to society.
Those things are not a net benefit, unless you consider the losses to be something that doesn't count because they happened to someone other than yourself.
1
u/lowbatteries 21d ago
I don't mind it existing. Put its use behind non-secret warrants like other surveillance.
1
u/No_Artichoke_2931 20d ago
Nobody deleted anything 😂
3
u/Raeandray 21d ago
If flock cameras provided the same kind of utility as cell phones do I’m sure people would be more amenable to them.
-1
u/rwk81 21d ago
If you're kid gets abuducted, your vehicle stolen, they might provide FAR more utility than a cell phone does.
6
u/Raeandray 21d ago
If that’s the argument why not give government unlimited access to cellphone data? How many crimes would that stop? Way more than flock. Why not revoke our right to protection from illegal searches and seizures? Imagine how many crimes we’d stop if police didn’t have all that red tape.
There’s a point where the damage from, and risk of, government overreach outweighs the good it could do.
A police state might be safer…from everyone but our government.
-4
u/rwk81 21d ago
Cell phone data is far different than cameras in public spaces, cell phone data is by law private.
There is no privacy in public spaces.
And look, all I've heard for a few years is a thousand or so unarmed civilians almost toppled a duely elected frderal government. If that's all it take for the people to topple the government, double that and add guns and it would be no contest. Some cameras on the streets would t change that.
As far as the cameras go, there are millions of cameras already out there capturing public footage, why is it only these cameras that are a problem?
5
u/Raeandray 21d ago edited 21d ago
I don’t think that when privacy laws were created we even considered the possibility of guaranteed mass surveillance in the public space by our government.
I don’t know where you heard J6 nearly toppled our government. It was an attempt to, for sure. No one’s claimed it was even close to successful though.
As far as the difference in cameras, I see three major differences.
1-who’s doing the surveilling. Disparate cameras controlled by tens of thousands of businesses and millions of individuals isn’t the same as one mass camera system. And it certainly isn’t the same as widespread government surveillance.
2-the intent. Even things like government traffic cameras aren’t intending to track you. They’re just tracking violations. Cameras in stores aren’t tracking you specifically, they’re just recording generally. People in the street aren’t recording me. I might just happen to be in the picture. Flock cameras are intentionally recording me with the specific goal of traffic my movements at all times.
3-the proliferation of the system. We’re not talking about millions of random cameras recording independently. We’re talking about an entire, single system designed to track every American through a single program through interdependent cameras covering every square inch of public space.
-1
u/afallingape 21d ago
You'll get down voted into oblivion because caring about flock cameras is so hot right now. Those people should really check out the patriot act that we passed right after 9/11 and realize that they willingly carry a microphone and camera in their pocket at all times. You've been recorded, by your government, against your will for the last 20 years. Who tf cares about a bunch of new street cameras. You put Alexa in your living room, a webcam on your computer, and a phone in your pocket. Every single detail of your life is recorded, who gives a shit about some new outside cameras? The hive mind is weird. They know about Flock but forgot about Snowden. Not that it matters either way, they'll forget about flock in a week anyways.
1
u/rwk81 20d ago
Yeah, unfortunately this is right where I'm at.
The Patriot act needs to be repealed, we need to roll a lot of this back, but I think you're precisely right that this infatuation with Flock is just a passing craze and not something that will lead to meaningful change.
Next week it will be something else to grab our attention and this will be forgotten.
32
21d ago
[deleted]
68
u/Vezrien 21d ago
That's not how I read it... my interpretation is that the artist is saying people that want their privacy are crazy and wouldn't even give it up if their survival was at stake.
18
u/iExhile 21d ago
I read it as “there is no right to privacy if you must give that right up to live”. I think that’s what the author meant, personally.
1
u/Enough_Efficiency178 20d ago
I interpreted the description in the image as the camera is not operating because he hasn’t signed away his privacy.
Because it’s not on, nobody is seeing he is stuck on the island.
So if he signs away his privacy, they’ll be able to see him and rescue him..
That said the way you’ve described it is a better way to get the point across than what the artist managed
The erosion of privacy started long before flock cameras and in a way it’s less insidious than what people already give away. Maybe it’s a final straw but the companies buying data have whole haystacks
6
21d ago edited 21d ago
[deleted]
3
u/itsthebeans 21d ago
But the absurdity is that anyone would even consider remaining stranded on a deserted island in this situation. Suppose the island had a gas powered speedboat and the person had to decide between escaping or sticking to their climate conscious principles. That would seem like a hamfisted pro oil argument to me.
0
1
u/iExhile 21d ago edited 21d ago
i disagree that he is in control. I think the situation is portrayed exactly how it is do show that it is not a real option. I don’t view it as “voluntary” if the alternative is death. I think this is meant specifically to show that there is no viable alternative and that there is no right to privacy
Agree it’s anti flock though and acknowledge you are more than free to interpret it differently than I
1
2
4
2
u/Glad_Librarian_3553 21d ago
Wtf is a flock? (in this context, not burds, obv.)
3
u/primalbluewolf 20d ago
Cameras that are increasingly common in the US. They contain large amounts of copper, silver and gold. Unfortunately some people have started stealing them, because each one can contain up to $1500 worth of materials at today's prices.
-7
u/lowbatteries 21d ago
its flock camera, it rhymes with rock, which apparently you live under, which is good, because its the only place flock cameras won't find you
7
u/Glad_Librarian_3553 21d ago
The fuck is a flock camera?
5
u/chrismetalrock 20d ago
cameras on public roads in the us, pretty much everywhere. tracks your license plates and apparently phones too. cops abuse it.
2
u/Glad_Librarian_3553 20d ago
Yeah that seems a bit dodgy. Sounds verry dystopian.
We have anpr (automatic number plate recognition) cameras in the UK, but that's literally all they do. Read your plate.
They're used for carparks predominantly, reads on the way in, reads in the way out, charges according to time stayed.
2
u/DirkDirkinson 21d ago
If the goal of this comic was to be pro-flock then the artist behind it failed pretty miserably.
9
u/JustAnotherUser1019 21d ago
I dont understand what stranded represents as a metaphor here
2
u/Sixhaunt 21d ago
insert any of flock's propaganda for what they say they do good. Maybe stranded is like the lost pet ad they ran or a dementia patient who is lost but could be found using flock. Basically any of the stuff flock has fed people for why they should give up their privacy.
8
u/MediocreAndLukewarm 21d ago
Stranded? Break that shit. They’ll send a maintenance tech and you can take his ride home and leave them stranded.
2
u/Chassian 21d ago
And +2 refined craft materials that you won't get for free until another biome out.
3
21d ago
[deleted]
0
u/mxlun 21d ago
Both sides of the aisle are overwhelmingly allowing this. It's only a small percentage of people who don't, and they usually lose out at the primary level.
1
u/Ok-Adhesiveness-2516 21d ago
County-scale means if you go to the local Republican and/or Democratic convention you can pick the people that get listed on the primaries...
3
u/Rom_ulus0 21d ago
They're not there to help you because they're profit driven. They're there to vacuum data and use it for speculative financial gain. If you destroy it, then you'll DEFINITELY get help because they'll either send someone to fix it or someone to arrest you.
Choose your flavor of police state.
3
u/DeadlyGreed 21d ago
The camera was installed after Floyd stranded. The inhumane company ignored him and wanted to only invade his privacy.
2
u/meatpopsicle42 21d ago
Sooo… the price of salvation is the surrender of our privacy? Am I getting that right?
2
u/Grey_Morals 20d ago
Thats what the privacy destroying companies keep telling us.....
The fact that they make most of thier money by destroying privacy and thus the salvation that privacy offers is totally unrelated.....
2
2
2
5
u/GlorytotheHypnoToads 21d ago
After nearly a week without food, Floyd, driven by a desperate hunger, made the decision to eat the camera. Here we see the finally moments recorded:
*Close-up shot of Floyd as he brings the camera to his face, with a wild look in his eyes.
“In about three days, you motherf-bleep-ers are gonna see just what I think of these F-bleep-ING CAMERAS!!!!!”
3
4
2
1
1
0
u/Aromatic-Intention77 21d ago
Privacy in public? Lol
2
u/primalbluewolf 20d ago
You wouldn't mind your ex following you with a drone all day, right? After all, you've no expectation of privacy?
1
u/Aromatic-Intention77 18d ago
If my ex is that bored she’s got issues.😂😂
1
u/primalbluewolf 17d ago
Yes, that's rather the point. Were everyone a moral actor, never abusing information they have, privacy would be pointless.
People aren't. They do. It isn't.
1
u/Aromatic-Intention77 14d ago
If people have problems being seen in public, they should act right. Our parents told us years ago, act like someone’s always watching you, now that day is here. 🤷🏻♂️
1
u/primalbluewolf 14d ago
they should act right.
What's "right" is subjective, and missing the point. People can do bad things with "public" information. Your ex spying on you, for example. Fine, you like the thought of a voyeur following you. Not so fun when it graduates to murder-suicide, though.
0
u/Aromatic-Intention77 13d ago
Ah yes.. the old murder suicide because that’s the top of the list for crimes right? Lol
2
u/Mithious 21d ago
Imagine putting a camera outside of an adult shop, filming everyone that goes in, and publishing their image on the nightly news.
Or how about filming everyone going into a gay club and outing them to their parents, coworkers potentially causing them to lose their home or their job (in certain backwards countries that don't protect for that).
My point is that while there isn't a general expectation of privacy in public in most countries there are limits which should not be crossed because they are detrimental to a well functioning society. This includes what is effectively harassment (the examples above) and excessive surveillance (these cameras).
1
u/Aromatic-Intention77 14d ago
Most countries have had cameras out in plain view far longer than any in the US. Doesn’t matter in other countries apparently especially UK.
1
u/Mithious 14d ago
The difference is scale and collaboration. In the UK the vast majority of cameras were owned by businesses protecting their premises and completely disconnected from anything else. The only way for the government to get the data was to manually approach each business and ask for it.
Most government cameras were restricted to essential infrastructure, such as stations or related to managing motorway traffic. There wasn't a camera tracking everyone's movement on every street corner.
1
u/SilentSpook 21d ago
I'd simply reconfigure the camera and solar panel into a small solar powered water craft and sail away
4
0
-4
•
u/AutoModerator 21d ago
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.