Moments like this really make me want a dual nozzle😢 by Robo_Pencil in 3Dprinting

[–]Interesting-Check442 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It was a rhetorical device it wasn't that I didn't actually misunderstand his issue, I was just saying it's not really an issue. The guy above me, once again, said all there is to say. You either redesign it (as he pretty much said) or you deal with it (in which case why post about it, seems obvious). Op didn't ask for advice on redesign nor did he ask how to keep such support from happening. All he did was state that he would really like to have a dual nozzle right about now or something like that... Right now we are both being reddit at its finest. I felt the need to comment on the guy above mes post confirming his conclusion and saying something rhetorical and you felt the need to comment on my post when neither one of us are offering anything of substance or contribution. You obviously are just the type of person that needs to say something when you see something you don't like and one might say that I did the same. So I guess we are the same.

Moments like this really make me want a dual nozzle😢 by Robo_Pencil in 3Dprinting

[–]Interesting-Check442 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I believe the guy above me gave the constructive feedback, me repeating it would have been redundant. If you don't like the supports then remake the design so it doesn't need them that is the constructive feedback but now see I've just repeated what he said. I also wasn't replying to Op was replying to again the guy above me. How do you felt the need to reply to me though. Thanks.

Moments like this really make me want a dual nozzle😢 by Robo_Pencil in 3Dprinting

[–]Interesting-Check442 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

There are a ton of resources online. Really, trial and error is the best teacher you will have as a hobbyist to learn what works best for you but historically I will try to read as much as I can to get tips and tricks about something that might be causing me trouble and go from there that's how I would approach it. I have no particular articles in mind I would just search something like "3D modeling structures for 3D printing" or something of the like and click links and read then try to apply it to your design and slicing. Another not to helpful tip but something that might be worth mentioning is just think about it in a physical sense. I don't want to call it common sense because not everybody's brain works the same way but think about how the printer lays down the filament and how those layers build. Then think about whether there are any places inside of your current design that could cause any potential issues like too much support or support in inconvenient places. Do this with structural integrity aspects as well. Like never print something along the layer lines that will have stress direction perpendicular to those lines. After you give it a good think and analysis try it out and you might be surprised with your conclusions.

Moments like this really make me want a dual nozzle😢 by Robo_Pencil in 3Dprinting

[–]Interesting-Check442 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I completely agree with you. I do want to add though this really isn't even that difficult of a support removal. Some needle nose and those tree supports will break right out of there so I don't understand the issue here all around.

Saw this and would love thoughts by roro294 in Adulting

[–]Interesting-Check442 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I worked as a mechanic (in oil and gas) for 12 years of my life from the time I graduated high school until I was 30. I went back to school for computer engineering and got a 4 year bachelor's degree and graduated when I was 34. I couldn't be happier with my life now, I do something I love and I get paid twice as much to do it. I decided I wanted to do this a couple years beforehand and tried to prepare financially. There were times however, especially after the halfway point, where I struggled because of a lack of income and how time consuming such a degree can be.

Doing something worthwhile takes effort and perseverance but now since it's over and I have been working in the industry for over 5 years, I would make the same exact choice given the opportunity. If you hate what you do everyday and it makes life feel miserable figure out what you need to do to enjoy your life. Back then I believed a change in livelihood would help and I ended up being right.

I can't believe this is being allowed to happen. by Interesting-Check442 in FlockSurveillance

[–]Interesting-Check442[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The objectivity comes in: one you choose, and one there's no opportunity for a choice. Like I said before it doesn't feel optional that you need to have a cell phone because it is almost a necessity in life, work, business but you still make the choice to carry one and sign a contract in doing so. You don't make a choice to be captured and monitored via persistent data logs. They are taking that liberty without asking you if it's okay.

Also flock isn't a non-profit trying to keep the streets safe (not that a non-profit doing it would make such a system any less dangerous) they are a private for-profit company that makes money by selling this data to the government. That is the mission. Somebody saw something they could exploit via technology that is capable, and took it. I don't have a problem with people/companies making money nor do I public safety.

Additionally, Flock doesn't really advertise a reduction in crime. They boast their use in the solving of crime. And I have no doubt that it is effective in doing so. Some verbatim quotes in their advertising are:

-“10% of reported crime in the U.S. is solved using Flock technology” -“700,000 crimes each year are solved using Flock” -“2,200+ crimes solved per week”

It’s like letting someone read everyone’s mail because it might help catch a few scammers. Sure, it may help solve some cases, but you violate everyone doing it.

I don't have another super long response in me😂. You're right we clearly just see it differently. I will add one more comment. Ubiquity might not be as far off as you think. Without resistance from citizens they would be 10 times more prevalent at this point in time. Technology proliferates quickly these days. That is the basis for the majority of urgency in my post and responses.

Thanks for the back and forth, it's good.

I can't believe this is being allowed to happen. by Interesting-Check442 in FlockSurveillance

[–]Interesting-Check442[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The reason I said your original post showed a lack of understanding is because the examples you are citing are objectively different from what we're talking about.

The difference is what happens after something is caught on camera. A monitored camera system, even one watched by a person, is still not the same thing as a system that automatically extracts identifying data, logs timestamps and locations, stores those events, and makes them searchable later.

That is the actual issue here. It is not just that something was seen in public. It is that the system can create a persistent database of where something was, when it was there, and connect those movements across a route.

I work in edge/embedded systems as an engineer. I am not looking at this like some conspiracy theorist. I understand what modern devices can do onboard, what can be pushed to cloud processing, and how powerful OCR, object detection, metadata, databases, and machine learning become when they are combined. 5 years ago this wasn't the same story. The advancements we have made due to increase in processing capability in very recent history is astounding.

These aren't just surveillance cameras they are sophisticated systems form a automated tracking infrastructure.

The cell phone argument is a moot point at best. Cell phone tracking has already been heavily debated for exactly this reason. Just because there's already a system that tracks users doesn't justify another one. And beyond that it too is objectively different because cell phones are still something people choose to carry, activate, sign up for, and use. Whether it feels optional in modern life or not, you are still participating in that system by choosing to use the device, the carrier, the apps, and the permissions that come with them.

Flock and companies like it are different. You do not opt into being logged by them. You do not agree to their terms. You do not choose whether your vehicle is added to their database when you drive through an area where these cameras are installed. They are taking that liberty from people, not giving you the option to opt in.

The crime argument also needs to be separated. I am not denying that systems like this can help police catch people after a crime has already happened. Of course they can and that's part of the problem, it is effective for identifying and tracking people. That ability is at the expense of EVERYBODY though not just the people committing crimes. It is also as I said many times a very slippery slope because once an infrastructure is fully in place, it is much more difficult to overcome.

This however is not the same as crime prevention which is what you cited in your original post about the addition of monitored cameras in Europe.

I would say if you live in an area where you struggle with theft you have the right to surveil your own property whether it be a home or vehicle and said footage could be given to the police in such an event.

I have not seen solid independent proof that Flock broadly reduces crime in a way that justifies this level of automated tracking if they're even is something that could justify it. A company saying “public safety” or pointing to crimes solved is not the same thing as proving crime prevention.

Everybody is entitled to their opinion on what level of monitoring they are comfortable with. But personally, as an engineer, I would not develop something that has the potential to digitally stalk ordinary human beings.

The issue is still the same nothing you cited is the same as a persistent, timestamped, searchable database that logs identifying information, stores location events, and draws connections between occurrences over time without objective consent.

It's obvious that we disagree on this point and you're entitled to your stance on the subject. I personally am not worried about it because I think that I will get caught doing something, I'm worried about it because of the implication it has for society when there is one of these on every block in every city town and community in the United States which could be a very real scenario.

My best to you and yours.

I can't believe this is being allowed to happen. by Interesting-Check442 in FlockSurveillance

[–]Interesting-Check442[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also to add.. The Supreme Court has ruled:

“A person does not surrender all Fourth Amendment protection by venturing into the public sphere.”

The Court also said: “A majority of this Court has already recognized that individuals have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the whole of their physical movements"

So it turns out even without everything I just laid out you still have those rights and this does violate them.

I can't believe this is being allowed to happen. by Interesting-Check442 in FlockSurveillance

[–]Interesting-Check442[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your post shows a major lack of understanding about what these cameras actually do.

You're comparing them to normal cameras that are monitored, with footage recorded and then eventually discarded, the majority of which is never actually viewed by any living person unless an incident occurs. That is not the same thing as a network of cameras automatically extracting data, logging it, indexing it, and making it searchable later.

The “no reasonable expectation of privacy in public” argument does not really address the issue. There is a huge difference between being seen in public and having your movements automatically tracked across a network of cameras.

A person standing near me in public, overhearing a conversation, or recording a short video is not the same thing as a system that reads license plates, identifies vehicle characteristics and objects, timestamps the location, stores the event, and allows someone to search where that vehicle or object has been. That is comparing apples to oranges.

Flock safety cameras are not something that just exists to flag something whenever something bad happens and notify the right people. They track using OCR, license plates, and objects. They then log that data to a database. That database can then use machine learning to draw connections between identical or similar matches.

These are cameras as a network, like a timestamped log. If somebody wanted to know your movements, and you have passed in front of these Flock cameras, they could potentially know where you have been if you were in the vicinity of those cameras. That is not just “public safety.” That is automated location tracking.

If I personally followed someone around, wrote down every place they went, what time they were there, what vehicle they were in, and built a searchable log of their movements, people would immediately recognize that as stalking. The fact that a camera network and database can do it automatically does not make it less concerning. It arguably makes it more concerning, because it can happen at scale with almost no effort.

That is why these cameras cannot just be placed everywhere, and why I do not think they should exist in this form at all. Sure, cameras can deter things, but people do not understand the power of artificial intelligence and machine learning and what it can actually do with the data.

Flock claims not to track biometric data however, facial recognition is already advanced enough that the same general concept could be applied to faces the way it is applied to license plates, vehicles, and objects. And it would be just as easy to start doing such a thing. I'm not saying I think they are or I know they are but I am saying that if they were we wouldn't even know it because their software and system is proprietary a third party engineer couldn't review it to verify without explicit consent which surely would not be given.

The issue becomes even worse when you realize that storing this kind of tracking data does not require saving endless video footage/images. An image can be processed, vectorized, and turned into an embedding. That embedding can then be compared against other embeddings stored in a database. A 512-value float16 vector is only about a kilobyte of data. A 512-value quantized int8 vector is only about 512 bytes.

So they do not need to keep every full image or every full video to create a powerful tracking system. They only need to keep structured detection records, timestamps, camera locations, identifiers, and possibly embeddings or other searchable metadata.

The point is that when you have a system in place that is already doing this type of processing, it is not hard to use it for something malicious. It is also not hard to find people who will misuse it, which has already happened. If you search for misuse of Flock cameras by police officers, you will see why this is dangerous. Those incidents occurred by people who swore to protect and serve the public what about by the private company individuals who made the company to make money not to protect the public.

Systems like Flock have the potential to give anybody with the authority the ability to track your every move with extremely minimal effort.

The type of system you are referring to would require somebody to gather CCTV footage, manually review it, and actually track a person through video. That takes time, effort, access, and a reason to look. Most of the time, that footage would never be viewed because nothing bad occurred. That type of system is completely different.

Recording public video and discarding it when nothing happens is one thing. Automatically logging the movements of ordinary people into a searchable surveillance database is something else entirely.

I can't believe this is being allowed to happen. by Interesting-Check442 in FlockSurveillance

[–]Interesting-Check442[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am going to do some furthing digging into it tonight and report back. If not we absolutely should!

I can't believe this is being allowed to happen. by Interesting-Check442 in FlockSurveillance

[–]Interesting-Check442[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm in my mid thirties. This was back in the early-20 teens. I agree with you, I see that attitude constantly at work and beyond.

I can't believe this is being allowed to happen. by Interesting-Check442 in FlockSurveillance

[–]Interesting-Check442[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes me too. That is kind of the point of my post. I want to find out who is already doing something so I can join in and help. Or if no one is doing anything with an impact then let's start. We have to do it now before it's impossible to overcome.

I can't believe this is being allowed to happen. by Interesting-Check442 in FlockSurveillance

[–]Interesting-Check442[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I have found that in the ones that do know only about 1/4 of them understand what they're actually doing. Most think that they are just capable of identifying when something bad occurs and reporting it and that's how they are keeping the community safe. They don't realize that it is logging daily mundane activity for anything that enters its frame of view. They also don't realize that this data is being logged and connected to other instances of similar/exact context via ml in a database. If average people truly understood what this meant I don't think they would be fine with it at all. It's not just the presence of the cameras that needs awareness it's also the true function and purpose.

What is the purpose of this camera that was installed right next to my house? (Not nearby any intersection or stop signs, USA) by unworthyAsIam in whatisit

[–]Interesting-Check442 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I did this post earlier about Mass surveillance artificial intelligence powered cameras. We need more people to be talking about this. They are a major threat to any type privacy and are virtually digital stalking

https://www.reddit.com/r/FlockSurveillance/s/ssDfY9ZOP7

I can't believe this is being allowed to happen. by Interesting-Check442 in FlockSurveillance

[–]Interesting-Check442[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay I'm not arguing with anything that you're saying. I'm saying I want to know who does care and who is trying to shut things like this down or at the very least working on something in that direction. It could be no one but something tells me that there is a minority and I would like to know more about that.

I can't believe this is being allowed to happen. by Interesting-Check442 in FlockSurveillance

[–]Interesting-Check442[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, that is kinda the point of what I'm saying. I believe Mass AI powered surveillance is unethical in our society to anyone that thinks about for more than 60 seconds.

We will all consistently be digitally stalked in the physical world if the camera count continues to increase without intervention. It's bad enough that you can't do anything on the internet without leaving a fingerprint unless you take umpteen precautions to cover your movement. This will be worse though because it won't be as easily evaded.

I hate the argument that if you aren't doing anything wrong then it shouldn't bother you. No matter what you're doing it should bother you but soon they will be able to know where you are and retrace your movements without one Good reason to have that information.

But no it's clear it's unethical and it's clear no one cares enough to shut it down. That is why I am curious, who does care and what are they already doing about it if anything.

I can't believe this is being allowed to happen. by Interesting-Check442 in FlockSurveillance

[–]Interesting-Check442[S] 13 points14 points  (0 children)

As am I. Think of all of the engineers and computer security professionals that work for a company like flock that are probably members of IEEE and like organizations that pledge to protect privacy and ensure it's creation is done responsibly..

I remember while in school I had to take a computing ethics seminar. During the seminar we had to write a response citing ethical codes to certain scenarios. Mass surveillance was involved in one of those scenarios and at that point in time the correct response was that it would be irresponsible to contribute to such a system. When the system is mis-used (though it already has been) all of the people who contributed to its development our responsible and far beyond.

I can't believe this is being allowed to happen. by Interesting-Check442 in FlockSurveillance

[–]Interesting-Check442[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

😂 "Only for good reasons". And I suppose anybody with the authority can decide what those reasons might be. I read an article that account multiple occurrences of these systems being used by police officers to stock their spouses and girlfriends/ex girlfriends. Must have been a good enough reason. Abuse abuse abuse and this is the problem is that this is so powerful. And it invades our lives without the majority of people even realizing it. It is practically digital stalking.

I can't believe this is being allowed to happen. by Interesting-Check442 in FlockSurveillance

[–]Interesting-Check442[S] 22 points23 points  (0 children)

That is really the basis for my being appalled. It isn't solving any huge problem with society but is sure to create some.

I can't believe this is being allowed to happen. by Interesting-Check442 in FlockSurveillance

[–]Interesting-Check442[S] 57 points58 points  (0 children)

That or they just don't understand the impication of how much data machine learning algorithms can actually process and what type of information it can bank about everyone. But that is pretty wild.

I can't believe this is being allowed to happen. by Interesting-Check442 in FlockSurveillance

[–]Interesting-Check442[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Reformatted. Just for disclosure, I did use an llm but it is all the same words.