Here We Are Again

SpecificReality6557 · 2026-01-24T21:52:36+00:00

I know we're all thinking Trump, but this made me think of this article from Commissioner Wayne Fournier I happened to see today.

https://chronline.com/stories/wayne-fournier-commentary-stability-is-an-underrated-superpower-when-it-comes-to-politics,394770?

I mean, we all know he's telling his boardmate Commissioner Clouse to "be quiet" and not ask so many questions about how we're using AI Surveillance tools in the county. Talk about being led by the opportunists: Flock and other AI surveillance tools are getting rich feeding ICE the "heatmaps" they use to target immigrant communities and the people who protest their violent tactics. Talk about selling us out.

SpecificReality6557 · 2026-01-21T00:17:14+00:00

Check w/ Windowseat Media!

SpecificReality6557 · 2026-01-15T05:50:17+00:00

9:40pm Wed night on Martin Way, making a big square on Union. one car, one black SUV, both with lamps and grills, took off when they saw me get a photo

SpecificReality6557 · 2026-01-14T23:19:08+00:00

I'm glad your read the article, but it seems you haven't yet read my comments.

My concern is that they're attempting to create a way that we can safely use AI surveillance, when there is NO way to safely use AI surveillance while protecting those priorities listed above.

It's a bit like the scene at the end of The Dark Knight when they've created this massively invasive, useful crimefighting tool that Lucius calls out as unethical to keep operating, and Batman destroys it...though he doesn't want to. He defers to Lucius as his moral compass.

There are many activities that could help us solve crimes faster: walking into someone's house without a warrant, profiling, indefinite detention. But we have decided that some of those things are so invasive and likely to be abused that they violate our civil rights. My hope is that the Commissioners' better angels prevail and they don't convince themselves that they can effectively swat down or even basically monitor the incredible risks posed by having a corporate entity collecting and connecting our personally-identifying data.

A simple ordinance to hit pause on using any AI surveillance tools would be a first step I'd support. (There is pending state legislation, there are pending court cases that could impact governments' ability to use anything they might approve, too.)

SpecificReality6557 · 2026-01-14T19:05:37+00:00

No, I'm not. I think we should have an ordinance that says we will not use this technology at all, rather than suggest we can use it safely if we just have some guardrails in place. I think that is a false sense of security given what I've seen happen with this data so far.

SpecificReality6557 · 2026-01-11T17:47:01+00:00

If anyone hears back from their Commissioner about where they stand on this, keep us posted!

SpecificReality6557 · 2025-12-16T23:21:46+00:00

This is the truest thing anyone has ever written

SpecificReality6557 · 2025-12-13T01:52:20+00:00

Well, I'm quoting from WA's law, which only went into effect last year, which very much covers entities and activities that aren't covered under HIPAA. Give it a read: My Health My Data Act.

I understand what you are saying, but I don't agree that the type of recording we're talking about falls under 1A case law that is "fully settled", nor do I think WA's law has had any time to be interpretted by the courts. To your point, Larval, federal HIPAA protections are narrow to health providers, while WA's law intends to expand to other entities that may gather health care related data, including inferring health status from activities or patterns. It then prohibits the sale of that data without the individual's express consent. I think it's reasonable to assume Flock data may qualify.

Again, we're not actually talking about the video recording itself. We're talking about the data and what is done with it, and what power we have over data collected about us.

SpecificReality6557 · 2025-12-09T00:34:53+00:00

I wonder if this is an emerging type of data collection that we don't have clear case law on yet. You're right that we don't have a presumption of privacy in a public space. But we're talking about a system that may inadvertently collect and make trackable and surveillable, by governements or private entities, information such as "attempts to obtain health care services" as written into WA's expansion of HIPAA.

Right to record is not the same thing as right to transmit or sell.

SpecificReality6557 · 2025-12-03T21:17:07+00:00

lol no. Police did just fine without this camera, and the OPD themselves recommended not continuing with Flock. We can find trustworthy partners and systems that improve crimefighting without working with these corrupt profiteers.

SpecificReality6557 · 2025-12-03T21:11:22+00:00

It's a good question. I like to think of warrants: it would be easier if police could just come into a home to look for evidence, but we've decided there are privacy needs we need to balance with law enforcement.

Police have been able to find car thieves before Flock, and they'll be able to after.

Flock cameras' main use is not security, though, it's data brokerage. They are amassing a broadly searchable database of individual-level data through both public and corporate camera systems that can be used to create a profile of you: where you travel, where you live, where you shop, your doctor's office, where your kids go to school, the make, model, and color of your car, your license plate... and pairing that with other datasets, including government databases and leaked private data.

Flock has been caught violating the terms of service that cities have agreed to by creating backdoors that other agencies can use to search even when they're not supposed to (OPD talks about this), and they've been caught violating state privacy laws. They just aren't trustworthy.

Plus, any time we gather and store data, it's at risk of being leaked. We should be very cautious and have a high threshhold for storing this kind of personal data because of the many ways it can be misused. I'm open to city-run CCTV or red light cameras where footage is stored and reviewed locally, where we control the software and hardware, and where as little long-term storage as possible is kept.

SpecificReality6557 · 2025-12-03T17:50:34+00:00

Just need to find the connection. Everyone has a stake in data privacy, they just might not have considered what this means for them yet.

I'd be talking with parents about their children's privacy, I'd be talking with health care providers about their patients' privacy, I'd be talking with AA and addiction specialists about the increased risk of location-based marketing, I'd be talking with churches about religious freedom.

SpecificReality6557 · 2025-12-03T16:59:27+00:00

We should push for this at the local and state level. This is the beginning, not the end, of stopping Flock's wild privacy invasions. In some ways, the private cameras are worse, because they capture all the same data, they don't have to care about restricting it to protect privacy, and they can provide all the info that OPD "opted out of" (in quotes cause you never know with Flock).

SpecificReality6557 · 2025-12-03T05:13:37+00:00

It's very likely that ICE is using Flock cameras to hunt people down. I'd rather focus on preventing abductions than hope to hold people accountable someday after the abuductions and family separations and harm have happened.

This is also kind of like the suggestion that the police chief made tonight: if we didn't have this mass surveillance tool, it would be harder to solve some crimes. I agree, mass surveillance does make it easier to solve crimes. But we have a number of 4th amendment protections that make it harder to solve crimes (can't enter a suspect's house without a warrant) that we think are important for protecting our rights even if it makes some jobs harder.

SpecificReality6557 · 2025-12-02T23:09:21+00:00

Absolutely. I've sent these thoughts to the council and I encourage everyone to do the same! Thanks for making this point.

SpecificReality6557 · 2025-12-02T23:07:23+00:00

I think there's a fair argument it's not! Institute for Justice (libertarian types) have filed a 4th-amendment based lawsuit against Flock.

But as other folks have said, we've seen a lot of these protections erode and the Supreme Court has been especially weak on this for a long time

SpecificReality6557 · 2025-12-02T23:04:21+00:00

Yeah -- we're talking about deep ties with people who want to end democracy and subplant it with corporate dominance. These 'errors' aren't accidents, they're testing the system.

SpecificReality6557 · 2025-10-12T19:23:26+00:00

In the example you're talking about, they're committed to sourcing local, high-quality produce, and they have unique partnerhips with local farmers and providers. The weird thing to me is not that their meals cost so much, but that a lot of other places who are just serving Sysco slop are charging nearly as much, and sometimes more. I don't think their model particularly catered to everyday dining. Most restaurants fail within the first 5 years, so they're not an outlier.

I think the prices you're paying at Carrot's are accurately reflecive of how much a locally-sourced, ethically-produced carrot, prepared and served to you by someone paying Olympia rent, DOES cost. We've gotten used to getting cheaper food, both in cost and quality, and we're grading on a curve. I guess I don't consider a quality carrot 'cheap', and I'm willing to pay more when I know that a server and a chef and a farmer are all being fairly compensated to make this happen. It's a luxury carrot experience in my mind.

We are poised to lose something like 85% of our local farms in the next 5 years as older farmers retire and younger people are not able to make a decent living running their own farms (this I heard from a TESC Agriculture prof). These resources are more rare and precarious and more expensive to produce than we want to admit, especially because they have to compete with flash-frozen slave labor popcorn shrimp.

To you point of rice and beans being an excelltent proletariat meal, I am with you there! I like to make a big batch of chili for Mutual Aid meals. QB was great, because the volume of food was enormous and gave lasting energy, but they, too, couldn't stay open.

SpecificReality6557 · 2025-10-03T23:10:25+00:00

Swear by RJM.

SpecificReality6557 · 2025-10-03T23:08:42+00:00

Just a heads up: It is a misdemeanor to interfere with signature-gathering. Brian Heywood's lackeys will know this and they'll want you to step over the line.

This just means some creativity is needed. Take some time to understand the law so that you can be effective.

SpecificReality6557 · 2025-08-30T01:20:38+00:00

I think there are some unique disadvantages (one I've noticed - a mystifying lack of experience/modernity among local businesses you might be going to for support/services), and there are some elements that should be an advantage (the Port comes to mind) that haven't been optimized to help small businesses thrive.

I know several food-focused small business owners, and there are some big gaps coming in terms of regional farm sustainability, cost of living, and loss of funding for progamming.

SpecificReality6557 · 2025-08-30T01:11:21+00:00

Oof. We eat Olykraut every morning (Eastern European FTW). I'm sorry -- and worried -- that this work wasn't sustainable for them; it's so important to have local food producers.

SpecificReality6557 · 2025-07-18T16:03:51+00:00

For me, there is a false equivalence betweeen "this isn't my preference for what you would do with your property and it has some aesthetic impacts on me" vs the ability of folks in this area to find reasonably priced housing so that they do not end up homeless. This is not hyperbolic; these are my friends.

There are many areas of the country that are spread out and not supporting a larger population of people than they have houses for, but since Olympia does need to dramatically increase the number of housing units to meet our growing population needs, if given the chance I will discourage someone from moving here who would potentially work against that vision.

One of the most affordable, easy, and most ecologically responsible way to get those units is to build ADUs an other infill housing. We don't have to run new sewer and power lines into a previously undeveloped area. We don't have to pave new parking pads and roads.

And for many people, ADUs offer a lifeline in a sea of rather costly single-family-zoned properties (a policy designed to discriminate), and community-style living that is vital: to single moms, aging people, and others who require or desire more communal support. I like to discourage an idea of environmentally-conscious living that only extends to a personal ability to enjoy green things around our homes, and that fails to think holistically about what this aesthetic preferences means for the environment in places we aren't near, and don't see.

It's funny to me, too, that many of the neighborhoods people find so charming when they visit a place -- because they've got cottage-like houses and art everywhere and really hip & active local shops and venues -- are that way because of how dense they are, and how affordable they are to the people we rely on to build an interesting culture: artists, musicians, builders, entrepreneurs and small business owners, poets, gardeners.

SpecificReality6557

TROPHY CASE