An interactive map of Flock Cams

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Map & Data Sources

  • Deflock’s map is powered by OpenStreetMap; coverage is incomplete and sometimes stale (removed/repositioned cameras still shown, missing cameras in many areas).
  • Users can add/edit cameras via OSM tools (MapComplete, EveryDoor, deflock itself) and even delete outdated ones.
  • Some users report multiple markers at one location, sometimes reflecting multiple cameras or providers.

Camera Locations & Density

  • Many report dense coverage in wealthy neighborhoods, big-box store parking lots (Home Depot, Lowe’s, Walmart), universities, and some parks/community centers.
  • Others see only a few in their town, or only on certain roads or campuses.
  • Presence of non-Flock ALPR vendors is noted but not mapped here.

Avoidance & Navigation Tools

  • Several projects generate ALPR-avoiding routes (Big-B-Router, dontgetflocked.com, alprwatch).
  • Users note limits: routes often impossible in dense areas and unknown cameras still capture drivers.

Perceived Benefits for Safety & Policing

  • Pro‑camera comments emphasize:
    • Easier identification of suspects, stolen vehicles, and wanted persons.
    • Reduced need for high‑speed pursuits.
    • Potential help in violent crimes, trafficking, Amber/Silver alerts, and retail theft.
  • Some prefer automated systems over discretionary policing and are willing to trade privacy for perceived safety.

Privacy, Civil Liberties & Abuse

  • Many see a de facto mass‑surveillance network: constant tracking of innocent drivers, centralized and queryable at scale.
  • Documented abuses cited: officers using Flock data to stalk ex-partners or coworkers; use in immigration enforcement and against protesters/activists.
  • Fears include future targeting of dissidents, dragnet use for minor offenses, and linkage to broader AI-driven profiling.
  • Critics argue benefits are overstated, police often ignore property crime even with video, and Flock’s security/transparency are “abysmal.”

Law, Policy & Public Records

  • In Washington state, courts have ruled Flock data public, triggering public-records strategies to pressure cities to drop the system; others expect legislatures to carve privacy-based exemptions.
  • Draft legislation is discussed that would narrowly constrain permissible ALPR uses (stolen cars, missing/endangered persons, felony-related cases, specific traffic functions).

Economics & Incentives

  • Counties can acquire cameras via grants requiring partial local match; traffic cameras also generate significant revenue in some places.
  • Some suspect “public safety” rationales mask revenue or surveillance expansion motives; Flock markets crime‑solving impact (e.g., “10% of crime” claims), which are questioned.

Public Sentiment Split

  • Enthusiasts welcome more cameras, especially after local crime experiences, and trust guardrails or better access controls could mitigate abuse.
  • Opponents describe the map as “scary,” adjust their routes to avoid cameras, contemplate leaving high‑coverage cities, and argue the “juice isn’t worth the squeeze.”