21 comments

  • darrylb42 an hour ago

    I don't really understand how blurring out a house adds privacy. Looking around my neighborhood on Google street view I sometimes find houses that are blurred, now that otherwise normal looking house is now suspicious. Because I am physically close I can just look at the house if I wanted to. Someone "special" lives there.

      schiffern an hour ago

      I'm confused. If he has nothing to hide he has nothing to fear, right?

      Seems like some Good Samaritan should set up a mobile pole camera (or twelve) outside his house 24/7. Rest easy, it's all being done for his own safety!

        jordanb 37 minutes ago

        The guy gives me unhinged stalker vibes whenever he does an interview.

      NewJazz 24 minutes ago

      now that otherwise normal looking house is now suspicious

      Mysterious? Yes. Suspicious? I wouldn't think that. Plenty of houses in my neighborhood are blurred. I don't think much about it. And yes, I can just walk over and look. But I'm their neighbor. Not someone megameters away...

      frollogaston 13 minutes ago

      You only know what the front of the house looks like.

        ascorbic 12 minutes ago

        So does Street View

          frollogaston 9 minutes ago

          Oh, turns out you can't blur the satellite images. Then yeah idk how this helps.

          Edit: Guess if you park some expensive car out front and don't want someone far away scanning for all houses with expensive cars? Or potentially the image is taken while the garage door is open. It's a bit far-fetched, but there also aren't that many reasons not to blur your house.

  • bastawhiz 32 minutes ago

    Didn't this man just go on record saying the public needs to "compromise" on privacy?

  • higginsniggins 43 minutes ago

    Flock ceo attempts to stop people using online photo system from stocking him…

    Hmmmm…

      frollogaston 11 minutes ago

      Not that I'm ok with Flock, but those images aren't publicly viewable like Google Maps, at least not easily.

      dessimus 37 minutes ago

      I mean, I wouldn't want to be boiled into a soup or stew either.

  • xvxvx an hour ago

    Tells you all you need to know about Flock.

  • thrownaway561 13 minutes ago

    People are so childish nowadays. The fact that things escalate to the point.

      Micrococonut 6 minutes ago

      Indeed. This mass surveillance should have been stopped long ago.

      newspaper1 9 minutes ago

      The Flock CEO just this week told the US public that it needs to "compromise" on their right to privacy. I'm glad things are escalating, we need every single one of these cameras taken down.

  • deepc4life an hour ago

    I'd hope he did! I hope all of you do to. This isn't information you want so easily publicly available. It's a pretty easy request.

      cheese_van 11 minutes ago

      It is an easy request. When the announcement blurring was made available, I made the request just to see if it they would do it - and they did!

      Now, if anyone in the neighborhood asks me, "Why is your house blurred?" I reply, "Why are you asking? Is anyone asking questions about me? What did they look like?" (well, that's what I plan on replying if anyone asks)

      lorecore an hour ago

      And yet there’s no way to get yourself blurred in Flock videos.

        jordanb 34 minutes ago

        The first key feature of the Panopticon is that the guards can observe the inmate at all times and he can't hide.

        The second key feature is that the inmate can't observe the guards. He can't know who they are and can't even know if they're paying attention to him or not.

        uberman an hour ago

        Yes, an here in lies the hypocrisy of our times where tech titans can have their information removed from public data sources (anyone remember the guy tracking Musk's plane?) while amassing staggering quantities of data about everyone else. Then have the gall to call for a "compromise" on their collection and selling of this data and our privacy.