The outrage level and desire to stop tech being used this way ought to be reaching a fever pitch rather than being a kind of unfortunate documentary of how it isn't working right.

I just spoke at my county commission meeting this morning as they're debating putting 50% more cameras up across the county. The original set went up without any news coverage or fanfare.

https://www.youtube.com/live/1OmEmpL-7qY?t=720&is=z_mb9ZEVCs...

Looks like I have two serious opponents to privacy on the commission to deal with, and the commissioner seems to at least want to end the contract. I have no idea where the other two members sit.

> Technology is supposed to make police work faster and safer.

Not sure I agree with the premise...

> Most of the time it does.

Citation needed

> But every so often, a computer system hiccups, and an ordinary person ends up staring down the barrel of a gun for no reason at all.

"Aww shucks, you know, bugs happen and sometimes guns get pointed at people because of them". Pardon my language but: What the actual fuck? How does a site write that with a straight face?

Just absolutely trash reporting and the site doesn't allow for copy/paste to top it off.

EDIT: And after reading further I can confirm this publication and author are not good at their jobs. The ending paragraph is absolutely absurd.

This isn't reporting, this is just saying what the police and the victim said while throwing in line at the end saying maybe we need more oversight.

This is bottom-of-the-barrel reporting and it make my blood boil for them to just shrug this off and make excuses for how the police acted here.

Why did they need to have guns drawn and that many cops, even if the flag had been correct? A car involved in a homicide investigation doesn't mean it's even being driven by the suspect. It's not a positive ID at all

The inaccuracy of our omniscient AI surveillance network isn't why I'm against it. The conclusion of this article is that we need more humans in the loop for a successful police state.

Like many things in American policing, this could easily be fixed by ensuring real consequences and penalties for fuckups like this. Incentives guide actions, and there is no incentive not to keep repeating the same negligent mistake.

What officer in Milwaukee left a dead notice in the system even after there was one false positive, and what happened to him (I would be willing to bet actual money that the answer is nothing). Who set up the system in Brookfield that allows them to accidentally pull a gun on someone innocent for the exact same reason they pulled a gun on that exact same person a few days earlier.

There is no other profession where you can get away with repeated identical negligence like this. The reason for that is in almost every other profession, negligence is a liability for the parties involved. In policing it is a liability, but not for the negligent person or department.

That's not a Flock error. That's a law enforcement error. Flock isn't responsible for a bogus warrant in the system.