As a person who suspects to have been a victim of Fl*cks central database, and its access to a growing wave of narcissist pranksters aka abusers, I gift the following design for a de-centralized Fl*ck like system into the public domain:
1) homeowner / business owner installs their own cameras.
2) open source camera server software, analyses said video using any
number of plugins, and categorizes said video / issues alerts.
3) results of video analysis are OPTIONALLY made available in a
queryable manner, in a radius selected by the camera operator.
4) victims of crime and investigating officers in an area, can search for video/analysis that might help, and contact the owner of the video directly.
5) camera operator could OPTIONALLY charge a small fee for the service of providing the video, to recoup camera / system operating costs.
At no time does the system upload any video or analysis not expressly approved by the operator of the camera.
Because each camera operator has control over their own video and analysis/events, and can retract them at different times, the history of any individual as they go about their business is fragmented, and by design not made available in a centralized database form.
This was spitballed. Tear it apart. Fill the cracks with bondo. Paint over it. Make it shine. V
Kevin_Flynn•3m ago
I'll take the first hammer to it:
Downsides:
1) Same software could be used by national/state authorities, to create their
own system, that doesn't follow the above rules.
Major Downsides:
1) See above.
forshaper•2m ago
Like many solutions that could work, the problem is often somewhere in adoption.
Kevin_Flynn•7m ago
1) homeowner / business owner installs their own cameras.
2) open source camera server software, analyses said video using any number of plugins, and categorizes said video / issues alerts.
3) results of video analysis are OPTIONALLY made available in a queryable manner, in a radius selected by the camera operator.
4) victims of crime and investigating officers in an area, can search for video/analysis that might help, and contact the owner of the video directly.
5) camera operator could OPTIONALLY charge a small fee for the service of providing the video, to recoup camera / system operating costs.
At no time does the system upload any video or analysis not expressly approved by the operator of the camera.
Because each camera operator has control over their own video and analysis/events, and can retract them at different times, the history of any individual as they go about their business is fragmented, and by design not made available in a centralized database form.
This was spitballed. Tear it apart. Fill the cracks with bondo. Paint over it. Make it shine. V
Kevin_Flynn•3m ago
Downsides:
1) Same software could be used by national/state authorities, to create their own system, that doesn't follow the above rules.
Major Downsides:
1) See above.
forshaper•2m ago