Flock cameras work by scanning the license plates and other identifying information about cars they see.
The use of a "private" middle man is to circumvent the 4th amendment
https://legalclarity.org/are-automatic-license-plate-readers-legal/
this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2025
46 points (97.9% liked)
News
32964 readers
5828 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
So how do you opt out?
And if you can't, what are the alternatives?
Don't buy a ring camera, and if you own one, it's e waste now.
Bad news, every s*** hole suburb in america's packed with these things and the golden retriever ass white people living there probably aren't going to be aware of this or care.
Say whatever you like about us white people, but leave golden retrievers out of this, please.
Agreed. If I ever do put up cameras, they are going to be stored locally
Does this go for Amazon's BLINK cameras, too? They recently bricked their app unless you installed a mandatory update.
Might be time to ditch technology.
corporate technology
My air-gapped Taiwanese IP camera, and the zoneminder Debian VM on my proxmox machine its connected to aren't snitches. (Except to me XP)
Yeah but I'm too lazy to maintain all of that. I spend enough time working on stuff at work.
Reolink make excellent video doorbells that can be selfhosted
Thanks, been trying on getting the ubiquiti one but its either stupid expensive or out of stock
Oh, Ring was untrustworthy since forever...
Perhaps relevant for some: https://www.pcworld.com/article/2945470/ring-lets-police-ask-for-security-videos-heres-how-to-opt-out.html