- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 1 out of 3 Flock stolen vehicle alerts were bogus.
Posted on 8/11/26 at 1:49 pm to Henry Jones Jr
Posted on 8/11/26 at 1:49 pm to Henry Jones Jr
quote:
So more times than not they were right? Sounds like a technology that should be utilized and continued to be fine tuned
The failure rate should shape administration policies. It’s no different than eyewitness testimony. If you get a hit, you simply approach with caution to verify, not certainty to arrest.
0
Posted on 8/11/26 at 2:01 pm to Powerman
quote:
A 33 percent failure rate for something this consequential isn't acceptable.
Correct.
That is why Flock upgraded their system - to improve the error rate from back in 2023. The error rate they now disclose is based on more current data. A November of 2025 court filing indicates it was 93% at the time. LINK
Flock now claims an accuracy rate of 96% under optimal conditions.
It still warrants better LEO admin policies. Flock does not control those…which are the real problem.
This post was edited on 8/11/26 at 2:14 pm
Posted on 8/11/26 at 2:14 pm to Night Vision
For the greater good.
Posted on 8/11/26 at 2:16 pm to Night Vision
Didn't even read through the thread to see all the "BUT I DONT COMMIT CRIMES, WHY IS IT A BIG DEAL" posts.
Posted on 8/11/26 at 2:17 pm to DeBoar
quote:
Flock shouldn’t be used for stolen vehicles
FLOCK shouldn't be used AT ALL. If any swangin' dick thinks that those fricking things won't be used to persecute,you need to wtfu.
Posted on 8/11/26 at 2:19 pm to Night Vision
I just hate to see it.
What a shame.
No not really.
Edit: Responding to the # of agencies dropping contracts.
What a shame.
No not really.
Edit: Responding to the # of agencies dropping contracts.
This post was edited on 8/11/26 at 2:32 pm
Posted on 8/11/26 at 2:19 pm to Henry Jones Jr
quote:
So more times than not they were right?
"We only shite on your constitutional rights one third of the time." Brilliant argument, Henry.
Posted on 8/11/26 at 2:20 pm to Night Vision
Why is that piece of shite holding his gun sideways like that?
We have the shittiest fricking cops
We have the shittiest fricking cops
Posted on 8/11/26 at 2:21 pm to Boom33
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.quote:
I just don't like where we're going with Flock cameras. I think that it's invasive, as you said. It's too big government,” Stutzman told the Just the News, No Noise television show on Friday night. “You know the law enforcement folks would argue that they can use these as a tool. You know they (cameras) can be where you can't have a human.”
Across the country, opposition to the license plate cameras created by Flock Safety is mounting, causing some communities to end their contracts over privacy concerns.
Stutzman recently experienced the long arm reach of the Flock cameras during a car ride in his home district in Indiana.
“I pulled into my driveway, and all of a sudden, a police officer pulls in behind me,” he recalled. “I said, you know, ‘Can I help you? Did I do something wrong?’ And he said, ‘Well, your car's registration has expired.'
“So I looked, and it was in my wife's name. I somehow missed it. Of course, we got it taken care of. But you know, he recognized my car because the Flock cameras relayed the information that you know we had driven into town, and it was under the jurisdiction of these Flock cameras, and it just, to me, I felt very uneasy about it.
Posted on 8/11/26 at 2:22 pm to Night Vision
"if it saves just one person......"
you just need to "trust" government......
you just need to "trust" government......
This post was edited on 8/11/26 at 2:23 pm
Posted on 8/11/26 at 2:24 pm to Ailsa
quote:
“I pulled into my driveway, and all of a sudden, a police officer pulls in behind me,” he recalled. “I said, you know, ‘Can I help you? Did I do something wrong?’ And he said, ‘Well, your car's registration has expired.' “So I looked, and it was in my wife's name. I somehow missed it. Of course, we got it taken care of
I’ve watched plenty of these stops. Was he pulled from the car, patted down, forced to do road side sobriety checks, and asked to have his car searched/waited for a k9 to sniff? If not, why?
Posted on 8/11/26 at 2:38 pm to weadjust
quote:
A cop running the plate isn't likely to mistake a O & 0 or 7 & 2 which happens with Flock
But they are likely to make that error when entering data into NCIC. That was the primary reason for errors in vehicle stops before Flock and continues to be with Flock.
One error can happen at the entry point, another at the point when a plate is read under non-optimal conditions.
This is why these agencies need to improve their policies.
Posted on 8/11/26 at 3:33 pm to Willie Stroker
quote:
Flock now claims an accuracy rate of 96% under optimal conditions.
Following up on complaints about Flock Safety flagging vehicles incorrectly, the police department of Roseville, California, ran its own analysis of the cameras, studying nearly 1,500 Flock reports. They found an astonishing 71% failure rate, where the cameras would mistake one license plate number for another.
This is a stark contrast to Flock’s own claims — sort of. The company reports that independent evaluations show its cameras have a 96% vehicle count accuracy rating, while correctly categorizing 92% into vehicle types. But accurately recognizing vehicles is a far cry from accurately reading license plates, which Flock doesn’t provide much data on.
copy & paste from a Cnet article
Posted on 8/11/26 at 3:49 pm to weadjust
quote:
They found an astonishing 71% failure rate, where the cameras would mistake one license plate number for another.
I throw the bullshite flag on that. There's no way.
Posted on 8/11/26 at 4:15 pm to KosmoCramer
I can tell you from professional experience that before I would make a traffic stop I would ALWAYS run that plate and get a return before I initiated said traffic stop. It gives me the information I need before I make contact with the subject operating the vehicle and allow the preparation for what could possibly happen.
These young officers today basically are lazy and want AI to do their work or they would have ran that shite before they ever turned a light on. Same with reports. The reports now I have had to go review working as a parttime trainer are so obvious in AI being used that the local DA is literally throwing cases out.
That flock system needs one person of a certain demographic to be killed and when it happens..NOT IF...you will then see action.
We preach safety but the "drag net" surveillance is absolutely a violation of the fourth amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America. This is gonna end up in the Supreme Court because apparently the last time it didnt sink in.
These young officers today basically are lazy and want AI to do their work or they would have ran that shite before they ever turned a light on. Same with reports. The reports now I have had to go review working as a parttime trainer are so obvious in AI being used that the local DA is literally throwing cases out.
That flock system needs one person of a certain demographic to be killed and when it happens..NOT IF...you will then see action.
We preach safety but the "drag net" surveillance is absolutely a violation of the fourth amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America. This is gonna end up in the Supreme Court because apparently the last time it didnt sink in.
Posted on 8/11/26 at 4:20 pm to IndianPower
quote:
We preach safety but the "drag net" surveillance is absolutely a violation of the fourth amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America. This is gonna end up in the Supreme Court because apparently the last time it didnt sink in.
My understanding is that appellate courts have held they are constitutional so long as there is no long term retention of the data to create profiles for each plate.
I agree that would be a significant over reach and absolutely unconstitutional. I don't know how long flock retains their data and how their system compiles it.
Posted on 8/11/26 at 4:21 pm to KosmoCramer
The department I was in has the ability to retain the information up to seven years if they so choose from the contract I have seen.
Posted on 8/11/26 at 5:12 pm to weadjust
quote:
Following up on complaints about Flock Safety flagging vehicles incorrectly, the police department of Roseville, California, ran its own analysis of the cameras, studying nearly 1,500 Flock reports. They found an astonishing 71% failure rate, where the cameras would mistake one license plate number for another.
If I’m remembering correctly, that was from an older data sample. Flock improved their product after that. They also reviewed Roseville’s assessment and determined most cameras there were still using older hardware, were positioned higher than Flock’s optimal height recommendation, and a farther distance from Flock’s recommended distance. Flock used the study to improve their product, just like Waymo does with their driverless cars. For Waymo, the result has been that their product commits far fewer error than humans. It seems reasonable to think that Flock may eventually improve to be better than humans.
quote:
This is a stark contrast to Flock’s own claims — sort of. The company reports that independent evaluations show its cameras have a 96% vehicle count accuracy rating, while correctly categorizing 92% into vehicle types. But accurately recognizing vehicles is a far cry from accurately reading license plates, which Flock doesn’t provide much data on.
That’s the most recent data.
Posted on 8/11/26 at 5:13 pm to Henry Jones Jr
quote:
So more times than not they were right? Sounds like a technology that should be utilized and continued to be fine tuned
You sound like a poster who hates freedom.
Posted on 8/11/26 at 5:15 pm to Powerman
quote:
A 33 percent failure rate for something this consequential isn't acceptable.
Make sure you tell that to Dr Jones sitting a couple rows in front of you.
This post was edited on 8/11/26 at 5:18 pm
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News