• neuracnu@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    133
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Not buying it.

    The product leadership, directors and executives who dreamed this nightmare up and believed in it enough to make it a reality are still there.

    Never trust them again.

  • SlippiHUD@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    1 day ago

    Who gives a shit if they cancelled thier flock partnership, they’re still partners with ICE.

  • billwashere@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    101
    ·
    2 days ago

    I’m just glad people were smart enough to realize the implications of “finding lost dogs”. I immediately thought this implied terrible surveillance uses. I asked my wife about how she thought this would work and she thought it was very sweet (she and I are both dog lovers). I said so how are they “identifying these dogs?” She went through the mental process… “they just take the footage and use the same facial recognition to see if a dog matches a missing one…. Oh yeah, that’s bad”.

    I guess a lot of other people did the same thing.

      • Oak_Kitten@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Depends on how sophisticated it is. My iPhone has been able to correctly identify and tell apart different cats for about 3 years now and gets it right 90% of the time.

        And before I get the comments: yes, I’m about to fully leave the Apple ecosystem.

      • Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yes absolutely it does. If you use Google Photos or Apple Photos they will handily identify every instance of your dog’s face. It’s not quite as accurate as people, but they’re perfect capable with little effort.

  • Renorc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    66
    ·
    2 days ago

    “Following a comprehensive review, we determined the planned Flock Safety integration would require significantly more time and resources than anticipated,” Ring wrote in a blog post. “As a result, we have made the joint decision to cancel the planned integration.”

    Not necessarily because of privacy concerns.

    • III@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      2 days ago

      Absolutely not because of privacy concerns. But definitely not about a resources or time issue. This is them responding to the negative backlash without acknowledging their tone deaf Superbowl ad. If there was time or resource issue they wouldn’t have dropped tens of millions of dollars bragging about it.

    • Evotech@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      They can’t say that out loud of course. They do the same thing.

      But it’s obviously to mitigate the current shitstorm

  • db2@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    2 days ago

    They already lost a bunch of people, some destroyed the devices too so no secondhand market customers from them either.

    That leopard is gonna get diabetes from all those sweet faces it’s eating.

  • aceshigh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    That was an interesting move by them, considering they’re seeing in real time the short term effects - when did target “rebrand”?