Comment Re: Adversarial patterns FTW! (Score 1) 63
If Flock wants to pay for the bandwidth and tokens to upload every image, who am I to stop my enemy from burning money?
As for doing it locally as some have suggested, there's a much more fundamental technical limitation here: Flock cameras have 0.4m^2 of solar panels, worth roughly 2.8kWh per day... in Death Valley. DeepSeek 4 Flash (currently one of if not the most efficient high-capability models) burns roughly 260Wh per million tokens. Somewhat conveniently, it resamples every image to be exactly 384 tokens. Per Wired, Flock is capturing very close to 100k images per day. 100k*260*384/1M comes out to very nearly 10kWh, a factor of four too high. Even then, even if Flock were willing to make each installation a giant multi-meter solar array, nobody's pushing 28*384=333312 tokens per second outside a data center. An RX4090 can handle... 12.5 (there's no suffix there), and that's assuming aggressively low-bit quants.
Comment Re: Adversarial patterns FTW! (Score 1) 63
It won't help in any way because the pictures are sent home for more processing.
Comment Re: More antinuclear frearmongering (Score 1) 130
Casks leak. There is a whole industry around dealing with it. Deal with it.
Comment Re: The hidden subsidies to the nuclear industry (Score 1) 130
Oh, you peaked in high school? You can stick your high school level understanding of economics up your ass next to your junior high school understanding of reproductive biology and your utter lack of ethics.
Comment Re: Not just there (Score 1) 130
Moving the goalposts from detectable to significant. Pick a lane.
Comment Cloudy with a chance of boom (Score 2) 44
The data went from being in the cloud to being in the clouds
Comment Re: New business opportunity (Score 1) 63
They don't need a reason.
I was going to say it's an excuse instead, but they don't need that either
Comment Re:I'm still wondering (Score 4, Informative) 45
Those two seemingly random instances of the US Executive merely being woefully incompetent make the real reason pretty clear. And in case we needed any more evidence, crude is still over $100/bbl.
Comment Re:Adversarial patterns FTW! (Score 1) 63
To repeat myself for the hard of thinking, "I'm not suggesting that as a way to specifically avoid detection". There's no practical and legal way to really "hide" while driving a car you own on public roads. I have no interest, positive or negative, in whether or not Flock helps catch actual criminals - That detail is completely irrelevant to the fact it's a blatant end-run around the fourth amendment.
Sure, the local police will recognize my car instantly. And if their first response when they see me is "oh, it's that jackass with all the weird bumper stickers" rather than fucking shooting me... Hey, that wasn't the intent, but I'll take it!
Comment Re: Why aren't we talking about it? (Score 1) 63
I do as far as you know.
Comment Re: This is a weird little hit piece (Score 1) 135
They are a well known product compared to camera phones? GTFOH with that clown shit
Comment Re: You are right (Score 1) 135
It's a reasonable assumption given the things we know about Facebook
Comment Re:Adversarial patterns FTW! (Score 1) 63
As an aside, the full Wired article is freely available. I can't say if there's any additional information in the 404 Media version (because I'm also not signing up), but the Wired writeup is pretty solid.
Comment Adversarial patterns FTW! (Score 1) 63
Time to absolutely wallpaper the front and back of our cars with bumper stickers that look like faces and license plates. Let 'em burn police time chasing down "8008135" stickers to the point nobody even checks the alerts anymore.