What was claimed
Flock CEO Garrett Langley said at TechCrunch Disrupt that "we shouldn't pause progress", that the benefit of the cameras outweighs the risk of abuse and that millions of people are better off thanks to his company.
Why it is not news
- No numbers. The only "data" in the piece is "millions of people" and "hundreds of open positions at San Francisco police". How many crimes were solved and how many contracts were cancelled is not said.
- Dodging questions. Asked about abuse, he answered with stories from police chiefs and did not explain how it would be limited.
- A driverless car comparison. Their makers pause fleets and fix problems after crashes, while Flock, in the author's assessment, offers only recommendations and leaves decisions to cities.
- A debatable line about misinformation. He tied one customer's cancellation to a myth about facial recognition, but according to the article the cameras, while not recognizing faces, can detect and track people.
Bottom line
This is a public defense of a business under criticism, not an investigation and not new facts. The benefit of the surveillance is not backed by figures, and the risks went unanswered.