No its not. The article spends most of its words explaining why people are vandalizing the cameras. It clearly draws the its connections to ICE. It mentions multiple legal attempts to block it. It doesn’t talk about any “benefits” of the surveillance system and explicitly calls it a “surveillance system”. Almost everyone it cites are pro-privacy. That’s being as anti-flock as you can get without saying “go destroy flock cameras”.
CN should be required listening. Or maybe just reading the article.
No its not. The article spends most of its words explaining why people are vandalizing the cameras. It clearly draws the its connections to ICE. It mentions multiple legal attempts to block it. It doesn’t talk about any “benefits” of the surveillance system and explicitly calls it a “surveillance system”. Almost everyone it cites are pro-privacy. That’s being as anti-flock as you can get without saying “go destroy flock cameras”.
CN should be required listening. Or maybe just reading the article.