Copaganda

Their comparison table conflates legal requirements for speed cameras (AB645 for speed cams) with vendor offering for ALPRs (Flock).

ALPRs in California are also moderately regulated (SB 34), although the regulations could be stronger (eg by explicitly requiring operating agencies to maintain control of their own data, and disallowing systems that collect data into massive cross-customer, inter-state databases). There are ALPR systems and deployment configurations in use in some instances in California that don’t sync to the cloud.

Flock has allegedly violated their own contracts and California law. Nothing says a speed camera vendor or the configuration or operation of a particular deployment won’t be found committing similar violations.

In all, I don’t mind either when properly regulated and independently audited, but the regulations do have some gaps that need to be addressed, and vendors who break the law should probably just be blacklisted for some time from the state, and put under some very stringent scrutiny before they can return.

Hey guise, OUR preferred government surveillance cameras are TOTALLY different than those other cameras. The corporations pinky swore it. And they'll totally hold to their promises unlike those other corporations.