this post was submitted on 04 Nov 2026
201 points (100.0% liked)

privacy

11597 readers
246 users here now

Big tech and governments are monitoring and recording your eating activities. c/Privacy provides tips and tricks to protect your privacy against global surveillance.

Partners:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The internet is losing it.

top 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] abcdqfr@lemmy.world 32 points 3 days ago

Sawzall blades are cheaper and actually remove the offending infrastructure. Faraday cage the electronics until they naturally discharge. Harvest the goodies thereafter. Be smart. Be safe. De-flock.

[–] glibg10b@lemmy.zip 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Not that indiscriminate. Flock cameras are concentrated in marginalized communities: https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/d6j3b_v2.html

[–] DeadEndLink@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 days ago

Just use crazy glue

[–] i_am_not_a_robot@discuss.tchncs.de 13 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Don't print this if your printer has one of those internet-connected ghost gun print scanning systems.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

People who are motivated to print and deploy these are likely not going to have one of those compromised printers.

Maybe out of people in this community and maybe for now. I checked just now and was surprised that even though Bambu has been making all their printers dependent on cloud services and closed source software, they apparently don't send all your prints to a government-affiliated entity for approval yet. But it's going to be law in California and New York so expect most printers sold in the US to have this in the future, and most cloud-dependent printers already sold in the US to add it on so they can continue selling their current models.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Are those out yet?

[–] SPRUNTnsfw@fedinsfw.app 22 points 3 days ago (1 children)

A plastic cover only hinders the camera. There are more surveillance devices within. The only sure method of disablement is complete destruction.

[–] Malica@lemmy.zip 4 points 3 days ago

Gotta take out the Bluetooth to make it worth it

[–] ten8tp@reddthat.com 20 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Vaseline is cheap and accomplishes the same result

[–] altphoto@lemmy.today 13 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Silicone spray...once a surface is contaminated with silicone there's virtually nothing that can clean it off other than gasoline or similar molecules.

[–] spankysalmon@fedinsfw.app 6 points 3 days ago (2 children)

While gasoline is far more expensive than it used to be, it's still pretty fucking cheap for a cleaning agent.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

and as an accelerant...

[–] altphoto@lemmy.today 8 points 3 days ago (2 children)

But you probably would not want that anywhere near a camera. Most lenses are plastic or have coatings or glues that turn hazy in contact with hydrocarbons. So its silicone hazy or crazed plastic haze. Pick your tick.

[–] spankysalmon@fedinsfw.app 5 points 3 days ago

Eh... You'd be surprised at how trivial it is to make things impervious to such basic chemicals. This isn't the 80s.

[–] Fallibilist@feddit.uk 4 points 3 days ago

Most lenses are plastic

No they're not. Glass is optically far superior and not that much more expensive.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 10 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

this has shown not to be effective flock just sends someone to remove it, only sawing the pole off is, it makes them waste more resources putting up a new one.

n

The dude they send out to remove my fancy new rainbow sparkle camera faceplate, how much you suppose they pay him per hour? I bet I can make them send him out here at least a dozen times on a single $15 roll of PLA, and I (probably) wouldn't catch charges if they caught me with it.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 days ago

Scratch the lens?

[–] j5y7@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 days ago

A garbage bag works too. It's also apt.

Give me 4 hours, some duct tape, and some old cardboard and I can make more than one Flock Camera UV Protection Cover. Biodegradable too. For the most part.

[–] graphito@sopuli.xyz 4 points 2 days ago

Why not tie a plastic bag on it though

[–] ObsidianFlux@fedinsfw.app 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Another pointless protest. Do people seriously believe this kind of performative gathering is going to stop indiscriminate mass surveillance? It's just the organizers creating more noise for self-promotion and microplastics everywhere 💀

[–] Bipauler@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Someone in the comments recommended using an actual old sock. I don't know. I don't like these things. but I don't have a circular saw. To be fair, I don't have a 3D printer either. Is spray paint and old socks the way?

[–] skankhunt42@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

150g filament and takes less than four hours

Seems like a lot to me. I think an old sock is better

[–] RadiallyAxiomatic@lemmy.ca 9 points 3 days ago

Baseball is a popular pasttime in america, perhaps we should all practice. Hrm, I could be in the wrong sub.

[–] spankysalmon@fedinsfw.app 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Hacksaws are pretty cheap and a good blade on a tight saw makes shockingly fast progress on aluminum and mild steel.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You're right, but if I'm killing one of these things in view of the public, I want in and out in seconds.

[–] spankysalmon@fedinsfw.app 2 points 2 days ago

If it's the right kind of blade and you're not out of shape, it is still seconds. No, not sawsall fast, but faster than an angle grinder, for example.