Which is more immoral: Flock cameras or spreading misinformation about the contents of them so the tweakers dismantle the network for us. Bonus- your catalytic converter remains in place while this happens.
The immoral bit would be the one where the tweakers risk jail time under false pretenses in terms of the reward.
Honestly makes for an allegory of capitalism. The worker (tweaker) does all the work and risks their health and freedom, while the beneficiary (people who want to get rid of the cameras) just enjoys the fruit of the worker’s labor.
To be clear, I’m not saying getting rid of the cameras is a bad thing, I’m just saying tweakers are people too.
Copper thieves know most electronics contain some amount of copper, we have to convince them the reward surpasses the inherent risk that comes from stealing a security camera. Why risk jail stealing a camera when you can continue the tried and true method of stripping poorly secured new construction sites? Because one camera is worth more than you can strip out a house in a week. Did I mention they have diamond lenses?
Innocent people being jailed because you told them they could bank thousands of dollars is pretty immoral IMO. Especially when you yourself are sitting on your ass and not doing any dismantling yourself. Put your money where your mouth is.
Would drunkenly vandalizing private property of that belongs to people you disagree with for the sake of destruction rather than financial gain be immoral?
I’m not a criminal, but if I’m struggling financially and have nothing to eat, I might take down a few cameras. But then I would NOT score ANY money to feed myself, with a high chance of ending up in jail and in a much worse situation than I already was. But as long as you’re happy sitting on your comfy sofa telling others to commit crimes for no reward, it’s all good. /s
Indeed it does. One can think of themselves as “not a criminal” if they define “criminal” as one convicted of a crime. Others break laws but without a record consider themselves to not be “criminal”. And some really do their damndest to obey the laws. I’m just curious as to what your experience with criminality, particularly theft and destruction of property while under the influence is. If you’ve genuinely never engaged in criminality than I’d say you’re speculating on what drives/motivates criminal behavior from an outside perspective. If you’re someone who recognizes that one can be a criminal without a conviction and you yourself engage in such behavior but have never been caught, you bring a personal perspective.
Nothing in that picture is silver.
Which is more immoral: Flock cameras or spreading misinformation about the contents of them so the tweakers dismantle the network for us. Bonus- your catalytic converter remains in place while this happens.
The immoral bit would be the one where the tweakers risk jail time under false pretenses in terms of the reward.
Honestly makes for an allegory of capitalism. The worker (tweaker) does all the work and risks their health and freedom, while the beneficiary (people who want to get rid of the cameras) just enjoys the fruit of the worker’s labor.
To be clear, I’m not saying getting rid of the cameras is a bad thing, I’m just saying tweakers are people too.
Copper would probably be a more believable material
Copper thieves know most electronics contain some amount of copper, we have to convince them the reward surpasses the inherent risk that comes from stealing a security camera. Why risk jail stealing a camera when you can continue the tried and true method of stripping poorly secured new construction sites? Because one camera is worth more than you can strip out a house in a week. Did I mention they have diamond lenses?
Innocent people being jailed because you told them they could bank thousands of dollars is pretty immoral IMO. Especially when you yourself are sitting on your ass and not doing any dismantling yourself. Put your money where your mouth is.
Would drunkenly vandalizing private property of that belongs to people you disagree with for the sake of destruction rather than financial gain be immoral?
I’m not a criminal, but if I’m struggling financially and have nothing to eat, I might take down a few cameras. But then I would NOT score ANY money to feed myself, with a high chance of ending up in jail and in a much worse situation than I already was. But as long as you’re happy sitting on your comfy sofa telling others to commit crimes for no reward, it’s all good. /s
Not a criminal as in “never caught/convicted” or “don’t actually break any laws”?
Ah yes, that’s what makes ALL the difference.
Indeed it does. One can think of themselves as “not a criminal” if they define “criminal” as one convicted of a crime. Others break laws but without a record consider themselves to not be “criminal”. And some really do their damndest to obey the laws. I’m just curious as to what your experience with criminality, particularly theft and destruction of property while under the influence is. If you’ve genuinely never engaged in criminality than I’d say you’re speculating on what drives/motivates criminal behavior from an outside perspective. If you’re someone who recognizes that one can be a criminal without a conviction and you yourself engage in such behavior but have never been caught, you bring a personal perspective.
There are ‘entreprenuers’ stealing fibre-optic cables for copper… This might get them to stealing flock cameras instead.
Not if it doesn’t pay
Tell them they have to find the right one. All they have to do is try a few more.
this is actually true. about half the cameras contain gold and silver in much higher quantities than the other type.
Just have to keep trying until you figure out which is which.
I mean I think we can crowdfund 10-15 dollars a piece to buy them from crackheads
Shhhhh.
Thatsthejoke.jpeg
Everything on that picture is silver
There is something that’s worth more