The festivities paid tribute to the legendary country music icon, featuring a plethora of platinum-blonde bouffants, exaggerated bustlines, and an abundance of pink attire. Guests' creative interpretations of Dolly's iconic style were on full display as they mingled at the East Village bistro turned late-night hotspot, Ella Funt.

Downstairs in the basement club, the atmosphere was electric, with a spacious subterranean area that was a rare find in downtown Manhattan. The space was transformed into a vibrant celebration of all things Dolly, complete with wood paneling and hot-pink walls illuminated by a soft rosy glow.

Guests enthusiastically took to the sunken black-and-white checkered dance floor, but it was difficult to discern its surface beneath the sea of dancing Dolly Parton impersonators.

The sea of Dolly Parton impersonators on the sunken dance floor seemed to blend together in a colorful blur, making it challenging to discern individual styles beneath the crowd's enthusiasm.

However, as guests mingled and danced, creative interpretations of the country legend shone through. Some attendees, like Rita Ora, opted for traditional Dolly-inspired looks featuring double denim outfits reminiscent of Tennessee Tuxedoes.

Others drew inspiration from more iconic moments in Dolly's career, such as her 1978 Playboy cover appearance. Meanwhile, a few guests pushed the boundaries of interpretation, incorporating unexpected references into their costumes.

A pair of actors, Archie Madekwe and Dorian Grinspan, even brought to life Dolly, the world's first cloned sheep from 1996, by dressing up in matching sheep costumes.

The music at the Manhattan Halloween party was relentless, with Michael Jackson's "Thriller" getting the dance floor into a frenzy before segueing into Dolly Parton's greatest hits to keep the momentum going.

Gaëlle Drevet, founder of The Frankie Shop, had a simple philosophy for the night: life is short. It seemed her guests took this mantra to heart, as they came dressed in an array of creative costumes that paid homage to the country music legend.

The sheer number of Dolly Parton lookalikes was staggering, with over 250 people attending the party dressed in their best Dolly-inspired outfits, creating a sea of sparkles and glamour.

Vogue: https://www.vogue.com/slideshow/dolly-parton-the-frankie-shop-unemployed-halloween

One of the key features that make Ring cameras so useful is their ability to function as live intercoms, allowing users to see who's at the door from another room or even remotely through the app. This can be particularly helpful when you're not physically present at home but still want to screen visitors before deciding whether to let them in.

Ring cameras can also be used to keep an eye on pets and other aspects of your property, providing a sense of security and reassurance without necessarily requiring a subscription. However, it's worth noting that some features are only accessible with a monthly fee, which may deter some users.

The company offers a range of subscription plans starting at $4.99 per month, with varying levels of access to saved footage and other premium features. While this can be a drawback for some, it's also worth considering the value you get from using Ring cameras without a subscription.

In many scenarios, even basic features like Two-Way Talk and Live Feed are sufficient, allowing users to see who's at the door and communicate with them through the app before deciding what to do next. This can be especially useful for parents or caregivers who need to keep an eye on children from another room.

For some owners, the free tier of Ring's service is more than enough, providing a convenient way to stay connected with visitors and maintain a sense of security without breaking the bank.

Indoor Ring cameras offer features that cater to pet owners who want to keep an eye on their animals when they're away from home. Using a smartphone, users can monitor their pets and even engage in two-way conversations with them through the device's speaker.

The use of Ring cameras for monitoring pets has sparked controversy, with some critics questioning whether it's acceptable to install such devices to watch over household animals. However, for many pet owners, these cameras provide valuable peace of mind when they're away from home.

Travelers who want to stay informed about what's happening at their homes while abroad can also benefit from the free version of Ring's service. This includes keeping an eye on potential package theft or suspicious activity outside the house.

The rise in porch piracy has made subscription plans more appealing for some users, particularly those who've experienced package theft firsthand and want access to footage that may help identify perpetrators. However, not everyone is convinced about the benefits of paying for a subscription.

Ring cameras have been at the center of privacy concerns, with critics questioning how facial recognition data is being used by Amazon and Ring. This has led to lawsuits against the companies, as well as widespread backlash over a recent Super Bowl commercial that highlighted the potential for mass surveillance using AI-assisted features.

The partnership between Ring and Flock Safety was put on hold following intense backlash over concerns about mass surveillance using AI-assisted features in a recent Super Bowl commercial. The deal allowed law enforcement to request footage from Ring owners, sparking widespread reactions.

Ring has since introduced an update to its TAKE software, claiming that users now have full control over their video footage through unique, rotating encryption keys. This approach is likened to a house key system, where only the owner can decide who receives a spare, maintaining confidentiality and security.

Engadget: https://www.engadget.com/2291366/why-ring-camera-useful-without-subscription/

Campaigns across the country have been dominated by discussions on major controversies in the tech industry, including concerns over privacy and cybersecurity as well as child online safety.

These contentious issues have exposed significant gaps in US legislation and underlying vulnerabilities that are fueling intense debate about emerging technologies like artificial intelligence. The lack of clear regulations has sparked a heated discussion among politicians and experts alike.

Big Tech executives are also increasing their financial influence ahead of the elections, making substantial contributions to various electoral races. This includes Elon Musk, who has been a major donor to conservative causes and right-wing candidates, funneling around $366 million into these efforts according to recent reports.

Tech industry leaders such as OpenAI President Greg Brockman have also made significant donations to pro-AI political action committees, further highlighting the growing influence of tech on electoral politics.

A growing number of US residents are voicing their concerns about large-scale server farms in their neighborhoods. According to a recent Gallup poll, 70% of adults across various political affiliations - including Republicans, Democrats, and independents - oppose the construction of local data centers.

The opposition stems from the significant environmental impact these facilities have on electricity and water consumption. To power generative AI programs, massive amounts of electricity are required, leading to increased costs for residents in nearby areas or even contamination of their water supply during construction.

Proponents of data centers argue that they bring in much-needed jobs and long-term investment opportunities. However, critics counter that the actual number of permanent positions created after construction is relatively low.

Several states have begun taking legislative action to address these concerns. New York has temporarily halted hyperscale data center construction, while other state legislatures are considering similar bills.

President Donald Trump has expressed strong support for data centers, suggesting that opposition to them is driven by Chinese propaganda and that communities rejecting such facilities will suffer economically.

Pressure from constituents is mounting on politicians to take action against data centers, a trend evident across both red and blue states. A leaked GOP strategy memo highlights the significance of this issue, suggesting it has the potential to sway public opinion and impact election results.

In Virginia, a state with more data centers than any other, both Senate candidates have addressed the need for greater regulation. During a recent Q&A session, incumbent Democrat Mark Warner emphasized that data centers should not be allowed to pass on their electricity costs to residents. His Republican challenger, Bert Mizusawa, also weighed in, stating his support for giving communities the power to block data center construction.

In Texas, the issue of data centers has reached boiling point. Despite Governor Greg Abbott's announcement of a "pause" on new constructions, recent reports indicate that development continues unabated. Furthermore, The Texas Tribune uncovered $5 million in donations from data center owners to the governor's campaign.

The debate over data centers is also being fueled by concerns about their environmental impact and potential effects on local communities. As scrutiny intensifies, politicians are facing increasing pressure to take a stance on this contentious issue.

Meanwhile, another contentious issue has emerged: the growing use of AI-enabled surveillance technologies such as cameras and automated license plate readers by companies like Flock. This trend has sparked intense debate over issues of privacy and surveillance, with many local and state governments grappling with how to address these concerns.

Flock Safety's technology has been installed in over 6,000 communities across the US, according to a recent estimate from the company. This widespread adoption of Flock cameras has sparked concerns about privacy and surveillance. Critics argue that law enforcement agencies are using these cameras for purposes beyond their intended scope.

Lawyers and digital rights advocates have pointed out how Flock's capabilities can be easily abused by law enforcement officers. Allegations include the use of Flock cameras to stalk individuals, track people seeking medical services, aid immigration enforcement activities, and conduct warrantless searches. These concerns highlight the need for greater oversight and regulation of surveillance technologies.

Flock Safety has faced opposition from various quarters, with some lawmakers calling for a ban on the technology. For instance, in Texas, Democratic Senate hopeful James Talarico expressed his disapproval, stating that Flock cameras have no place in the state. This opposition transcends party lines, as concerns about government overreach and civil liberties unite people across different political affiliations.

The debate around Flock Safety's technology has also led to local ballot measures aimed at regulating or banning its use. In York, Maine, for example, voters will decide on a proposal to ban automated license plate readers, highlighting the growing concern about surveillance technologies in communities nationwide.

Artificial intelligence has become a central concern in this election season's tech issues, largely due to its increasing pervasiveness and capabilities. Many experts warn that AI is advancing too quickly, sparking widespread public concerns over job loss, misinformation, deepfakes, and economic volatility.

According to recent research by the Pew Research Center, nearly half of US adults under 30 believe AI will have a negative impact on society. Across all age groups, more than 60% share this sentiment, highlighting growing fears about the consequences of unchecked AI development.

The debate over regulating AI has intensified, with many major labs arguing that they can effectively self-regulate. However, some argue that the federal government should play a stronger role in overseeing AI development to mitigate its risks.

Critics of the current regulatory landscape point out that the Trump administration's approach prioritizes giving more power to AI companies rather than regulators. This stance was reiterated during the G20 summit this fall, where frameworks were proposed that favor industry self-regulation over government oversight.

The debate has spilled onto ballots in various forms, with voters weighing in on local initiatives related to data centers and surveillance technologies like Flock cameras. However, the issue of AI regulation remains a contentious topic, pitting advocacy groups against the lobbying power of Silicon Valley companies.

As the midterm elections near, it is clear that tech issues, particularly those surrounding artificial intelligence, will continue to be a driving force in shaping public policy and influencing voter decisions.

CNET: https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/tech-issues-midterm-elections-2026-news/

The "surveillance layer" can be toggled on or off within the app's mapping service, providing a visual representation of where these cameras are located. This feature is particularly relevant as it highlights the increasing presence of automated license plate readers across various locations such as intersections, parking lots, and private properties.

MapQuest has identified several companies that develop these cameras, including Flock Safety, Axon Enterprise, Motorola Solutions, and PlateSmart, which suggests a diverse market for this technology.

The use of license plate reader cameras has been met with resistance from some communities. Cities and towns are reevaluating their contracts with companies like Flock Safety due to concerns over data misuse and privacy infringement.

Critics argue that the data collected by these cameras can be used for purposes other than its intended purpose, such as sharing it with federal immigration officials. This has led to protests, petitions, and even physical removal of the cameras in some areas.

Flock's license plate readers do not utilize facial recognition technology and allow customers to regulate access to and sharing of collected data. This means that users can control how their information is used and shared, providing an added layer of privacy protection.

To address growing concerns about data collection and usage, Flock has implemented stricter privacy measures. The company has reduced the storage period for collected data from 30 days to just 7 days, limiting the time sensitive information is retained on its servers.

MapQuest's decision to integrate Flock's cameras into its route mapping service reflects the platform's efforts to stay relevant in a rapidly changing digital landscape. By leveraging public discourse and incorporating new features, MapQuest aims to regain lost ground and remain competitive in the navigation app market.

Business Insider: https://www.businessinsider.com/mapquest-flock-surveillance-cameras-license-plate-readers-2026-10

The list of companies whose license plate reader locations are displayed on the map includes Flock, as well as several other major players in the industry such as Motorola Solutions (Vigilant), Genetec, Axis Communications, Axon, Leonardo (ELSAG) and Neology. Other companies with their devices shown on the map include Rekor, PlateSmart, Ubicquia and Verkada.

To access this feature, users must first open the MapQuest app and tap the Layers icon to activate the Surveillance option. Once enabled, tiny eyeballs will appear on the map, indicating the presence of license plate readers at specific locations. Clicking on these symbols will provide more detailed information about each device.

The addition of this feature comes as a part of MapQuest's ongoing effort to regain relevance in the navigation market. The company has faced stiff competition from major players like Google and Apple, but its recent moves have helped it carve out a niche for itself, such as refusing to comply with President Donald Trump's executive order on map labeling.

MapQuest has joined a growing list of apps that reveal locations of license plate readers in various areas. The company is not alone in this endeavor, as other apps such as DeFlock, FlockHopper, Pelican and LPR Maps have also taken on this role.

These apps often rely on crowdsourcing to gather information about the location of license plate readers. This means that drivers can notify the app when they believe they have spotted a reader, allowing the app to update its database with the new location. However, MapQuest has not disclosed how it acquires its data on license plate reader locations.

The proliferation of license plate readers has been met with significant criticism from civil liberties groups and others. With over 140,000 units in operation across the US, concerns have been raised about the potential for mass surveillance. These devices can collect a wealth of information about a vehicle, including its license plate number, make, model, color, and location.

The data collected by these cameras has also been subject to misuse, with instances of police officers using it to stalk ex-partners or wrongly accusing individuals of theft. This has further fueled concerns about the impact of license plate readers on individual privacy and civil liberties.

License plate readers are being used in a variety of settings beyond high-tech surveillance. They also play a role in more everyday operations such as electronic toll collection and parking enforcement. Additionally, these devices are utilized for traffic violation monitoring, vehicle repossessions, and granting access to restricted areas through parking gate activation.

To experience the MapQuest feature, I downloaded and installed the app on my phone since I'm more accustomed to using Google Maps. Upon opening the app, I located the Surveillance layer and activated it. The map in my city and county was suddenly filled with numerous icons representing license plate readers, giving me a visual representation of where these devices are situated.

While the feature provides insight into the presence of license plate readers, it falls short by not disclosing the names of the companies that own them.

CNET: https://www.cnet.com/news/privacy/mapquest-locations-of-license-plate-readers/

In 2022, the department paid Flock $81,250, which was an increase from previous years. Breaking down this cost, it's clear that Flock is charging cities not only for the initial installation of its cameras but also for ongoing maintenance and upgrades.

Fifteen new "Falcon cameras were installed in 2022, which accounted for a significant portion of the $81,250 bill. These Falcon cameras have more advanced technology for reading license plates than earlier models. In addition to purchasing these cameras, the department had to pay $3,750 to install them.

The rest of the money went towards maintaining the initial fleet of cameras. It's clear that Flock is charging cities not just a one-time fee but an ongoing expense to keep its technology up and running.

In 2024, the Covington Police Department paid Flock even more, $113,225. This payment included $87,500 for maintaining its existing 35 cameras over the next five years, as well as money for eight new Falcon cameras.

The Covington Police Department is not alone in paying Flock significant sums of money; other cities across the country are also paying hefty fees to use Flock's surveillance technology.

Flock's entry into law enforcement was initially met with resistance from some police departments due to concerns over data sharing and ownership. However, by leveraging existing relationships with private homeowner associations (HOAs), Flock was able to gain a foothold in the market.

In Alpharetta, Georgia, this dynamic played out in 2020 when the city's police department purchased five Falcon cameras from Flock for $17,680. The purchase also included logins for Wing software, which enables the extraction of vehicle and license plate data from footage captured by off-brand cameras.

A subsequent justification for a 2021 Flock camera purchase noted that several local HOAs had already adopted the technology, granting the police department access to their cameras as well. This existing infrastructure allowed Alpharetta to expand its use of Flock's surveillance system more easily.

The city's relationship with Flock continued to grow over the next few years, with Alpharetta's annual bill ballooning to $381,000 by 2025. As in other industries, financial incentives often play a significant role in securing initial sales and long-term contracts for police technology companies.

Clearview AI, Ring, and Taser are among the companies that have used enticing offers to win over law enforcement agencies across the country. According to Guariglia, vendors have learned from traditional sales techniques and now frequently employ deals and discounts to secure business.

Flock's product lineup has also expanded in recent years, with Alpharetta paying for an upgrade to the Elite Package of FlockOS in 2025. Additionally, the city took advantage of a 90-day free trial period last year to test a new product called Nova.

Flock has introduced a new pricing strategy that offers discounts for departments signing multiyear contracts.

This approach has proven successful in various cities, including Alpharetta, which secured a five-year deal worth $254,250 in the first year and $238,000 each subsequent year.

In comparison to individual one-year agreements, this contract represents a significant cost savings of $232,500.

The city's police department declined to comment on the matter.

Flock has also been offering bundled product packages as part of its long-term contracts, which appears to be a key factor in securing deals with other cities.

Albany County Sheriff's Office in New York was recently approached by Flock customer success manager Gwen Saltal with a five-year contract offer.

The email highlighted the increased cost of new cameras, which would rise from $2,500 to $3,000 for future renewal terms on existing cameras.

The proposed order form listed numerous other Flock products and services included in the contract, although it is unclear how many of these were new additions to the agreement.

Greenfield's city council unanimously approved Mixer's revised Flock contract, bringing an end to the negotiations process.

A Public Sector Price Sheet for Flock products obtained by WIRED reveals the approximate price ranges observed in Flock purchase orders from around the country at that time. The sheet reflects the prices for various agencies across different regions and cities.

Flock categorizes its clients into 14 pricing buckets, with each bucket corresponding to a specific agency size. Agencies in Bucket 1 have one to 15 sworn officers, and their Flock software costs range from $2,000 to $115,500, depending on the package selected and add-ons chosen.

The cost of individual hardware components also varies significantly, with license plate readers and surveillance cameras priced at $3,000 to $5,200 annually. Installation costs can be substantial, ranging from $150 to $2,750 upfront.

Flock's gunshot detectors are available for $8,500 to $35,000 per year, depending on their range, while individual drones cost between $50,000 and $150,000 annually. The company also offers two mobile security trailer" options priced at $20,000 and $25,000 annually.

Flock's pricing structure appears to be in line with its competitors, with costs varying depending on individual negotiations with cities and the size of the purchase.

Axon, a rival company, recently quoted Denver $150,000 for installing 50 cameras across the city and maintaining them for one year. Meanwhile, Motorola charged Manti, Utah, $4,704 for a single license plate reader. These prices suggest that Flock's costs are comparable to its industry peers.

Flock also offers protection against vandalism, which has become a growing concern as cities nationwide report incidents of damaged or stolen cameras. According to Flock's contract conditions, the company retains ownership of the products it sells to cities, which means that when equipment is damaged or destroyed, cities are responsible for the cost.

In cases where Flock products are damaged or stolen, the company has flat replacement rates: $800 for cameras, $500 for poles, and $1,300 for both. These costs may seem steep, but they are a fraction of what cities typically spend on other law enforcement expenses.

Some cities have highlighted the financial burden of replacing damaged Flock equipment, often citing inflated costs. For instance, police in Winona, Minnesota, claimed that camera replacements cost $3,000 each, while those in Rutherfordton, North Carolina, said they were $3,500 apiece, both figures exceeding Flock's listed rate by several hundred dollars.

In Derby, Kansas, a man damaged 10 Flock cameras, prompting local police to claim he caused $26,000 in damages. However, if the poles were also damaged, replacements would likely have cost between $8,000 and $13,000, significantly less than initially stated.

Cities across the country have been significantly increasing their spending on Flock technology over just a few years, with some cities seeing costs rise exponentially.

For instance, Savannah, Georgia, paid $33,000 for Flock in 2020 but increased its expenditure to $193,500 by 2025. Similarly, Snellville, Georgia, initially spent $5,000 on Flock in both 2021 and 2022 before seeing a sharp increase to $163,275 by 2025.

Other cities have also been purchasing large quantities of Flock technology, with budgets often exceeding $100,000. However, some customers are starting to reevaluate their investments due to rising costs.

Sheriff Jack Hall of Lorain County, Ohio, recently announced that the county would be canceling its Flock contract after being informed that the company planned to raise the two-year rate for 15 cameras by 17 percent.

Wired: https://www.wired.com/story/how-much-does-flock-actually-cost-cities/