Garrett Langley, founder and CEO of Flock, defended his company's technology on a panel at TechCrunch Disrupt 2026 in San Francisco on Wednesday, October 14. TechCrunch's Sarah Perez reported on it that evening, and a photo caption identifies Connie Loizos of TechCrunch as his onstage conversation partner. Flock makes license plate cameras and other recording devices. The article notes that Flock cameras do not have facial recognition but can detect and track people, citing a 404 Media report.
His defense
Langley said that if society wants higher accountability for crime, “we shouldn't pause progress.” He argued that technology means doing things better, not doing things perfect, and called driverless cars definitively safer than human drivers, saying accidents should prompt discussion of prevention, not shutdowns. He said: “Flock is far from perfect,” and that he is far from perfect too. He claimed law enforcement employment is declining, with hundreds of open positions in San Francisco that will probably never be filled, and that Flock helps police do more with fewer staff. These are his claims.
Customers and misinformation
He said a customer canceled a contract because it believed the cameras used facial recognition, which the article says is inaccurate, and attributed critics' complaints partly to misinformation. He said Flock does not want to tell city leaders how to do their job and will offer defaults while minimizing mandated features and policies. On abuse, he said curbing it is possible without disrupting legal systems or police efficacy, but did not specify how.
The worth of the work
Langley said the cost of building a consequential company is worth it because millions of people have better lives, and because one day they might be a victim.
The article's assessment
The article says the backlash has led to canceled contracts and layoffs, linking to an October 9 TechCrunch report. Perez writes that Langley deflected specific questions with anecdotes from police chiefs and city leaders and had no substantive answers when pressed on abuse and invasiveness. She argues he framed Flock as an inevitable advance requiring people to give up privacy, and contrasts driverless car companies, which pause fleets and apply fixes after crashes, with Flock, which she says leaves responsibility for ethical use largely to others. That assessment is the reporter's.
Source: TechCrunch. This is an AI Business Watch summary of the original report.