For the most part this it’s true, although it’s possible to do it securely. Security cam footage stored in iCloud is end to end encrypted. Apple can’t access it.
Yes. 100%. End to end encrypted means the decryption key is at the other end. Where Apple is.
If it were ACTUALLY secure you would have BOTH the encryption AND decryption keys and Apple would only have a useless, unreadable, encrypted binary blob.
So, it does say that not even Apple can read your data, but it also says it's protected by "end to end encryption", which if Apple can't read your data, is absolutely nonsense usage of the term.
"End to end encryption" means encrypting the data at one end, and decrypting it at the other end. That's literally the NAME. If they're not doing that, the term is completely nonsense to use. They might as well say they have fat-free encryption. What they're really doing is storing an encrypted file that you hold both keys for. And IF that's what they're doing, that's actually fantastic - far better than end-to-end encryption because only you can decrypt it. But they're not inspiring confidence by COMPLETELY misusing a term that has nothing to do with what they're doing.
The other point is, if those keys... if you have to manually copy those keys over between all of your devices? Great. You're actually protected. If, however, you just connect to your Apple account and now you can get your files out of iCloud? That means that Apple DOES have your decryption keys SOMEWHERE, because otherwise they couldn't send them to your other devices, which means, sorry, whatever they're promising, they DO have the ability to look at your files if they're motivated enough.
It has to be decrypted for you to use it stupid... Ffs they literally call it out in the line "No one else can access your end-to-end encrypted data, not even Apple, and this data remains secure even in the case of a data breach in the cloud.". To apple end to end encryption is keeping the data entirely encrypted up until it hits your device where you use it... I could go on about how you misunderstand the tech but you're better off just actually looking into how they implement it because they account for your concerns.
The fact that there are multiple seprate recovery options to regain access to your account and with it access to those encrypted backups is all the clue you need to know those keys are not stored only on your device.
Apple has access to those keys - whether they want to directly admit it or not.
"With Advanced Data Protection turned on, Apple doesn't have the encryption keys needed to help you recover your end-to-end encrypted data." it's literally on the page. If they have them, prove it, and launch yourself the most profitable lawsuit against apple possible. Otherwise you're just bring a grumpy fool.
They literally say to store your Recovery keys in a safe place or you could get locked out of your account.
If you don't know your account password and have lost or otherwise don't have a trusted device, you need your recovery key to regain access to your Apple Account. If you can't provide your recovery key, you’ll be locked out of your account permanently.
Print a copy of your recovery key or write it down. Keep your key in a safe place, and consider storing a copy in more than one place. You can also give a copy of your recovery key to a trusted family member.
Don’t store your recovery key in your Apple Passwords app, iCloud Photos, Notes, or iCloud Drive. If you lose access to your Apple Account, you won’t be able to open these apps to find it.
There are no ways to recover your account if you have ADP on. Stop making stuff up. You need to have your key written down and stored somewhere safe, otherwise you are SOL and locked out forever.
I think they're trying to say that while apple encrypts in transit (upload + download is sftp or some other secure transfer method that can't be eavesdropped on), they don't encrypt at rest, meaning the data is written in decrypted format to disk. Which is a data security no-no for mine and most enterprises out there. They're alleging that if someone got into an apple server, they'd be able to read your data and anyone elses.
Now that might not be true but I don't see apple saying otherwise anywhere obvious. It's not true. I'm pretty sure Google do this though. They retain a level of access to train their ai models and other deep learning algorithms on what you write in docs or the photos you upload.
E2E in the context of data stored at rest conceptually just means that "current you" is sending data to "future you" where the two ends are "current you" and "future you."
Always question and audit the implementation of any E2E claim by a vendor, but the term itself refers to how only those with authorized access can decrypt, and that the service provider itself need not be authorized.
If anyone can prove that this implementation has security vulnerabilities (such as Apple being able to view your footage), you are in for a huge payday.
Idk why you're being down voted. With ADP enabled and using icloud secure cameras the data is encrypted by keys stored only on your local devices, Apple has no access to these keys and there are no recovery options through apple. If you lose all of your devices and your recovery code and your login information, the data is gone. This has been validated by independent third parties. It's also worth noting that apple still to this day hosts the only corporate "fuck you, we're encrypting it" public memo I've ever seen at https://www.apple.com/customer-letter/ .
Apparently and fr. I'm by no means an apple stan but let's give them shit for things they're actually guilty of instead of gaslighting ourselves with new bs.
Yeah, I remember several years ago they got a terrorists iphone and Bush tried to pressure Apple to give them access to the phone; Apple refused to cooperate. Good on them.
Just because you repeat marketing "talking points", doesn't make it a "fact".
Simping for one of the most profitable, closed source, authoritarian friendly, anti competitive, ring kissing pedophile president company is definitely a choice.
The push notification issue applied to all push notifications including any os that delivered them (Google, Microsoft, etc) which is a valid concern we can discuss, family recovery is not possible with ADP enabled jfc learn to read, and I never stated they were the most privacy oriented company in the world. Hate all you like boo but their implementation of E2E is vetted and legit as any, and idk how any of this is simping because I don't fucking like apple. I'm just not going to subscribe to blind stupid baseless hate that does not follow any factual reality.
A quick search looks like the Roman empire at its peak was about half the size of the US. I don't think people recognize the absolute size of the US.
I mean, most people in urban areas agree generally, but even like city to city there are massive leaps in quality of education, climate, policy, social environment, etc etc that all shape how a person thinks and acts.
Right, but the very idea of “local culture” has been severely weakened. A guy in Alberta or Alabama are both the same annoying, stupid conservative with basically all the same opinions and crappy “jokes” despite the on-paper differences.
Yes, people are different and the people who hate Flock are highly unlikely(but not guaranteed) to be the same people. On the other hand, I would not be the least bit surprised if many people who are onboard with the Flock hate have no true idea why, and so still keep their Ring cameras because they think they’re different.
All this money and effort spent on catching people who commit crimes, but no money spent on raising people’s material conditions, which would actually prevent crimes.
As your mail, mobile geolocation and plenty of other data.
The difference is that in flock case the system is “push” (flock alerts the police with their alerts real or due to bugs) while ring/gmail/mobiles is “pull” (police needs a warrant if you are an US citizen, it needs to be processed by the cloud provider, etc) and most crucially police needs to already know what is looking
police need a warrant to view your camera specifically, but they absolutely do not need a warrant to request video from a ring camera stored by amazon. they just ask for it and amazon hands it straight over.
Reolink and Lorex both make doorbells that expose rtsp streams. They have apps and such but these aren’t necessary, and at least reolink doesn’t require a subscription even with the app (not sure about lorex). The reolink comes in Poe and WiFi version, not sure about lorex. I have reolink Poe cameras (including doorbell) and they work great, everything is local only and aside from the initial config they do not require internet access. I have them on an isolated vlan that has no internet access and they work fine. They make WiFi versions too but in my experience Poe is substantially more reliable if you have the ability to run ethernet
There are many other options too, there’s like a billion doorbell cameras, just research bc almost (if not all) “cloud” cameras can view the footage on their servers. The only thing I’ve seen is encrypted in transit, they all are not encrypted on their servers. This means their employees, intruders, etc can view your cameras (and in the case of stuff like Amazon and Google actively view it to apply ML models as well as actively share with law enforcement with no need for a warrant). This applies to literally every “smart” camera I’ve seen that’s not local only, whether it’s a doorbell, baby monitor, dog treat dispenser, basic security camera, etc
I don't know why people are surprised. This feature was the basis of an entire Superbowl ad at the beginning of this year. In other words: Amazon spent millions to tell as many people as possible that their cameras can do this.
Because, as a general rule of thumb, most people are either oblivious or have so many other demands on their time and energy that they are unable to take notice.
i think the big difference comes down to that flicks are put up by police departments and city governments, while ring cameras are put up by private citizens.
Like, they both do effectively the same thing, but, criticizing your neighbors for putting up a ring is self censored because people don’t want to come across as “preachy” or judging their neighbors. But no one has any hang ups about criticizing a town government.
I think the bigger issue is that people have not internalized that the companies behind these systems are the real problem, less the people conned in to implementing them.
the big difference comes down to that flicks are put up by police departments and city governments
Legit.
they both do effectively the same thing
Nobody is getting traffic tickets from a Ring camera. That's another important difference here. Car brains do not want to be monitored while operating deadly machinery and they definitely do not want to be held responsible for their violence.
the design of our house makes it where we can't see who's in the door through the windows and holiday reefs (idk if that's the right word, decorative things that go on the door) blocks the peephole :/
I tried to come up with a reason to justify a door camera. I couldn't.
If the doorbell rings, and I'm not expecting anyone, then I don't answer it. It doesn't matter to me who it is. I don't need to know.
Also, if I don't answer and it is someone I know, they can call me from my doorstep and let me know it's them.
If a package gets stolen off my doorstep, which has never happened, and doesn't happen much here at all as far as I know, the video is of zero use, unless I know who it is. Because, the cops sure don't know who it is, or even care to find out. You might think that's their job, but you'd be wrong. Their job is to take the report and file it. That's it.
You have a package go missing, and you don't know why. It shows as delivered, but you never saw it. You check the ring camera to see what happened to it, and one of your kids picked
it up, took it inside, forgot about it, and when you asked, was too dumb to piece together, "Oh, THAT package."
Pretty sure they can also see everyone through the walls now if there's wifi, and hear you with the mics on your speakers, and tv, and phones, and laptops.
Ring cameras can't grab license plates or track fast moving cars effectively. They can track slower moving pedestrians, but no one walks in america any way...
The obvious, important difference is at whom the camera is pointed.
Privileged USAians don't give a shit about the police state stalking their neighborhood, until you threaten them with a traffic ticket then it's time for a "revolution".
101 Comments
Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca · 82 pts · 2d
If it records to the cloud, it's not your footage. It can and will be acquired/distributed against your will.
dogdeanafternoon@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 2d
For the most part this it’s true, although it’s possible to do it securely. Security cam footage stored in iCloud is end to end encrypted. Apple can’t access it.
Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca · 26 pts · 2d
I wouldn't bet on that.
cantstopthesignal@sh.itjust.works · 32 pts · 2d
E2E doesn't matter if you don't control the other end.
mycodesucks@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 2d
Yes. 100%. End to end encrypted means the decryption key is at the other end. Where Apple is.
If it were ACTUALLY secure you would have BOTH the encryption AND decryption keys and Apple would only have a useless, unreadable, encrypted binary blob.
9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 2d
They literally give you the keys. See Advanced Data Protection
mycodesucks@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 2d
So, it does say that not even Apple can read your data, but it also says it's protected by "end to end encryption", which if Apple can't read your data, is absolutely nonsense usage of the term.
"End to end encryption" means encrypting the data at one end, and decrypting it at the other end. That's literally the NAME. If they're not doing that, the term is completely nonsense to use. They might as well say they have fat-free encryption. What they're really doing is storing an encrypted file that you hold both keys for. And IF that's what they're doing, that's actually fantastic - far better than end-to-end encryption because only you can decrypt it. But they're not inspiring confidence by COMPLETELY misusing a term that has nothing to do with what they're doing.
The other point is, if those keys... if you have to manually copy those keys over between all of your devices? Great. You're actually protected. If, however, you just connect to your Apple account and now you can get your files out of iCloud? That means that Apple DOES have your decryption keys SOMEWHERE, because otherwise they couldn't send them to your other devices, which means, sorry, whatever they're promising, they DO have the ability to look at your files if they're motivated enough.
anomnom@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 1d
End to end means the ends you use it at, ot the server you’re imagining it ending up on.
In this case the “ends” are your devices.
Ptsf@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 2d
It has to be decrypted for you to use it stupid... Ffs they literally call it out in the line "No one else can access your end-to-end encrypted data, not even Apple, and this data remains secure even in the case of a data breach in the cloud.". To apple end to end encryption is keeping the data entirely encrypted up until it hits your device where you use it... I could go on about how you misunderstand the tech but you're better off just actually looking into how they implement it because they account for your concerns.
Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 2d
The fact that there are multiple seprate recovery options to regain access to your account and with it access to those encrypted backups is all the clue you need to know those keys are not stored only on your device.
Apple has access to those keys - whether they want to directly admit it or not.
Ptsf@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 2d
"With Advanced Data Protection turned on, Apple doesn't have the encryption keys needed to help you recover your end-to-end encrypted data." it's literally on the page. If they have them, prove it, and launch yourself the most profitable lawsuit against apple possible. Otherwise you're just bring a grumpy fool.
9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2d
They literally say to store your Recovery keys in a safe place or you could get locked out of your account.
Set up a recovery key for your Apple Account
Ptsf@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d
They do not.
Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 1d
There are no ways to recover your account if you have ADP on. Stop making stuff up. You need to have your key written down and stored somewhere safe, otherwise you are SOL and locked out forever.
theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 2d
Ding ding ding!!!!
The test of E2E encryption is "who manages the keys?" If the answer isn't me, it isn't E2E encrypted.
joshcodes@programming.dev · -1 pts · 2d
I think they're trying to say that while apple encrypts in transit (upload + download is sftp or some other secure transfer method that can't be eavesdropped on), they don't encrypt at rest, meaning the data is written in decrypted format to disk. Which is a data security no-no for mine and most enterprises out there. They're alleging that if someone got into an apple server, they'd be able to read your data and anyone elses.
Now that might not be true but I don't see apple saying otherwise anywhere obvious.It's not true. I'm pretty sure Google do this though. They retain a level of access to train their ai models and other deep learning algorithms on what you write in docs or the photos you upload.9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 2d
Thats not how it works at all. The traffic is encrypted locally on the device before it even gets sent to Apple.
GamingChairModel@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 23h
E2E in the context of data stored at rest conceptually just means that "current you" is sending data to "future you" where the two ends are "current you" and "future you."
Always question and audit the implementation of any E2E claim by a vendor, but the term itself refers to how only those with authorized access can decrypt, and that the service provider itself need not be authorized.
dogdeanafternoon@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 1d
You don’t have to bet on it. Just look it up.
OS2Warp@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 18h
Trolls never do the legwork.
dogdeanafternoon@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 18h
Not sure if I’m the troll, or the other guy, but just in case I’ll add this.
https://support.apple.com/en-lb/guide/security-pdf/sec525461d19/web
If anyone can prove that this implementation has security vulnerabilities (such as Apple being able to view your footage), you are in for a huge payday.
Ptsf@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 2d
Idk why you're being down voted. With ADP enabled and using icloud secure cameras the data is encrypted by keys stored only on your local devices, Apple has no access to these keys and there are no recovery options through apple. If you lose all of your devices and your recovery code and your login information, the data is gone. This has been validated by independent third parties. It's also worth noting that apple still to this day hosts the only corporate "fuck you, we're encrypting it" public memo I've ever seen at https://www.apple.com/customer-letter/ .
dogdeanafternoon@lemmy.ca · 8 pts · 1d
I’m being downvoted because I dare say something positive about Apple. People don’t like that here.
Ptsf@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 1d
Apparently and fr. I'm by no means an apple stan but let's give them shit for things they're actually guilty of instead of gaslighting ourselves with new bs.
dogdeanafternoon@lemmy.ca · 6 pts · 1d
Pretty much. There’s plenty to bitch out apple for. I don’t see why people can’t just stick to the facts.
schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 1d
Yeah, I remember several years ago they got a terrorists iphone and Bush tried to pressure Apple to give them access to the phone; Apple refused to cooperate. Good on them.
OS2Warp@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 18h
https://lemmy.world/comment/25339959
0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 1d
Sure, let's stick to facts like Apple is the most privacy oriented company in the world and regularly gives a "fuck you" to the government.
Apple admits to secretly giving governments push notification data - Ars Technica
Apple account data is irrecoverable.
How to request access to a deceased family member’s Apple Account
Just because you repeat marketing "talking points", doesn't make it a "fact".
Simping for one of the most profitable, closed source, authoritarian friendly, anti competitive, ring kissing pedophile president company is definitely a choice.
Ptsf@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
The push notification issue applied to all push notifications including any os that delivered them (Google, Microsoft, etc) which is a valid concern we can discuss, family recovery is not possible with ADP enabled jfc learn to read, and I never stated they were the most privacy oriented company in the world. Hate all you like boo but their implementation of E2E is vetted and legit as any, and idk how any of this is simping because I don't fucking like apple. I'm just not going to subscribe to blind stupid baseless hate that does not follow any factual reality.
OS2Warp@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 18h
Jellyfin! Android! Lanepslitting!
These are all things that, if you go against, will bring out the angry nerds.
theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 2d
Nope! The only question that needs to be asked is: who manages the encryption keys?
If the answer isn't you, it isn't E2E encrypted.
dogdeanafternoon@lemmy.ca · 5 pts · 1d
The answer is you lol it’s end to end encrypted. You couldn’t do one google search before making some dumb assumptions?
Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
Do you actually know anything about Apes E2EE or ADP?
You do control the keys. They’re generated solely on your device locally.
treesquid@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 21h
Oh, you sweet summer child
dogdeanafternoon@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 21h
I’d love to see some evidence that I’m wrong. No one else has been able to provide any.
unknownuserunknownlocation@kbin.earth · 59 pts · 2d
I'm pretty sure the people who are sawing off flock cameras for the most part aren't the ones with ring cameras
VitoRobles@lemmy.today · 14 pts · 1d
I think the message is that we should be just as frustrated with ring cameras too, and not saying you should, but if they accidentally get smashed...
Zexks@lemmy.world · 18 pts · 1d
It amazes me how some people cant comprehend different mindsets existing in the same space. Especially coming from fucking europe
Funkt4st1c@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 1d
A quick search looks like the Roman empire at its peak was about half the size of the US. I don't think people recognize the absolute size of the US.
I mean, most people in urban areas agree generally, but even like city to city there are massive leaps in quality of education, climate, policy, social environment, etc etc that all shape how a person thinks and acts.
Soup@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 1d
Right, but the very idea of “local culture” has been severely weakened. A guy in Alberta or Alabama are both the same annoying, stupid conservative with basically all the same opinions and crappy “jokes” despite the on-paper differences.
Yes, people are different and the people who hate Flock are highly unlikely(but not guaranteed) to be the same people. On the other hand, I would not be the least bit surprised if many people who are onboard with the Flock hate have no true idea why, and so still keep their Ring cameras because they think they’re different.
Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 1d
What do you mean? Are flock and ring cameras two different mindsets?
weps@lemmy.world · 18 pts · 1d
I was watching a murder case on YouTube
An unknown phone number called the victim.
They saw it was a burner phone.
They have video of him buying the phone.
They have video of him walking around in different states.
They have video of him driving around in different states.
They knew where his real phone was at all times.
The video was uploaded 5 years ago.
USA is a crazy on surveillance.
TheColonel@reddthat.com · 7 pts · 1d
Was this the one where the victim was his mom? If it’s the same one, it’s pretty insane
joenforcer@midwest.social · 4 pts · 21h
Yet they have no idea who abducted Nancy Guthrie 🙄
FlyingCircus@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 23h
All this money and effort spent on catching people who commit crimes, but no money spent on raising people’s material conditions, which would actually prevent crimes.
technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 21h
... and prisons, war, genocide, etc... It's all one big shitberg.
mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 1d
can we get a link
multiplemigs@sh.itjust.works · 0 pts · 23h
america gets the culture it deserves. I have no more energy to care about this bs.
BenLeMan@lemmy.world · 15 pts · 2d
"Alexa, is constant surveillance a bad thing?"
lavander@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 9 pts · 2d
As your mail, mobile geolocation and plenty of other data.
The difference is that in flock case the system is “push” (flock alerts the police with their alerts real or due to bugs) while ring/gmail/mobiles is “pull” (police needs a warrant if you are an US citizen, it needs to be processed by the cloud provider, etc) and most crucially police needs to already know what is looking
schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works · 11 pts · 1d
Police don´t need a warrrant to get third party information for you UNLESS that third party refuses.
Guess what?
anewfox@lemmy.zip · 8 pts · 1d
police need a warrant to view your camera specifically, but they absolutely do not need a warrant to request video from a ring camera stored by amazon. they just ask for it and amazon hands it straight over.
Mistiygirl@lemmy.zip · 9 pts · 2d
anyone got a source? I know they aren't a good idea but can police really access them?
EisFrei@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 2d
They only mention recordings in response to warrants, but yes.
https://ring.com/support/articles/oi8t6/Learn-About-Ring-Law-Enforcement-Guidelines
Lucky_777@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2d
Discovery gainst the company and I'm sure they have to produce your cloud saves.
weps@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
if you watch true crime you'll see how they have footage from you from all kinds of stuff including doorbells.
ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 8 pts · 23h
Especially because if you truly want a doorbell camera there are other options. There’s even local only options!
QuinnyCoded@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 22h
can you list one, I might look into it if you don't have to pay a subscription
ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 5 pts · 22h
Reolink and Lorex both make doorbells that expose rtsp streams. They have apps and such but these aren’t necessary, and at least reolink doesn’t require a subscription even with the app (not sure about lorex). The reolink comes in Poe and WiFi version, not sure about lorex. I have reolink Poe cameras (including doorbell) and they work great, everything is local only and aside from the initial config they do not require internet access. I have them on an isolated vlan that has no internet access and they work fine. They make WiFi versions too but in my experience Poe is substantially more reliable if you have the ability to run ethernet
There are many other options too, there’s like a billion doorbell cameras, just research bc almost (if not all) “cloud” cameras can view the footage on their servers. The only thing I’ve seen is encrypted in transit, they all are not encrypted on their servers. This means their employees, intruders, etc can view your cameras (and in the case of stuff like Amazon and Google actively view it to apply ML models as well as actively share with law enforcement with no need for a warrant). This applies to literally every “smart” camera I’ve seen that’s not local only, whether it’s a doorbell, baby monitor, dog treat dispenser, basic security camera, etc
rsky@lemmy.ml · 8 pts · 23h
I don't know why people are surprised. This feature was the basis of an entire Superbowl ad at the beginning of this year. In other words: Amazon spent millions to tell as many people as possible that their cameras can do this.
Stegget@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 21h
Because, as a general rule of thumb, most people are either oblivious or have so many other demands on their time and energy that they are unable to take notice.
megopie@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 5 pts · 23h
i think the big difference comes down to that flicks are put up by police departments and city governments, while ring cameras are put up by private citizens.
Like, they both do effectively the same thing, but, criticizing your neighbors for putting up a ring is self censored because people don’t want to come across as “preachy” or judging their neighbors. But no one has any hang ups about criticizing a town government.
I think the bigger issue is that people have not internalized that the companies behind these systems are the real problem, less the people conned in to implementing them.
technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 0 pts · 21h
Legit.
Nobody is getting traffic tickets from a Ring camera. That's another important difference here. Car brains do not want to be monitored while operating deadly machinery and they definitely do not want to be held responsible for their violence.
QuinnyCoded@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 22h
the design of our house makes it where we can't see who's in the door through the windows and holiday reefs (idk if that's the right word, decorative things that go on the door) blocks the peephole :/
Bipauler@sh.itjust.works · 7 pts · 22h
Wreaths?
technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 6 pts · 21h
Holiday reefs are way cooler though.
DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 19h
I tried to come up with a reason to justify a door camera. I couldn't.
If the doorbell rings, and I'm not expecting anyone, then I don't answer it. It doesn't matter to me who it is. I don't need to know.
Also, if I don't answer and it is someone I know, they can call me from my doorstep and let me know it's them.
If a package gets stolen off my doorstep, which has never happened, and doesn't happen much here at all as far as I know, the video is of zero use, unless I know who it is. Because, the cops sure don't know who it is, or even care to find out. You might think that's their job, but you'd be wrong. Their job is to take the report and file it. That's it.
5318008@lemmy.ml · -1 pts · 18h
Here's my pitch:
You have a package go missing, and you don't know why. It shows as delivered, but you never saw it. You check the ring camera to see what happened to it, and one of your kids picked it up, took it inside, forgot about it, and when you asked, was too dumb to piece together, "Oh, THAT package."
SalmonTractor@discuss.tchncs.de · 2 pts · 19h
So get a not ring.
QuinnyCoded@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 19h
planning on it
HubertManne@piefed.social · 4 pts · 1d
I thought ring started getting blockback even before the anti flock became popular.
FavouriteShapes@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 2d
They love ring cameras because crime so bad
technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 21h
Ha... I'll upvote despite Poe Law uncertainty.
FavouriteShapes@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 20h
😁👍
formlessoedon@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 18h
Don't take that to mean they will actually respond to a home break-in or car theft 🤣
Abyssian@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
Pretty sure they can also see everyone through the walls now if there's wifi, and hear you with the mics on your speakers, and tv, and phones, and laptops.
Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 1d
Ring cameras can't grab license plates or track fast moving cars effectively. They can track slower moving pedestrians, but no one walks in america any way...
humanspiral@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 17h
If the police can, then so can CIA and MAGA headed government departments. Could be a shame if they knew your movement timings.
technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 21h
The obvious, important difference is at whom the camera is pointed.
Privileged USAians don't give a shit about the police state stalking their neighborhood, until you threaten them with a traffic ticket then it's time for a "revolution".