Ask HN: IP cameras that don't require an app or internet? • Hacker News Board

Re: Ask HN: IP cameras that don't require an app or internet?

#131

Post by 312c » Fri, Jun 23, 2023, 7:07 PM UTC

qbasic_forever wrote: post #40

I don't know if it's supported anymore but some Wyze cameras have an official but unsupported alternative firmware you can flash that exposes them as a local network video stream. They work great and anything on your network can ingest the video. I don't think they made this firmware for their fancier cameras that have motorized pan/tilt etc though.

The firmware exists for the Cam v2, Cam v3, and Cam Pan v1

Cam v2 - https://download.wyzecam.com/firmware/rtsp/demo_4.28.4.51.bi...

Cam v3 - https://download.wyzecam.com/firmware/rtsp/demo_v3_RTSP_4.61...

Cam Pan v1 - https://download.wyzecam.com/firmware/rtsp/demo_4.29.4.51.bi...

Re: Ask HN: IP cameras that don't require an app or internet?

#132

Post by blobcode » Fri, Jun 23, 2023, 7:10 PM UTC

bobbean wrote: post #127

freedomben wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, this is solid advice. If you are going to leave it plugged in all the time, check on the battery regularly to make sure it isn't swelling.

Would it be possible to use the phone without a battery?

There are a good number of androids that can run without a battery as long as they are plugged in, though that varies by model and manufacturer.

Re: Ask HN: IP cameras that don't require an app or internet?

#133

Post by sebcat » Fri, Jun 23, 2023, 7:11 PM UTC

kayfox wrote: post #69

ce4 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Axis is cool, they once even had (still have?) their own CPU / ISA (ETRAX CRIS) plus a Linux port: https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/cris/README Edit: Official Linux support was removed with 4.17 in 2018 https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/6/3/142

The ETRAX CRIS has been superseded by ARM Cortex-M in the latest ARTPEC (Axis Real Time Picture Encoder Chip) chips these days. For a period of time in between those two architectures the ARTPEC chips used MIPS as a core.

Still used a bunch of CRIS cores for ARTPEC-6 for scheduling scaler and trfm jobs and some other things, are they completely gone now?

Re: Ask HN: IP cameras that don't require an app or internet?

#134

Post by megous » Fri, Jun 23, 2023, 7:15 PM UTC

bobbean wrote: post #127

freedomben wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, this is solid advice. If you are going to leave it plugged in all the time, check on the battery regularly to make sure it isn't swelling.

Would it be possible to use the phone without a battery?

If the hardware and software are designed and tested for it, then yes.

Otherwise you may run into various issues caused by phone self-limiting power it takes from USB port. Some kind of negotiation needs to happen before the phone can safely raise the input power limits. If it needs more than currently allowed, it will just poweroff immediately, instead of satisfying the excess need from the battery.

Re: Ask HN: IP cameras that don't require an app or internet?

#135

Post by davchana » Fri, Jun 23, 2023, 7:26 PM UTC

disposition2 wrote: post #87

fabioyy wrote: post #73

A little off topic, i don´t know your use case, but you can use an old phone as webcam, they will be better in quality than any IP camera. A little example using my old galaxy s11. ( its connected to a pc using usb, airplane mode, no internet ) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CDE7PsLwzk

Be careful when doing this. If left unchecked this could very easily start a fire. I did this with an old Nexus 5 and it only took a couple of days before I had a spicy pillow. Although, this probably works well for a device with a removable battery and that can be powered by USB alone.

Or a timer switch. Christmas lights 6 hours on 18 off power timer switch. Or a smart switch. Also make sure there is no cushy things like pillow or clothes or stuff around phone.

Re: Ask HN: IP cameras that don't require an app or internet?

#136

Post by EvanAnderson » Fri, Jun 23, 2023, 7:35 PM UTC

AdamJacobMuller wrote: post #79

EvanAnderson wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fun story re: the term "explosion-proof": I was given a tour of an industrial facility where conditions required explosion-proof equipment. The tour guide made a point of calling out the explosion-proof motors in one of the rooms. One of the other tour group members asked the question "Why would it matter if these motors survived an explosion?" I visualized the facility exploding in a fiery blaze and a motor, fully i…

I don't think it's a silly question, my first thought about explosion proof would also be able to survive some level of explosion. Especially for cameras in potentially hazardous or critical areas, being able to capture details of their final moments could be important (obviously great to have cameras which [also] don't cause explosions in the first place). I can also think of many situations in which you would want…

It's definitely not a silly question. I shared it because I really enjoyed the image that came to my mind when it happened.

It was a formative experience for me, too. I try really, really hard to explain terms-of-art to my audience if I'm unsure of their familiarity. "Reading the room" can be difficult sometimes so I try to always preface w/ "Stop me if you know this already...".

I also learned not to be afraid to speak up when terminology isn't familiar to me. I've no doubt that's made me look ill-informed in some situations. I'll always take the judgement of others re: my knowledge vs. acting on a bad assumption later.

There are consequences (sometimes significant ones) from assuming somebody knows what you're talking about. People who act like they understand something when they don't (either because they're afraid to ask, or because they don't know they don't understand) are dangerous.

Re: Ask HN: IP cameras that don't require an app or internet?

#137

Post by Reubachi » Fri, Jun 23, 2023, 7:49 PM UTC

fabioyy wrote: post #73

A little off topic, i don´t know your use case, but you can use an old phone as webcam, they will be better in quality than any IP camera. A little example using my old galaxy s11. ( its connected to a pc using usb, airplane mode, no internet ) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CDE7PsLwzk

How does this comment come up whenever IP cameras or dash cams are mentioned? You certainly "can use a old phone as a webcam" and it will be "better quality". That's because it's a device designed to view commercial media, text, etc from your hand while mobile, connected to a network 24/7.

As an analogy, you have a 40 year old Ferrari in pristine condition that really doesn't have much work value, but still a fast classic car. also you daily drive a 5 year old cheap truck. if your daily breaks down, would you replace it with your Ferrari which is certainly "faster" and better quality?

Re: Ask HN: IP cameras that don't require an app or internet?

#138

Post by palotasb » Fri, Jun 23, 2023, 7:51 PM UTC

idbehold wrote: post #98

EvanAnderson wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fun story re: the term "explosion-proof": I was given a tour of an industrial facility where conditions required explosion-proof equipment. The tour guide made a point of calling out the explosion-proof motors in one of the rooms. One of the other tour group members asked the question "Why would it matter if these motors survived an explosion?" I visualized the facility exploding in a fiery blaze and a motor, fully i…

> Explosion-proof means that it won't cause an explosion Wait, what? The implication is that their other cameras regularly cause explosions?

Think about oil rigs or coal mines where all electronics are potential sources of sparks/arcs and thus explosions.

Re: Ask HN: IP cameras that don't require an app or internet?

#139

Post by jmbwell » Fri, Jun 23, 2023, 7:55 PM UTC

jasonjayr wrote: post #111

We recently setup Ring, but without a subscription they don't save/record anything, and of course are (creepily) cloud dependant. Is there any similar hardware that (a) Can run local only? (b) Is "non-tech partner-proof"? (ie, looks decent on a house, works reliably, wifi/24vac or PoE) Are there any self-hosted apps/servers that can replace the Ring software?

For this, I would consider UniFi Protect. Their doorbell cam is nice, their other cameras are nice, their software isn't the worst by a mile.

With some simple detours, you can set up a Protect system -- cameras and "console" (NVR) -- to operate completely independent of the cloud, or altogether isolated if you like. Attractive devices and family-friendly. Homekit compatible via an excellent Homebridge plugin.

Not necessarily the cheapest, but, again, there are no recurring fees, either, as there would be for much equipment of similar quality.

Re: Ask HN: IP cameras that don't require an app or internet?

#140

Post by dangus » Fri, Jun 23, 2023, 7:59 PM UTC

ramesh31 wrote: post #25

lloydatkinson wrote: post #5

This is a very disturbing trend for sure. Given that these new cameras that need accounts sure aren’t showing ads on the feeds either, meanwhile an account being required must be important to the manufacturers in some way. I can only conclude that they must be selling access to feeds, because even the most incompetent agile product delivery manager type person isn’t going to simply suggest every camera needs an accou…

This is happening with routers, too. Just recently had someone give me a new Netgear Nighthawk for free, and I was stoked until it wanted me to download an app and create an account to manage my network. Straight to the garbage.

Were you using the phone app-based installation, or visiting the local network address from a desktop computer?

Most products like this have some kind of "harder way" to set up without an account, while the smartphone way uses an account. For a router usually means that if you want the old-fashioned manual way you need to visit the router's gateway IP and set it up from there.

Sometimes "the smartphone way" even has a way around having to make an account, it's just that it's hard to find or discouraged. E.g., I set up my HP printer without an account or any ink subscriptions (and I even think it's a great printer, shocking, I know).

(I had a Nighthawk device relatively recently and it had no need for an account, but I don't actually know if this has changed recently)