11–20 of 156 posts
Welcome to the private free-market Stasi. You can try to opt out by not using Facebook or Ring cameras, but your friends and neighbors opt you in without your permission.
Indeed. Mass surveillance. Police brutality. Weapons confiscation. Seems to be a pattern. Both sides of the political spectrum are enabling different portions of this pattern.
If I put a camera outside of my house I want police to be able to access/react to what it’s captured. Our PD even has an app where you can register a camera with them (not direct access though)
Please explain why your rights are greater than mine.
The headline neglects to mention that the system is opt in and per-incident, which I think is a critical detail. It's not like police have 24/7 involuntary access to everyone's video.
If I put a camera outside of my house I want police to be able to access/react to what it’s captured. Our PD even has an app where you can register a camera with them (not direct access though)
Great. You pointed that camera directly at my house and are now infringing on my right not to have it watched by the police 24/7. Please explain why your rights are greater than mine.
I'm not aware of any legislation in the USA that would make a video feed of the exterior view of a property from one's own property illegal.
So, a capitalist surveillance state. Is it better if the Government forces surveillance, or if people are duped into buying it for themselves ?
> Officers don’t receive ongoing or live-video access, and homeowners can decline the requests, which Ring sends via email
It's not as if the police are pulling a Batman and watching every ring simultaneously, but instead they can do the digital equivalent of going door-to-door and asking "Hey, did you catch footage of your neighbors house being broken into last night?"
Frankly, I actually trust a bunch of random citizens to have video footage more than I trust any company or government organization.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed. Mass surveillance. Police brutality. Weapons confiscation. Seems to be a pattern. Both sides of the political spectrum are enabling different portions of this pattern.
Who is confiscating weapons?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Great. You pointed that camera directly at my house and are now infringing on my right not to have it watched by the police 24/7. Please explain why your rights are greater than mine.
>right not to have it watched by the police 24/7 I'm not aware of any legislation in the USA that would make a video feed of the exterior view of a property from one's own property illegal.
The headline neglects to mention that the system is opt in and per-incident, which I think is a critical detail. It's not like police have 24/7 involuntary access to everyone's video.
Remember you don't own or control anything you upload to a third party. From the ring privacy policy: > We also may disclose personal information about you (1) if we are required to do so by law or legal process (such as a court order or subpoena); (2) in response to requests by government agencies, such as law enforcement authorities; (3) to establish, exercise or defend our legal rights; (4) when we believe disclos…
(4) and (5) are the only ones with wording I see as a bit dubious, but I'm not a lawyer and don't know if those are normally required terms.