Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ring has partnered with 400 police forces

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 156 posts

Re: Ring has partnered with 400 police forces

#21

Post by pdkl95 »

moate wrote: post #6
danepowell wrote: post #3

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.

Depends on what your problem with this arrangement is. IF you're worried about the use of your feed against your will, then yea this isn't a problem (you know, unless the police get a warrant and demand Nest turn it over to you) If your issue is that your neighbors are now helping expand the surveillance state by self-installing cameras to allow the police visibility of your home, then it's still a problem. Technical…

> Technically this was always a possibility

Even worse, as people normalize the use of a surveillance technology (a technology in general, NOT a specific product), eventually it will pass the "in general public use" test created by Kyllo v United States. When that happens, using that technology is no longer a search and thus the police no longer need a warrant to use it. The people normalizing surveillance tech are eroding our future 4th Amendment protection.

(see my previous post[1] about this for references)

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20595358

Re: Ring has partnered with 400 police forces

#22

Post by rpmisms »

gameswithgo wrote: post #16
rpmisms wrote: post #5

So, a capitalist surveillance state. Is it better if the Government forces surveillance, or if people are duped into buying it for themselves ?

[flagged]

At least it's somewhat possible to opt-out. I wish the libertarian ideal of government as protecting personal liberties, up to and including against corporate interests, was practiced.

Re: Ring has partnered with 400 police forces

#23

Post by smileypete »

moate wrote: post #12
option wrote: post #10

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.

It's the neighborhood equivalent of 'Five Eyes'!

Re: Ring has partnered with 400 police forces

#24

Post by 5440 »

My ring camera caught a murderer breaking a door down last year and it's been a headache for me ever since. Even though I didnt actually see the murder,I've been called to several depositions and had to take three unpaid weeks off of work because of trial stuff. It's so frustrating. All I say everytime, is "Yes, I own the camera" I regret ever buying it at this point.

Re: Ring has partnered with 400 police forces

#25

Post by y04nn »

vorpalhex wrote: post #17

This headline leaves out an important detail from the article: > 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 in…

Edit: actually, this is by request as stated in the article

A̶ ̶s̶y̶s̶t̶e̶m̶ ̶w̶h̶e̶r̶e̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶p̶o̶l̶i̶c̶e̶ ̶c̶a̶n̶ ̶a̶s̶k̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶c̶a̶m̶e̶r̶a̶ ̶o̶w̶n̶e̶r̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶a̶c̶c̶e̶s̶s̶ ̶a̶ ̶s̶p̶e̶c̶i̶f̶i̶c̶ ̶t̶i̶m̶e̶ ̶r̶a̶n̶g̶e̶ ̶w̶o̶u̶l̶d̶ ̶b̶e̶ ̶m̶o̶r̶e̶ ̶t̶r̶u̶s̶t̶a̶b̶l̶e̶ ̶t̶h̶a̶n̶ ̶o̶n̶e̶ ̶g̶i̶v̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶p̶e̶r̶m̶a̶n̶e̶n̶t̶ ̶a̶c̶c̶e̶s̶s̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶c̶a̶m̶e̶r̶a̶ ̶f̶o̶o̶t̶a̶g̶e̶ ̶w̶i̶t̶h̶o̶u̶t̶ ̶l̶i̶m̶i̶t̶s̶.̶

I would also not trust a system recording videos of my life and sending them on remote server that I have not access to.

Re: Ring has partnered with 400 police forces

#26

Post by panarky »

inscionent wrote: post #7
danepowell wrote: post #3

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…

Imagine if the privacy policy simply said:

We will disclose your personal information if it benefits us.

Adding more words doesn't strengthen privacy one bit:

We will disclose your personal information to comply with a court order, or to save someone's life, or if it benefits us.

Re: Ring has partnered with 400 police forces

#27

Post by paublyrne »

5440 wrote: post #24

My ring camera caught a murderer breaking a door down last year and it's been a headache for me ever since. Even though I didnt actually see the murder,I've been called to several depositions and had to take three unpaid weeks off of work because of trial stuff. It's so frustrating. All I say everytime, is "Yes, I own the camera" I regret ever buying it at this point.

At the risk of being glib, your headache and frustrations seem trivial in the context of the crime you're mentioning.

Re: Ring has partnered with 400 police forces

#28

Post by dole »

rpmisms wrote: post #5

So, a capitalist surveillance state. Is it better if the Government forces surveillance, or if people are duped into buying it for themselves ?

Buying it for themselves? I don't know whether Ring is paying the various police departments for their "partnership", but it's been in the news locally here (an "at-risk", "high-crime" area, call it what you will) in the last few days that the local police department is giving away 50 Ring cameras and the winners are chosen by a lottery system.

Ticks all the boxes: "free" and entertaining element of gaming for the public, good police PR, field data for Ring. Much like the supposed value (and tentacles) of the Red Light Camera industry. Nevermind the constant barrage of ads through Nextdoor and other channels.

Re: Ring has partnered with 400 police forces

#29

Post by cc439 »

inscionent wrote: post #11
yters wrote: post #8

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?

The police via Red Flag laws which are incredibly easy to abuse.

Re: Ring has partnered with 400 police forces

#30

Post by [deleted] »

vorpalhex wrote: post #17

This headline leaves out an important detail from the article: > 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 in…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN