A podcast that hacks Ring camera owners live • Hacker News Board

Re: A podcast that hacks Ring camera owners live

#271

Post by tripzilch » Sun, Dec 15, 2019, 1:05 PM UTC

mikepurvis wrote: post #84

fpgaminer wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who tends to fall on the side of privacy more often than not, I'm actually not sure how I feel about facial recog+home security cameras. I'm completely against any fully automated system where the police can have access to the camera's data. But on the other hand, what if the system was implemented completely locally, and all with the owner's control and permission? So your Ring app pops up and says "Hey,…

I'm a four season bike commuter, and have been wearing a helmet cam for the past year or so— it's just breathtaking the amount of small violations I catch on camera: I don't even go looking for them or dwell at hotspots, and I pick up probably 5-10 instances per week of things like cars turning right on red without fully stopping, going through stop signs without fully stopping, not fully yielding to pedestrians in c…

> if there was a portal somewhere where I could just upload my timestamped helmet cam and porch cam videos as part of a dragnet operation to identify and catch repeat violators of the rules of the road, I'd be awfully tempted to participate, despite ideological misgivings about pervasive surveillance.

What do you mean, despite ideological misgivings about pervasive surveillance?

You're literally saying you would upload your private videos as part of a dragnet operation, so it doesn't really sound like you have any ideological misgivings about pervasive surveillance.

Re: A podcast that hacks Ring camera owners live

#272

Post by tripzilch » Sun, Dec 15, 2019, 1:18 PM UTC

mikepurvis wrote: post #84

fpgaminer wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who tends to fall on the side of privacy more often than not, I'm actually not sure how I feel about facial recog+home security cameras. I'm completely against any fully automated system where the police can have access to the camera's data. But on the other hand, what if the system was implemented completely locally, and all with the owner's control and permission? So your Ring app pops up and says "Hey,…

I'm a four season bike commuter, and have been wearing a helmet cam for the past year or so— it's just breathtaking the amount of small violations I catch on camera: I don't even go looking for them or dwell at hotspots, and I pick up probably 5-10 instances per week of things like cars turning right on red without fully stopping, going through stop signs without fully stopping, not fully yielding to pedestrians in c…

One of the US's problems with (bicycle) road safety, is the hostile attitude between cars and cyclists. You're really not helping that by wearing a helmetcam and reporting minor traffic infractions.

Cars are generally respectful towards bikes in the Netherlands, but if some dude were to try this, don't expect too much sympathy ... from anyone, including the police apparently.

Re: A podcast that hacks Ring camera owners live

#273

Post by perl4ever » Mon, Dec 16, 2019, 4:45 AM UTC

mikepurvis wrote: post #254

laumars wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say both points are complimentary rather than contradictory. Yes, cars do require more responsibility, however they are not exclusively responsible for road safety. For example cyclists have caused serious harm and even kills pedestrians before. Also pedestrians and cyclists have caused serious accidents to motorists when causing car drivers to react suddenly, to swerve or break harshly which has resulted in thos…

There's definitely some , but discussing this requires tact or you quickly find yourself making "all lives matter"-type arguments that can look like they're trying set the two sides up as equally dangerous or equally responsible. Or worse, an argument that ends up boiling down to "as a motorist, I will only ever drive more slowly and carefully once I no longer see any cyclist or pedestrian break another law, ever." I…

"as a motorist, I will only ever drive more slowly and carefully once I no longer see any cyclist or pedestrian"

I feel like the internet is full of dispatches from a fantasy/science fiction alternate universe where people are divided into warring tribes of (SUV) drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians that are somehow mutually exclusive.

I vaguely remember a time or a place or a timeline when people would drive here and there, with a bike rack on their car, and then they would get out and walk or ride their bike somewhere. All in one day!

But I guess today everyone does only one thing their whole life. Or else they have lost the ability to imagine doing anything other than what they are currently doing, minute by minute.

Re: A podcast that hacks Ring camera owners live

#274

Post by perl4ever » Mon, Dec 16, 2019, 4:59 AM UTC

kaikai wrote: post #182

laumars wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reporting someone for minor traffic offences if they caused an accident is the right thing to do but reporting people for the sake of reporting people is a little unsympathetic. I've lost count of the number of times I've misjudged a situation because kids were screaming in the back of the car, I'm stressed about something at work and had the briefest laps in concentration; or even times when I just have a complete b…

Unfortunately, it doesn’t matter whether it was a moment of distraction or purposeful bad driving. The reason it didn’t cause harm is just luck. I ride a bicycle and a motorcycle, and have had more close calls due to distracted drivers than I can count. I DO NOT CARE if it’s because you’re stressed out, you have screaming kids in the backseat, or it was just a “complete brain fart.” If you hit me with your giant meta…

I have a motorcycle license, but when I see someone who thinks it would be fun to stand up on their seat while riding along in front of me, I would feel hostility towards anyone haranguing me that I'm responsible for keeping them safe. Of course I don't want them to crash right now and involve me; that would be inconvenient. But it would be nice if something prevented them from continuing to do what they're doing.

I don't have a principled argument why someone else shouldn't regard all riders the same way. It's arbitrary where you draw the line between risks that are reasonable to take because you feel like it and risks that aren't.

Re: A podcast that hacks Ring camera owners live

#275

Post by perl4ever » Mon, Dec 16, 2019, 5:02 AM UTC

Mirioron wrote: post #243

lopmotr wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's a particularly American idea to want to cripple the police. They don't trust their government or their police, and perhaps rightly so, I don't know. Where I'm from, I would be happy if the police could use cameras everywhere to catch all the horrible petty crimes. People get their lifetime collections of things trashed and stolen during burglaries. It's quite upsetting for the victims. The police usually…

I don't think it's uniquely American at all. It's weird to me that some places don't feel this way. Remember that every state-caused atrocity is aided by the police in some way. Even if you're okay with the police right now, you might not be in 30 years. Also, I think the chance of the police (as a group) not being corrupt is about the same as politicians (as a group) not being corrupt - essentially zero. The incenti…

I think anyone here is almost certainly going to be more pro-police in 30 years, assuming they are at least 10 years old. It's just the natural course of things, although of course who knows what society will be like by then. But going by all of past history...

Re: A podcast that hacks Ring camera owners live

#276

Post by perl4ever » Mon, Dec 16, 2019, 5:06 AM UTC

anarchodev wrote: post #95

fpgaminer wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who tends to fall on the side of privacy more often than not, I'm actually not sure how I feel about facial recog+home security cameras. I'm completely against any fully automated system where the police can have access to the camera's data. But on the other hand, what if the system was implemented completely locally, and all with the owner's control and permission? So your Ring app pops up and says "Hey,…

Consider that nobody breaks into your home/vehicles because it's fun. They do it out of desperation. I'm not alleging any ignorance on your part, it's just not the sort of thing we think about often. The penalties for these crimes are already extremely severe. So I fall on the side of, I'd rather change the system proximally to help those who resort to this sort of petty crime for cash so they don't need it, rather t…

I have actually never considered that the only reason someone might break into a house or vehicle is desperation.

Have you considered that when penalties seem extremely severe, it's possibly because the percentage of perpetrators that are caught and punished is very low?

Re: A podcast that hacks Ring camera owners live

#277

Post by perl4ever » Mon, Dec 16, 2019, 5:08 AM UTC

tinix wrote: post #189

anarchodev wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consider that nobody breaks into your home/vehicles because it's fun. They do it out of desperation. I'm not alleging any ignorance on your part, it's just not the sort of thing we think about often. The penalties for these crimes are already extremely severe. So I fall on the side of, I'd rather change the system proximally to help those who resort to this sort of petty crime for cash so they don't need it, rather t…

Whatever man, someone stole my car from my garage a few weeks ago. It was recovered a block away, parallel parked in front of someone's garage. They trashed the inside, and didn't steal anything of value. Tell me, how were they desperate? They left sunglasses and other valuables in the car, but trashed the inside. They left camping gear in my garage, but stole a sentimental machete and some other random odds and ends…

Was the Creedence all right?

Re: A podcast that hacks Ring camera owners live

#278

Post by _ea1k » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 2:05 PM UTC

reaperducer wrote: post #31

_ea1k wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, but my camera watching what happens outside of my house is also not the same as a police camera. I didn't have such a camera at my old house, but if I did, there were several happenings that would have been reported to police.

there were several happenings that would have been reported to police. Reported. Not prevented. The companies that make money off of law enforcement have conditioned people to believe cameras=prevention and camera=safety, which is false.

These were vehicle related incidents. The important thing would be to get better descriptions of the vehicle to (hopefully) help with a later financial claim. Prevention is really a secondary goal.

Re: A podcast that hacks Ring camera owners live

#279

Post by _ea1k » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 2:36 PM UTC

matthewmacleod wrote: post #36

_ea1k wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, but my camera watching what happens outside of my house is also not the same as a police camera. I didn't have such a camera at my old house, but if I did, there were several happenings that would have been reported to police.

I think the general issue though is that devices like this exist in kind of a grey area of ownership. Yeah, it's "your" camera or "my" camera, but in reality they're wholly dependent on services provided by Amazon or Google or whatever other large data collator. And while there are pretty obvious reasons for that to be the case, it also opens up a rather large dragnet-style video surveillance system that looks juicy…

I still think it is my camera, even if I chose a camera that is dependent upon third party services.

I've had similar frustrations with them, though. The Ring doorbell is so slow to respond that it borders on uselessness for certain tasks. I really wish that I could just monitor an RTSP feed from it. I'm thinking that it will be replaced with one that is able to do that eventually.

Re: A podcast that hacks Ring camera owners live

#280

Post by mikepurvis » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 4:05 PM UTC

perl4ever wrote: post #273

mikepurvis wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's definitely some , but discussing this requires tact or you quickly find yourself making "all lives matter"-type arguments that can look like they're trying set the two sides up as equally dangerous or equally responsible. Or worse, an argument that ends up boiling down to "as a motorist, I will only ever drive more slowly and carefully once I no longer see any cyclist or pedestrian break another law, ever." I…

"as a motorist, I will only ever drive more slowly and carefully once I no longer see any cyclist or pedestrian" I feel like the internet is full of dispatches from a fantasy/science fiction alternate universe where people are divided into warring tribes of (SUV) drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians that are somehow mutually exclusive. I vaguely remember a time or a place or a timeline when people would drive here an…

Sure, there are lots of multi-modal travelers, and by and large those people are the most even-handed and reasonable in these discussions. :) Some people who cycle or take transit do so exclusively, but I suspect that many or even most have a car at home or occasionally rent one, or have at least been in a passenger in one in the recent past.

Meanwhile, the overwhelming majority of motorists have never experienced the road from the perspective of a bicycle seat, or last rode a bike decades ago as a child or teenager. For those who live in a garage door community, it's possible that you could even go many years with your only vulnerable pedestrian experience being the weekly dash across the Wal-Mart parking lot.

So yes, there is some tribalism to this. The people who ride bikes (some of the time) are a minority group, but I don't think we're the ones driving that mentality.