Live data from Hacker News

Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

theintercept.com

321–330 of 532 posts

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#321

My next door neighbor (we share a wall) had their bicycles stolen twice, so they installed Ring (floodlight) cameras in both the backyard and the front porch. After a year, the cameras have yielded no added security, or caught any "bad guys" as far as I can tell and from what they told me. What I realized, is they use it to keep track of their kids, funny cat videos that trigger the recording, and most importantly, a…

I live in a block-long grouping of condos in Brooklyn. Every so often the management company sends out exterminators and one day as I was talking to him he pointed to these environmental monitors installed on a lamppost on our block. He says “what’s with that, the government spying on us?” and I explained it’s just some environmental data collectors, but pointed to my neighbor’s Ring and mentioned “although that thin…

It's explainable by looking at polls for how Americans feel about major institutions. Gallup did one for various public and private institutions: https://news.gallup.com/poll/394283/confidence-institutions-... and what they found is the only two major institutions that maintain a universal (across political affiliation and other demos) positive trust rating are small businesses and the military. Everybody else either varies a lot or just has universal low trust.

You'll note from this source that "big technology companies" score above all 3 branches of the federal government. Part of this is how partisan politics has become, so one party will have a majority of people expressing trust in an institution their party controls, the other hardly anybody, resulting in a fairly low score for the presidency and supreme court. Congress, it seems, is so universally despised it doesn't matter who controls it, it sits at single digit trust percentage.

In light of this it becomes understandable why somebody would be fine with big tech spying on them at the behest of the police (another institution with pretty high universal trust, though it does vary depending on political affiliation a bit it's considerably higher than any federal institutions), yet react with suspicion from something set up by bureaucrats from a federal agency.

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where the hell do you all live where this is a common problem? Out of all of my friend and relatives, 100s of people, none of them have ever complained about vandalism/theft.

I was in a similar situation until a rash of thefts began happening around my apartment complex a little over 10 months ago. Something changed, whether some porch pirates moved in to the complex, or some crime ring decided to start exploiting our area. The police and apartment management had no answer, and it turns out their security cameras are absolutely useless.

Yeah a similar thing happened at a rental property we own. Someone in the neighborhood learned the code to get into the building and started stealing packages. Changing the code would help for a few days and then it would happen again. I haven't heard about the issue in a few months, so it seems like they've fixed whatever the problem was. My guess is someone was watching people input the code and then using it later to get in. Another owner recently moved out, so maybe they were the weak link? Who knows.

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#323
post #128
post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The camera may be acting as a deterrent (if they didn't have any additional thefts) without it being obvious. I never would give a neighbor a hard time about a camera pointing at a publicly visible spot on my property- just into windows and other semi-private locations. That includes both audio and video. I ascribe to the "it's legal for journalists to go through your trash, so if you want privacy, shred your trash f…

> I never would give a neighbor a hard time about a camera pointing at a publicly visible spot on my property In Germany people have successfully sued their neighbours for that and I fully agree with the courts. Filming others without consent is invasive.

[deleted]

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#324

My next door neighbor (we share a wall) had their bicycles stolen twice, so they installed Ring (floodlight) cameras in both the backyard and the front porch. After a year, the cameras have yielded no added security, or caught any "bad guys" as far as I can tell and from what they told me. What I realized, is they use it to keep track of their kids, funny cat videos that trigger the recording, and most importantly, a…

If feasible a physical barrier on the porch along your property line might be the simplest option. Simply block the line of sight, and optionally install white noise generators on your side to mask noise.

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#325

Looking at most Ring videos, they don't seem very useful for tracking anyone down, more of a "yes, a porch pirate stole your stuff." Their position is such that the license plate -- assuming they even come in via a vehicle -- is visible. Plate readers need to be in a different place, with a different aim. Plus, Rings are wireless, and too many thieves are just using a wireless jammer.

> too many thieves are just using a wireless jammer. Is this actually that wide spread? I hardwire all of my cameras but I've never heard of wide-spread wireless jamming in house-hold crime.

They should cut off the power instead... it would take care of both.

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because there is no clear distinction between the two. You're certainly entitled to listen with your ears and write things down aren't you? Can you use a hearing aid to help you listen? What about binoculars to help you see? Clearly it's impolite to peer into your neighbours windows with binoculars, and gossip about all the conversations you overhear with your hearing aids, but you've got the right to do so, don't yo…

> I'd just like a clear idea of why we ban some and not others. Can you think of any reasons why we would want to ban some and not others? It reminds a bit of something that Emma Goldman might say: people have only as much liberty as they have the intelligence to want and the courage to take.

I can't think of any deontological reasons, no. It seems to me that people are just more apprehensive of the more recent innovations. I can point you to writings in the past advising what to avoid writing down. This taboo has clearly shifted.

Say in 1000 years from now everyone has cameras and storage media implanted in their persons, I suspect the public consciousness surrounding what is and isn't expected to be recorded would change. I don't however think that your fundamental liberty as a human being should depend on the public consciousness, but rather be derived from principles/axioms.

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#327
Does any one know of a privacy focused security camera?

I live in a rough neighborhood and am concerned about theft, but I have 0 faith or trust in companies like amazon.

If I want a security camera that I can check remotely, but I want to own my data and have complete privacy (no snooping by the company, no ability for them to give my data to some one else).

Do I have any options for this other than completely rolling my own?

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#328

My next door neighbor (we share a wall) had their bicycles stolen twice, so they installed Ring (floodlight) cameras in both the backyard and the front porch. After a year, the cameras have yielded no added security, or caught any "bad guys" as far as I can tell and from what they told me. What I realized, is they use it to keep track of their kids, funny cat videos that trigger the recording, and most importantly, a…

I’m sympathetic to your privacy concerns (neighbors shouldn't be recording much of your space although some may be unavoidable if you are close by).

You really lose me with this, though:

> I believe these cameras haven't decreased crime. They also don't really add more security.

Based on what?

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#329
post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had two suspicious people come to my door (separate incidents) which resulted in me getting a video doorbell (I'm going to migrate from a cloud one to a closed circuit one). I've also had two cases of salespeople who didn't understand the phrase "not interested". One escalated to me threatening a trespass call before he left. (This is with No Soliciting signs clearly visible) I worry my wife would not get the same…

How do you judge how suspicious someone is through a video feed?

If it's 90° on a hot summer day and they are wearing a big bulky jacket, that raises eyebrows.

Are they wearing a uniform? If they are pretending to be part of a company and not wearing a uniform, that is suspicious.

What about the time of day? ADT sales people don't knock on my door at 8pm at night.

How are they acting? Are they waiting calmly? Are they checking their pockets or waistline? Are they glancing around seeing if other people are around?

Are they hiding their face?

Did they ignore a no soliciting sign?

Did they walk by and check out the property before approaching the door?

Did they knock on my neighbors door first? Or did they come straight to my door?

Did they park? Where did they park? Was it a company vehicle?

How many people is it? Are those people dressed in a similar way? Are they all standing together or did one of them wander off?

If you don't answer immediately, how do they act? Do they get annoyed and wander off or do they become insistant? Do they escalate to knocking or shouting?

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#330
post #132
post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I never would give a neighbor a hard time about a camera pointing at a publicly visible spot on my property In Germany people have successfully sued their neighbours for that and I fully agree with the courts. Filming others without consent is invasive.

In the US you don't have any expectation of privacy in public (or at least severely limited) and the courts have upheld again and again that recording public areas, even from a private area, is completely find. Some jurisdictions require notification or consent for audio recording, but not all.

My front door is not a 'public area', not really
Post reply on HN