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

Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

theintercept.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 532 posts

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#371

Post by heavyset_go »

Zak wrote: post #364
ls15 wrote: 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.

It's interesting that Germany makes a distinction between observing and recording images or video, while the US does not. The US does distinguish (typically in state law) between listening and recording. Recording is different from watching/listening. It's reasonably possible to know who is present at any given time, but not possible to know in advance who might hear/see a recording in the future. I do, however think…

It's not just about trespassers, it's also about anyone who was invited onto the property that's under surveillance. Guests, workers and contractors who are invited onto the property have a right to know if they're being recorded or not.

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#372

Post by swatcoder »

always2slow wrote: post #277
dekhn wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's totally uncalled for to call me a creep. I'm saying other people can point their cameras at my yard. When I point my camera I seriously consider that others don't share my values. And if they came over and asked nicely, I'd move the camera (it currently points at a neighbor's driveway). At least I'm open and honest about it.

>I think it's totally uncalled for to call me a creep. I'm saying other people No I think it is called for, you clearly aren't getting it. The things you are saying, the behavior you're outlining and the justifications you are giving for it make you a creep. >can point their cameras at my yard. When I point my camera I seriously consider >that others don't share my values. And if they came over and asked nicely, I'd…

I appreciate the principled point you’re trying to make about public recording specifically and anticipatory deference more generally, but you’ve turned it into a very personal attack on another community member and that doesn’t feel very appropriate to this site.

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#373

Post by 5-more-minutes »

unfocused wrote: post #31

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…

Did you steal the bicycles...

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#374

Post by wslack »

dionidium wrote: post #181
karaterobot wrote: post #8

> “If there is the infrastructure, if there is the channel by which police can request footage without a warrant or consent of the user, under what circumstances they get it is out of our control. I worry that because it’s decided by the police and by somebody at Ring, there will be temptation to use that for increasingly less urgent situations.” Many people (I would argue anybody with common sense) predicted Ring wo…

My view on this is that we're not going back and it would be silly to try to do so. Once you have the technology to record, track, and ultimately apprehend criminals, simply not doing so in the name of ideological purity becomes increasingly obscene. What we need are courts that understand the technology, prosecutors who fear censure for overreach, and fair laws about standards of access to the data. It's here to sta…

By that logic, we should use illegally obtained evidence to record/track criminals. Not sure that's how the courts actually operate.

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#376

Post by heavyset_go »

ls15 wrote: post #312
shadowgovt wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Germany's entire threat model, at a cultural level, is 100% different from the US due to differing histories. Germany is concerned about how networks of tattle-tale can be used by fascists to organize oppression. Americans are concerned about how crime flourishes in the unobserved corners of urban environments. These are both, basically, bogeymen. But the German bogeyman is the Nazis returning and the American bogeym…

> These are both, basically, bogeymen. But the German bogeyman is the Nazis returning and the American bogeyman is the transient murderer. Eastern Germany had another authoritarian surveillance state after the Third Reich. I have no good reason to be confident that it will not happen again. It could as well happen in the US, considering recent history. An authoritarian surveillance state that is paired with digital s…

More like billions of people.

Anyone who thinks that the power of the surveillance state won't be abused is naive. The existence of "benign" surveillance hinges on those with power always acting in good faith and never faltering. There are practically zero repercussions for abusing that power, and little to no checks and balances, either.

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#377

Post by at_a_remove »

Pakdef wrote: post #325
darknavi wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

It's a grab, not a heist.

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#378

Post by deltree7 »

dm319 wrote: post #47
unfocused wrote: post #31

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 am also no fan of Ring or similar, though the reasons are slightly different. We lost our cat recently, and I went round my neighbourhood knocking/ringing on every door to ask around. It was a strange experience as around 30% had these ring doorbells. It was unpleasant to know I was being recorded and judged, and often as a result, not answered. I vowed at that point we would never consider one, if only because I d…

If you had a Ring, you would have most likely gotten clues about your cat.

If you had asked your neighbors nicely to view their Ring history, you would have mostly likely gotten even more clues or even found your cat.

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#379

Post by eth0up »

Pakdef wrote: post #260
eth0up wrote: post #119

I tend to drop a link to Motion when such subjects arise. It's been a stalwart companion for years and is usually in Linux repositories. https://motion-project.github.io/

My favorite one. I run a script on_event_end to make a backup on my VPS and also, on_event_start, I record audio: on_event_start ffmpeg -nostdin -f alsa -i pulse -c:a libmp3lame -ar 44100 -b:a 128k -ac 1 -f mp3 /home/user/motion/%Y%m%d%H%M%S.mp3 & I just wish they would have chosen a different name, it can be hard to find in a web search.

> I just wish they would have chosen a different name, it can be hard to find in a web search.

It's an apt and good name, but definitely not search friendly.

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#380

Post by jimmaswell »

unfocused wrote: post #31

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…

You have no right not to be recorded in public in my opinion. You're the one shooting photons onto their property (the camera) that they should be able to do what they want with.
Post reply on HN