51–60 of 122 posts
This can get even worse, e.g. Verkada, Meraki, what we named "Hostage as a Service" https://youtu.be/_vhIdsHeI0M
A lot of people advocate for traditional cameras gaining some sort of smart interface to facilitate sharing or some other such features. What they don't understand is that traditional cameras work extremely well with their dedicated but seemingly outdated interfaces, and moreover, they prevent things like this from happening. Replaceable batteries, replaceable storage, and "primitive" but exceptionally functional fir…
Why would smart cameras end up any different?
I will say the DSLRs understand the necessity of immediacy - turn it on and take a shot.
(well, there is the "turn it on" part)
Honestly I don't know why phone cameras haven't understood the immediacy thing. why not dedicate one button to ALWAYS take a picture, getting the shot even at the expense of accidental shots.
In short, the people who "purchased" these cameras do not own them. Specifically, the owners of these cameras may own the hardware, but cannot use it because they do not own nor control the software that runs it. Richard Stallman predicted this decades ago . Regardless of what you think of him, he was the first person to come up with the idea of free open-source software expressly to give users the ability to (quotin…
> Starting April 1, the company would no longer support models that included no-fee seven-day rolling storage of video clips—a well-advertised selling point.
And cameras were still being able to be used with external storage
> Instead, Arlo device owners could upgrade to one of the company’s paid plans, starting at $13 a month or buy an add-on device to store videos.
Which is... exactly what you'd have to do with fully open source system anyway, buy a box to store it or pay someone for storage.
This problem will only be solved by legislation. If countries seek to reduce e-waste they need to force electronics makers to ensure a minimum length of support on the same conditions as existed on the date of sale - say 10 years.
The FCC could have a rule when you are releasing "Cloud Connected" hardware that would specify that you must provide an "EOL plan" for when you no longer wish to support the hardware. A good example would be Sonos, they would be within their right to end official support for a speaker, but they must provide some EOL support that will let these devices function in perpetuity (or at least until the hardware breaks down…
But yeah, would be nice. "No updates - give source code on OSS license + reasonably easy way to flash".
The "right to repair" laws being developed might help here, but I don't know what this means for anything "connected to a service". If the service goes down, are there laws that say we need to be able to connected to something else? I'm not aware of much.
I mean, as an Arlo customer, I knew this was coming, but that's because I've worked in tech for over 20 years, and know none of these companies can operate a plan that looks ahead more than 2 years.
Ultimately technology is either subscribed, or "rented" for an undefined period of time. It's never "bought". It's gonna take some serious regulation to make that happen, and I'm not even sure how that will work.
This problem will only be solved by legislation. If countries seek to reduce e-waste they need to force electronics makers to ensure a minimum length of support on the same conditions as existed on the date of sale - say 10 years.
Or vote with our dollars and reject "cloud" connected devices
I've been suckered to buy cloud-shit that I wasn't aware it was. When helping some family with a failed wifi/router, I got some newer Linksys router. Brought it over to them, and demands an online account with some app on the phone.
Looked online with my phone, and verified they went cloud only and no reasonable (non-ddwrt, etc) way to bypass it. I wrote "DEFECTIVE" in sharpie on the bottom of the router, packaged it right back up and took it back to the retailer for a refund.
I bought a non-Linksys/Cisco brand that didn't play stupid games. Changed the SSID, BSSID, and WPA2 config to be the old one, and finished the install in just a few minutes. It does its job and just works. Has been for like 4+ years.
I never understood why I need MY hardware to use their servers. If I buy something it should be mine alone.
In short, the people who "purchased" these cameras do not own them. Specifically, the owners of these cameras may own the hardware, but cannot use it because they do not own nor control the software that runs it. Richard Stallman predicted this decades ago . Regardless of what you think of him, he was the first person to come up with the idea of free open-source software expressly to give users the ability to (quotin…
They do own the camera. They just don't own the cloud service that makes the camera useful. Or even operable.
Reminds me of Cory Doctorow's story Unauthorized Bread.