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

Amazon Ring's lost dog ad sparks backlash amid fears of mass surveillance

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 407 posts

Re: Amazon Ring's lost dog ad sparks backlash amid fears of mass surveillance

#161

Post by chasd00 »

warkdarrior wrote: post #154
toephu2 wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything I want to do in public I can still do. What "freedom" is lost? I gain security and lose no freedoms (unless you are doing something illegal). When property crime is up 53%.. plenty of people are willing to lose "freedom" whatever you are referring to, in exchange for safety.

You were recorded smoking marijuana, an illegal drug at the federal level. You were recorded walking into an abortion clinic, although face recognition identified as a resident of a state where abortion is illegal.

Well aren’t both of those things crimes? I’m not a fan of mass surveillance either but maybe pick a different example.

Re: Amazon Ring's lost dog ad sparks backlash amid fears of mass surveillance

#162

Post by janalsncm »

nilamo wrote: post #129
toephu2 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

That's beside the point? Gaining security by losing freedom was always on the table. What's interesting is the cultural shift toward not caring about losing freedom.

I think it is the point: there is a balance between freedom and safety.

For example, it is illegal to carry a loaded handgun onto a plane. Most people would agree that is an acceptable trade of freedom for safety.

There are places with even less safety and more “freedom” than the US so people who take an absolutist view towards freedom also need to justify why the freedoms that the US does not grant are not valuable.

Re: Amazon Ring's lost dog ad sparks backlash amid fears of mass surveillance

#163

Post by AnthonyMouse »

foobarian wrote: post #152
koolba wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only way Batman remains a "good guy" in the eyes of the audience is by destroying the entire thing once he's done. A key part of that is when he tells Alfred that he did not even trust himself with that level of surveillance and coded it to only grant access to Alfred. Further, Alfred agrees to aid Batman by accessing the data but simultaneously tenders his resignation. I doubt Amazon has anyone like Alfred in…

These kinds of resignations are interesting. The character is such a good protagonist, he resigns rather than do Bad Thing. But that pretty much guarantees the boss will hire someone more pliable. Why not instead swallow the pride and do Bad Thing but with some level of moderation? That would surely be a better outcome overall. The argument is that it would destroy the character's honor or whatever. But that is also…

> Why not instead swallow the pride and do Bad Thing but with some level of moderation?

A better answer is "refuse to do it without resigning". To begin with it gives you a better chance of preventing it, because maybe they back down, whereas if you do it or leave, someone does it. Then if they fire you, well, that's not really that much worse for you than resigning, but it's worse for them because now they're retaliating against someone for having ethical objections. How does that look in the media or in front of a jury? Which is all the more incentive for them to back down.

The problem with "well just do it a little bit" is that you can travel arbitrarily far in the wrong direction by taking one step at a time.

Re: Amazon Ring's lost dog ad sparks backlash amid fears of mass surveillance

#165

Post by magicalist »

toephu2 wrote: post #127
whatthe12899 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the reduction in crime is not solely due to Flock, but is has definitely helped. what's the theory? murderers see flock cams and decide not to murder? most of the general public doesn't even know what these cameras are (or that they even exist).

People tend to behave if they know they are being watched. Yeah it's not going to stop crime 100%, but I bet you it will (and it has) help reduce crime by double digit percentages. Look at places where there are CCTV cameras all over, there is very little crime there compared to the United States. I won't use China as an example because then you are going to attack me for saying it's an authoritarian state. In that c…

> People tend to behave if they know they are being watched

At long last, we have created the Torment Nexus from classic sci-fi novel Don't Create The Torment Nexus...

Re: Amazon Ring's lost dog ad sparks backlash amid fears of mass surveillance

#166

Post by ibejoeb »

apparent wrote: post #151

The situation with the Nancy Guthrie disappearance and Nest camera footage is related, and interesting. It seems that she had a Nest doorbell camera, but didn't pay for the subscription plan ($100/yr?). As a result, the camera records short snippets but doesn't save them to the cloud in a user-accessible way. After a week, Google finally hunted down/coughed up the footage. I imagine there were some people within Goog…

That is one of the weirder aspects of this run of the simulation.

Ring: just want you to know that we record everything whether you pay us or not and we know where you dog is.

Savannah: Where's Ma?

Ring:

Re: Amazon Ring's lost dog ad sparks backlash amid fears of mass surveillance

#167

Post by throwaway743 »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #83

I think Nancy Guthrie and the release of the doorbell video by scouring Google’s caches has done far, far more to make people want video cameras and cloud storage than any ad.

What's not given as much coverage is how she didn't have a subscription, yet the footage was still recorded pulled from servers. That's concerning.

Re: Amazon Ring's lost dog ad sparks backlash amid fears of mass surveillance

#168

Post by yibg »

toephu2 wrote: post #135
nilamo wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's beside the point? Gaining security by losing freedom was always on the table. What's interesting is the cultural shift toward not caring about losing freedom.

Everything I want to do in public I can still do. What "freedom" is lost? I gain security and lose no freedoms (unless you are doing something illegal). When property crime is up 53%.. plenty of people are willing to lose "freedom" whatever you are referring to, in exchange for safety.

How about just general privacy? I mean do you really want someone / the government to be able to track everywhere you go?

- Going to your girlfriends place while the wife is at work

- Visiting a naughty shop

- Going into various companies for interviews while employed

With mass surveillance there is the risk of mass data leak. Would you be comfortable with a camera following you around at all times when you're in public? I wouldn't be.

Re: Amazon Ring's lost dog ad sparks backlash amid fears of mass surveillance

#169

Post by janalsncm »

warkdarrior wrote: post #154
toephu2 wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything I want to do in public I can still do. What "freedom" is lost? I gain security and lose no freedoms (unless you are doing something illegal). When property crime is up 53%.. plenty of people are willing to lose "freedom" whatever you are referring to, in exchange for safety.

You were recorded smoking marijuana, an illegal drug at the federal level. You were recorded walking into an abortion clinic, although face recognition identified as a resident of a state where abortion is illegal.

The solution is to change the laws, not to stop enforcing them. Otherwise this is basically just giving up on the concept of having laws.
Post reply on HN