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

Ring cancels its partnership with Flock Safety after surveillance backlash

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 331 posts

Re: Ring cancels its partnership with Flock Safety after surveillance backlash

#161

Post by noduerme »

crote wrote: post #159
dylan604 wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have been selling NVR based camera systems for decades. It's clunky. It takes a network savvy person to open up their home network to allow remote access. It takes an even savvier person to not do that in a way that guarantees getting their network pwnd. Having a cloud based solution from an ethical company would be the consumer friendly solution people are actually wanting. Lots of people are willing to spend m…

This isn't an inherently unsolvable problem. Peer-to-peer file sharing and video calls have been able to work around it for ages . The same approach could be used for cameras - see for example Home Assistant's remote access. Sure, you'd still need a cloud-based STUN-like discovery service, but a small one-time fee should easily cover operating it.

Right..Or instead of STUN/TURN just use Tailscale for now. I think the reason no one's packaged this into a slick Ring-like plug-and-play probably comes down to corporate greed and how hard it is to raise money if your intention is to start a business that doesn't have ever-expanding verticals. Like, this is a set of solved problems. They just need to be smoothed and packed for the user.

Re: Ring cancels its partnership with Flock Safety after surveillance backlash

#162

Post by ncallaway »

stalfosknight wrote: post #102
chmod775 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're saying that because saying what they actually mean would paint flock in a negative light, which they likely want to avoid for various reasons.

So they'd rather lie in their press release.

Yes.

That's...not unusual.

I would strongly to advise you to assume companies are extremely willing to lie in press releases.

Re: Ring cancels its partnership with Flock Safety after surveillance backlash

#163

Post by ncallaway »

RyanOD wrote: post #137
dakolli wrote: post #95

Doesn't matter, I've come to the conclusion I'll never buy into one these networks. There's a reason "security" cameras were always on "closed circuit", there's no need give these companies money.

I feel this way about many such networks. We avoid networked appliances, garage doors, door locks, external cameras, etc as often as we can.

I've gotta say, I'm at my absolute most smug when the internet is out and my Roku TV warns me "Are you sure you want to open Jellyfin, it probably won't work without internet access".

Re: Ring cancels its partnership with Flock Safety after surveillance backlash

#164

Post by jkestner »

kQq9oHeAz6wLLS wrote: post #141
ProllyInfamous wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I worked across several facilities and obviously cannot talk specifics about those. It is public knowledge that one of them housed a large metro area's main ISP "meet-me room." During Snowden revelations I'd already been apprenticing for years; nothing Edward documented surprised me . I'd literally walk around our 500,000sqft elevated floors knodding my head [none of this exists, officially] . ---- Nothing is as it s…

> PO Box in profile Pretty sure government agencies will have no trouble finding you from that bit alone, and then tracking your movements is trivial. I mean, you have to show up and check the box periodically..

They implement a physical Tor each time their check their box - layers of Taskrabbits hiring Taskrabbits. One picks up the Mail and hands it off to the next. The owner is one of the Taskrabbits somewhere in the chain.

Re: Ring cancels its partnership with Flock Safety after surveillance backlash

#165

Post by aenis »

alehlopeh wrote: post #61

A lot of you won’t want to hear it but HomeKit + iCloud secure video is the only way to go. For one thing it’s end to end encrypted. You can also do ML stuff like face recognition which happens locally on your Apple TV. And you can set it to trigger HomeKit scenes if eg the person in the video isn’t recognized, or if it recognizes a particular person. Yeah Apple bad, blah blah. But they don’t have an incentive to sel…

Huh? Just roll your own, thats hacker news after all.

Frigrate nvr + cameras that are confined to internal network. Easy peasy. And you get to set it up exactly as you want.

p.s. i am not saying going with apple is a bad idea (i dont have an opinion), i am just saying thats far from the "only way to go"

Re: Ring cancels its partnership with Flock Safety after surveillance backlash

#166

Post by Arrowmaster »

toofy wrote: post #135
Cerium wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not really cheap, nor best "value for the dollar", but I am extremely satisfied with UniFi [0]. Nearly instant setup, decent mobile apps, web interface, basically just works as you need. [0] https://ui.com/ Edit, update link.

while i agree that unifi is worth looking at, id urge anyone reading this to be a little weery there: i used to own extensive unifi equipment for my home network, 8 access points, 2 switches, gateway, a couple cams, etc… it was amazing, the initial setup, the interoperability, the stability and maintenance was absolutely painless. i will loudly sing them praises for those things, but i started noticing them trying to…

I did a full security system replacement for my previous employer in our data center. Replaced all the old IP cameras that connected directly to a small black box nvr with UniFi camera recording onto a UniFi Video server writing to a NAS cable locked to the rack in our locked data center. Two months later UniFi Video was discontinued and stopped receiving updates or support. If we wanted a supported platform we had to purchase a UniFi Protect NVR with less storage and less power/network redundancy than what I built. Plus all access to UniFi Protect would run through their cloud portal.

Yes I'm still bitter.

Re: Ring cancels its partnership with Flock Safety after surveillance backlash

#168

Post by BatteryMountain »

mandeepj wrote: post #25

“Canceled” for now. Maybe it was just a video, they’ll continue with the “quiet” development and slowly launch it

Definitely this. Now way they are saying no to that bag (and/or gag orders....). This isn't over.

Re: Ring cancels its partnership with Flock Safety after surveillance backlash

#169

Post by lstodd »

GaryNumanVevo wrote: post #140
idle_zealot wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great. Now package that as a plug-and-play product so more than 1000 nerds will use it instead of participating in the largest dragnet in history ;)

Security systems used to be 100x the cost (parts+install) before the cloud because you essentially needed a local NAS and to run a bunch of PoE enabled ethernet to each corner of your house.

Hm. So all those "security systems" are defeated by a $1 jammer?

Re: Ring cancels its partnership with Flock Safety after surveillance backlash

#170

Post by toast0 »

minimaxir wrote: post #160
mh2266 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

pokemon?

A fail IMO because it exposed people as only liking Gen 1 Pokemon. Except that guy who liked Zygarde.

Yeah, but Jigglypuff singing put both offenses to sleep.
Post reply on HN