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

Ring owners are returning their cameras

msn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 314 posts

Re: Ring owners are returning their cameras

#201

Post by gosub100 »

ToucanLoucan wrote: post #156
gosub100 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Christofascists It's not a partisan issue. From leftist utopias to god-fearing Texan ranch lands, the police are abusing power and harassing innocent people. Trying to bring religion and partisanship (in one word, even) doesn't help your message.

> It's not a partisan issue. I'm sorry I'm having a hard time remembering the role leftists are playing in the US right now what with the Executive, Congressional and Judicial branches all being stacked to the tits with Republicans, right up to the top with our dementia-addled conman of a president, sleepily signing into law the policies that will see us excised as the center of world economics.

That's called selective memory and that's why partisanship is harmful. I'm not going to feed the "my guy good, your guy bad" fallacy.

Re: Ring owners are returning their cameras

#202

Post by [deleted] »

asdff wrote: post #4

Funny how a single superbowl ad from Ring themselves was able to do in one weekend what a thousand and one anti Ring bloggers were unable to do for the past 10 years straight. This commercial and the response will probably be studied in marketing classes.

[deleted]

Re: Ring owners are returning their cameras

#203

Post by saintfire »

SanjayMehta wrote: post #131
ulrikrasmussen wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm walking on the pavement. And yes, it is illegal to point cameras at public spaces in my country (Denmark), but the law is not really enforced.

[flagged]

Seemed to mean that specific camera law, not the law as a whole.

Re: Ring owners are returning their cameras

#205

Post by throwaway173738 »

philipallstar wrote: post #175
ToucanLoucan wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not a partisan issue. I'm sorry I'm having a hard time remembering the role leftists are playing in the US right now what with the Executive, Congressional and Judicial branches all being stacked to the tits with Republicans, right up to the top with our dementia-addled conman of a president, sleepily signing into law the policies that will see us excised as the center of world economics.

If you think the current president is dementia-addled compared to the last one, then that would be very surprising.

He talks and acts like my mother who has dementia.

Re: Ring owners are returning their cameras

#206

Post by friendzis »

zetanor wrote: post #169
nindalf wrote: post #155

This news article boils down to "a few people on reddit did something", which is interesting. But we know reddit and HN are definitely not mainstream. Is this hurting Amazon? No, it is not. As long as they're honouring return requests freely, you know that the number of returns is within their accepted levels of distressed inventory. If it's getting into uncomfortable territory, they'll start rate limiting people by…

I'd agree on /r/FlockSurveillance/ specifically, but if Reddit itself does not qualify as "mainstream", then what does? Just FANG?

Reddit is at the core forum platform, therefore it's as misleading to attribute whatever is happening at any one [group of] subreddit to the whole of Reddit as it is misleading to do the same with closed Facebook groups.

Remember forums of old. Larger sites with daily visitors in the thousands already had nearly isolated topic silos within the forum. The effect is even stronger here.

Re: Ring owners are returning their cameras

#208

Post by jkestner »

roysting wrote: post #66
asdff wrote: post #4

Funny how a single superbowl ad from Ring themselves was able to do in one weekend what a thousand and one anti Ring bloggers were unable to do for the past 10 years straight. This commercial and the response will probably be studied in marketing classes.

Am I missing something? I thought it was not the ad itself, but rather the combination with the reporting on that Guthrie abduction, which claimed that although there was no subscription to the recording service, the video data was still recovered, i.e., recorded and sent to Google servers. Regardless of how you see it, although the ad was a kind of manipulative reframing of surveillance infrastructure by using pets…

Humans can adapt more quickly than wildebeest. Join advocacy groups for your own morale, continue to get better at communicating these dangers to the mainstream, be that person who offers alternatives to your non-technical circle.

Yeah, it’s a timing thing. Government surveillance with commercial partnerships is more aggressive now, and the stories are chipping away at our collective ignorance until something like this connects the dots for people. I’m off in my corner of culture and don’t watch social video so I didn’t appreciate the work that streamers/explainers have done to alert normal people to these problems. But those videos were more effective at getting Flock out of my city than any canvassing I did. It’s nice to see conspiracy brains turned to an actual cabal.

Re: Ring owners are returning their cameras

#209

Post by throwaway173738 »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #121
mingus88 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Counterpoint: everyone needs to own their own video streams I hate it, but you are being recorded everywhere you go. Your plates and your face get scanned every single day, all day long. This is normalized. Privacy is dead. You will never get access to any of that data when you need it. It is not there to help you. You need to keep your own evidence of the world around you; you never know when you will need it.

I just assume that I’m on video, at any given time. Not condoning it; just accepting reality. > It is not there to help you It’s like those “This call may be monitored for 'quality' purposes.” service calls. You can bet, that if the recording helps the company, they’ll have it, but if it helps you , well, they didn’t record that call.

The best part of those messages is that they give you tacit permission to record the call on your phone.

Re: Ring owners are returning their cameras

#210

Post by dwedge »

tialaramex wrote: post #198
dwedge wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a really confusing law. how can you share the recording with the police if you're not permitted to store the recording in the first place

Ordinarily the police investigating a major crime don't care whether you broke the law in small ways. "Hmm, should we solve the murder, or, maybe get somebody fined $100 for having an unauthorised video" ?

I got hit by an Uber once as a pedestrian, he drove away, I phoned the police and they spent the whole time trying to decide if I can cross the road there or not, decided that it was a legal technicality and let me off with a warning for jaywalking. So in summary:

> "Hmm, should we solve the murder, or, maybe get somebody fined $100 for having an unauthorised video" ?

Don't be surprised to find out the answer is both.

Post reply on HN