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

271–280 of 331 posts

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

#271

Post by Panda4 »

kristopolous wrote: post #202
noduerme wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've had a couple Ring cams for years. I hate the network, hate having to pay for the cloud storage, I've just been too lazy to research self-hosted alternatives. Is there solution you'd recommend that's relatively polished and easy to use?

I've been looking for cheap optionally non-cloud camera recently and cycled through 15 different vendors on amazon buying, testing, probing, and returning. Here's what I found. If you don't want to pay a lot, there's something called "wansview" which is a white-label to a number of cheap amazon cameras (sub $20). You can do ONVIF and RTSP on any of the wansview firmwared devices and then knock them off the internet t…

I have been searching for the same thing and my search resulted to nothing. Thank you so much for providing this.

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

#272

Post by jmuguy »

thinkingtoilet wrote: post #268
s0a wrote: post #83

Frigate NVR + Amcrest cameras. 100% local, private, on-device AI object recognition and classification. Can use a Google Coral USB TPU to speed that up. Runs on hardware as modest as a Raspberry Pi.

For a everyday person putting a camera on their front door, what does AI object recognition do for them?

Without it, if you want to know when something is happening on camera, you have to use motion detection. Motion detection sucks. Everything sets it off. Shadows moving, insects... anything moving.

Object detection, and then human detection, is extremely useful. Thankfully thats become nearly trivia enough to happen on device, but even with just "dumb" cameras the open source, on network solutions are very good.

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

#273

Post by ProllyInfamous »

jkestner wrote: post #164
kQq9oHeAz6wLLS wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Back in 2006, I became involved in a USPS investigation (witness/victim); barring specifics, the perpetrator's PO Box [0] was involved: the investigated would send minors in to retrieve packages, which is allowed ("possessor of key possesses mailbox privileges").

This made it extremely difficult to capture the actual perp. He eventually walked away with minimal consequence, for lack of evidence/possession.

[0] established with false identification

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

#275

Post by wmeredith »

noduerme wrote: post #108
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've had a couple Ring cams for years. I hate the network, hate having to pay for the cloud storage, I've just been too lazy to research self-hosted alternatives. Is there solution you'd recommend that's relatively polished and easy to use?

I have a couple cheap Wyze cams aimed at my front door/porch at different angles. They record on a loop to SD cards. Qyze has cloud stuff, but you don't have to subscribe to it. They're like $30 each and supremely hackable.

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

#276

Post by crazygringo »

SecretDreams wrote: post #129
idle_zealot wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to be taking the company's words at face value and assuming good faith. I would caution against doing that.

Look, Amazon has our best interest at heart, alright? Surely they're not working on this still in the background.

At the end of day, Amazon is a business, not an extension of the police or the FBI.

They initially partnered with Flock because they thought this would be a feature people would want. They literally bought a crazy expensive Super Bowl ad to show it off.

Turns out people didn't. So now they're not doing it.

Amazon's only interest is to make money.

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

#277

Post by chankstein38 »

tokioyoyo wrote: post #176
bandrami wrote: post #148

I still don't understand how otherwise sensible people can have an Alexa or Google Home. Like what part of that seems like a good idea to them?

Ability to “Hey Google, play Spotify” in every room and shower is pretty great. That’s literally the only reason I’ve been using it for 5+ years. Oh, and it was practically free.

I liked using it like this but my problem is that it wouldn't reliably respond to commands while music was playing. There were times I had to unplug it to get music to stop. And other times I'd want a song with an explicit word in the name and it'd pretend it didn't exist.. like wtf I'm an adult in my own house I think you can manage to play the song I asked for whether or not it has a big mean curse word in it.

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

#278

Post by ImPostingOnHN »

camillomiller wrote: post #208
dylan604 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can easily put it into the corporate charter that you will not "do evil". At that point, you have a mandate to grow revenue while abiding by the charter.. Just because majority of people choose to be assholes does not mean everyone has to be. Be the change you wish to see in the world, or something

That worked for Google, didn't it?

Did google do that? Pretty sure no.

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

#280

Post by nozzlegear »

gib444 wrote: post #216
nozzlegear wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We never needed CCTV in the 90s/00s for dogs. We never needed the telephone back when we had smoke signals and carrier pigeons either. Here are three real scenarios that have happened to us just off the top of my head where I was thankful we had cameras and locally stored footage rather than smoke signals and old timey folklore: 1. We couldn't find our cat last summer. Turns out she was sitting in the living room w…

[flagged]

Don't waste my time with little pissant gotcha bullshit. If you can't engage with my comment in good faith then just move on.
Post reply on HN