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

Amazon’s Ring to partner with Flock

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 531 posts

Re: Amazon’s Ring to partner with Flock

#301

Post by absoflutely »

morshu9001 wrote: post #192
red-iron-pine wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

plenty of good use cases for it, and the popularity of the devices speak for themselves. just don't get ones owned by evil megacorps who have openly said they'll sell access to ICE

What is an equivalently capable alternative that puts the user more in control? The reason Ring is popular isn't just marketing or network effect, it's that it works. Before Ring and clones, security camera / DVR combos were really hard to make effective, I tried. Maybe you'd have a totally reliable system with good video, but it'd fail to notify you when you need it to, or notify way too often. Battery power was inf…

Reolink also seems to work pretty well with local storage, notifications and no subscription or cloud uploads.

Re: Amazon’s Ring to partner with Flock

#302

Post by night862 »

gitfan86 wrote: post #13
themafia wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have deniability with the phone. I can also just leave it at home if I want or turn it off entirely. That access should also be illegal without a warrant; however, this is far worse than cellular "metadata" tracking.

I don't understand why you assume that the government is following all the laws when it comes to cell phones and cloud data but won't when it comes to ring data?

Well, they don't.

They definitely need to follow the law when they get it from the Telco, but Cops can use their CSS/IMSI catcher all they want, theres almost no way to tell. But they can not then go to court and say "Yeah—we listened to their phone call and searched the car."

With this its no problem. No Hailstorm to buy for the entire force and there isn't any federal oversight on this sort of thing as near as I can tell. If you think police don't do crimes I've got a bridge to sell you.

Re: Amazon’s Ring to partner with Flock

#303

Post by beala »

olex wrote: post #55
Flere-Imsaho wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My reolink runs off power over Ethernet. Here in the uk, there have been reports of Amazon drivers using wifi deauth-ing devices to kill the ring cameras when they are near your property. My parents recently experienced this.

Absolutely, I will be running PoE wherever possible, definitely for the doorbell. Not just because of Amazon drivers, I've read reports of burglars using WiFi jammers to make sure wireless cameras are useless during a break-in.

Well this is disturbing. I guess my weekend project is running ethernet to my front door.

My problem is that the area around my front door where the doorbell is installed is solid timber, so it's not just a simple ethernet drop. I'm honestly not even sure how the builders ran the existing wire to that location. Maybe my only option is to add a second backup camera in a location where an ethernet install is easier.

Re: Amazon’s Ring to partner with Flock

#304

Post by bpt3 »

hitarpetar wrote: post #300
bpt3 wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A cursory internet search would back up my statement. Feel free to do that if you're interested. I note that you aren't asking the parent poster for any citations for their claim, which I would say is quite extraordinary. And to be clear, my "argument" is that the parent poster is objectively incorrect, which is accurate. I decided not to posit on why the parent poster made an objectively incorrect statement, though…

[flagged]

[flagged]

Re: Amazon’s Ring to partner with Flock

#305

Post by an0malous »

AlexandrB wrote: post #267
xbar wrote: post #211

With the stroke of a key, 100 million customer-installed cameras become part of the surveillance state.

This was always the end game for Ring. I think people were saying this since before the Amazon acquisition. The acquisition itself always struck me as Amazon attempting to reduce "shrinkage" - brick and mortar stores have their "loss prevention" team and Amazon has Ring. The bottom line with technology is that you either host and control it yourself or you're at the whims of the vendor's business strategy.

This is also the end game for LLMs

Re: Amazon’s Ring to partner with Flock

#306

Post by rkomorn »

CaptainOfCoit wrote: post #293
rkomorn wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, I think it's the other way around. Sci-fi writers understood both what technology could create in the future (and what would be desirable), and also understood how people abuse power and the tools available to them to stay in power (or gain more). In other words: they predicted the future, more than they inspired it. IMO, that also makes their writing that much more interesting.

Surprisingly, I never considered that, and agree that it makes the writing more interesting, I'm gonna keep this in mind for future stories. Thanks a lot for sharing that :)

Relatedly, somewhat, I've been reading a lot of 19th century French literature (because I'm French and because my sister is a literature teacher who's been "assigning" me stuff to read).

It has been somewhat shocking to see how relevant the writing is seen through a 21st century lenses. Whether it's how media works, how cliques of people function, etc.

It truly feels timeless in a way that I've found very surprising. It also very much supports notions that people don't change even if means and methods do.

Re: Amazon’s Ring to partner with Flock

#307

Post by grafmax »

AlexandrB wrote: post #267
xbar wrote: post #211

With the stroke of a key, 100 million customer-installed cameras become part of the surveillance state.

This was always the end game for Ring. I think people were saying this since before the Amazon acquisition. The acquisition itself always struck me as Amazon attempting to reduce "shrinkage" - brick and mortar stores have their "loss prevention" team and Amazon has Ring. The bottom line with technology is that you either host and control it yourself or you're at the whims of the vendor's business strategy.

Unfortunately you can’t opt out. The surveillance network blankets virtually everyone - friends, family, all of society.

Re: Amazon’s Ring to partner with Flock

#308

Post by adolph »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #262
Aurornis wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When you take this info and combine it with the ability of Wifi7 routers to "see" where people are in their house, WiFi routers can’t tell you where people are in the house. The routers don’t even know their own location within the house. All of those papers you see on the topic have extensive additional information being put into their models. The routers don’t magically know the layout of your house. At most, a W…

Couldn't someone standing outside figure out where interior routers are by triangulation, simply by walking around the house?

Kinda: ESPARGOS: ESP32-based WiFi sensing array

https://espargos.net/

Re: Amazon’s Ring to partner with Flock

#309

Post by _DeadFred_ »

chung8123 wrote: post #160
touwer wrote: post #4

Big tech is nothing different from the German industrialists one hundred years ago

I am both amazed and not surprised by the amount of people that will work at a company that is directly opposed to their own points of view. I am willing to bet many of the employees of Google, Meta, and Amazon are morally opposed to the very things they are supporting.

Nah. They aren't. If they were, they would leave. I went to school for aerospace but didn't work in the industry for the longest time because all the jobs available were military.

These people don't care, they might put on a fake persona that pretends to care, but you outright don't care if you work at these places. You get a job somewhere else when you care.

What you hear from them isn't caring, it's just a way for them to pretend they are someone they aren't. The person they pretend to be would not be working there.

Post reply on HN