Ring founder Jamie Siminoff is back at the helm of the surveillance doorbell company, and with him is the surveillance-first-privacy-last approach that made Ring one of the most maligned tech devices. Not only is the company reintroducing new versions of old features which would allow police to request footage directly from Ring users, it is also introducing a new feature that would allow police to request live-st

  • Dr. Moose@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    71
    ·
    5 months ago

    Who could have guessed that having billionaire owned always on surveillance device in your home would lead to this

    • devfuuu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s not like there’s been dozens of people warning about it in the last few years. People deserve what they get.

  • skisnow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    56
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    5 months ago

    I bought a cheap Chinese security camera for a fraction of the cost of a Ring and signed up for their cloud storage system. I’m more comfortable with the Chinese government being able to access footage of my backyard, than the current US administration.

    • Dr. Moose@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Or you could choose an option that does neither. Why feed the autocrats at all?

      • skisnow@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        eh, you might have a spare day to source a completely uncompromised camera and find someone in a trusted neutral country who runs an unproblematic hosting service and configure a system to do offsite storage in a secure way, but I’ve got other stuff going on. If you can source me a reasonable alternative I’m happy to use it when it comes time to renew my subscription.

        • Maestro@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Just buy a Reolink Doorbell. Pop in an SD card. Put in on your wifi or LAN and access it with your browser. You’re done. It’s all local. There’s an optional app that does need an external server, but that’s optional and there is no subscription.

          • OhNoMoreLemmy@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Ok, but one of the most important use cases is non-local access.

            If I’m at home I can just go to the door.

              • youmaynotknow@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                5 months ago

                This is highly unlikely to be able to notify you of someone ringing the door. It’s doable, but takes some tinkering which most people are not able to do because of all the reasons mentioned in previous comments.

        • tabular@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          5 months ago

          An offsite server is not under your control and accessible by who knows. Surely it is still a privacy concern.

          Privacy is like security in that it costs time. Most people don’t spend time on even having a conversation like this but if something bothers you then finding a spare day is easier.

        • Dr. Moose@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          5 months ago

          Nah you’re just being lazy. Its really not that hard. At least be ashamed man instead of this defeatist bullshit.

          • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            What you’re saying makes me think you aren’t aware of the technical knowledge of your typical smart doorbell or cam user, which is basically little to none.

  • Junkernaught@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    So, what are people using to get:

    • good quality streaming
    • doorbell alert
    • motion alerts
    • local and remote access
    • recording storage

    Currently using Ring (outside of America) and looking to migrate away. There are some nice other features like distinguishing motion vs people vs vehicles that are nice to have but can live without.

      • tabular@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        5 months ago

        There are many other cameras but most have the same potential to do this sort of shit. Sending video to some server you don’t control, on cameras you don’t control because it’s proprietary, isn’t going to cut it if privacy is your goal.

    • pulsewidth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      I have a piezoelectric doorbell.

      The bell part plugs directly into a wall socket. The button part is completely wireless and batteryless and is affixed near my front door.

      Been working like clockwork for a decade to let me know when someone is at the door and I’m home.

      If I’m not home, the postman or delivery driver leaves a note to go to the collection center for my package. If it’s a small package not requiring signature, they just leave it at the door or in the mailbox if it fits. None of that changes with a camera.

      Why overcomplicate life.

    • projectsquared@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Just bought a Reolink rln46 NVR and four cameras. I don’t have the doorbell, but every other feature you requested works flawlessly. It records 24/7 in 4K but can stream at lower resolutions if you want when you’re away from home on mobile. You can set what notifications you receive and when you want to receive them. You can even go back and search for events by type in the recorded video when they were never flagged for notification in the first place. I’ve been thoroughly impressed and plan to add to the system in the coming months.

      • toynbee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        I also use Reolink, including both the NVR and doorbell, and have been very pleased with it.

  • Gmork@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    I don’t like being under constant surveillance from my neighbors doorbell cameras. This is one of many excellent reasons why.

    What I am going to do is use MapComplete to start labeling every house that I come across that has one of these doorbells.

    Then I’ll post some QR codes around town that link to the map.

    Once people start seeing their homes called out on a map then perhaps some of them will feel uncomfortable with that and start to understand just why privacy matters.

  • Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    I mean, people are not being forced to buy this shit. So it’s on the idiots who think they have nothing to hide. Just Google something like “why are people ok with cameras inside their house “ and you’ll see many many people basically saying “don’t care, I have nothing to hide, everyone has a pussy/dick”

    • Dr. Moose@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      5 months ago

      We still need to protect the idiots. Thats why we’re banning asbestos and have safety codes. How is this any different?

      • Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Not if they are willingly bringing this inside their homes. I think it’s very different from substances that you might not be aware are there and are highly toxic.

    • tabular@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      5 months ago

      People who claim they don’t value privacy are simply ignorant of how this can affect them. They don’t consider the data falling into the wrong hands. Surely they don’t want criminals with unauthorized access at least. It should be obvious that governments don’t always have their best interests either.

    • ChexMax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Right but if my neighbor across the street has one, my house is being surveilled a lot more than is theirs.