Posted on 07/19/2019 1:20:37 PM PDT by Kaslin
There’s something about cameras that seems to divide our nation, while at the same time pointing out dizzying differences in terms of how we evaluate the technology based on who is using it. We already know that privacy advocates (for lack of a better term) hate facial recognition software when it’s used by law enforcement of any kind. However, most of them don’t seem to have any problems with Facebook and other social media apps “tagging” them and their friends at the latest party. Speed cameras are also seen as being evil, even if they do occasionally catch violent felons fleeing the scene of a crime.
But now another sort of camera is coming under attack. It’s the newly ubiquitous doorbell camera that lets you know when someone is at your door even when you’re not home. Video taken by these cameras can be shared among neighbors and even the local police to catch porch pirates, burglars and other ne’er-do-wells, varlets and cullions. In some cases, as with the Amazon offering called “Ring,” police departments are partnering with the company to offer discounted camera deals. This, of course, means that they have to be done away with. (Associated Press)
[A]s more police agencies join with the company known as Ring, the partnerships are raising privacy concerns. Critics complain that the systems turn neighborhoods into places of constant surveillance and create suspicion that falls heavier on minorities. Police say the cameras can serve as a digital neighborhood watch.
Critics also say Ring, a subsidiary of Amazon, appears to be marketing its cameras by stirring up fear of crime at a time when it’s decreasing. Amazon’s promotional videos show people lurking around homes, and the company recently posted a job opening for a managing news editor to “deliver breaking crime news alerts to our neighbors.”
“Amazon is profiting off of fear,” said Chris Gilliard, an English professor at Michigan’s Macomb Community College and a prominent critic of Ring and other technology that he says can reinforce race barriers. Part of the strategy seems to be selling the cameras “where the fear of crime is more real than the actual existence of crime.”
The arguments being made against Ring (and related products) for teaming up with police are bizarre, to say the least. First of all, arguing that these are unnecessary measures during a time of falling crime rates is bogus. Thankfully, it’s true that violent crime continues to fall across most of the nation (except in several larger cities), but porch piracy is on the rise and has been for some time.
Also, the usefulness of these devices for homeowners is beyond question. It allows you to instantly communicate with someone coming to your door when nobody is home. And if they are on your porch or at your doorway, you have a right to know about it.
The same applies to the privacy argument. Your expectation of privacy drops dramatically when you walk out your door and into the public square. When you set foot on someone else’s property, your expectation of privacy evaporates. (With the exception of using personal facilities like bathrooms, locker rooms or showers with the permission of the owner.)
What it comes down to in the end is that the advocates arguing against this technology simply want to make it as difficult as possible for law enforcement to do their jobs if it involves “Big Brother” having an image of you or any other data on record. I continue to find this argument unconvincing.
The battle continues, however. Over at Buzzfeed this week you can find yet another screed about how facial recognition needs to be banned entirely. To be clear, I’m not saying there aren’t situations where the consumer should be leary about some of this technology. We recently learned that the Russians own and operate that FaceApp system that shows you pictures of yourself looking much older. Turns out they’ve been collecting all of your photos and might be using them to create fake social media profiles.
But that’s the Russians. Not our own law enforcement agencies. This was just a case of caveat emptor. If you don’t know who you’re dealing with, don’t download dodgy apps that rely on you submitting pictures of yourself. But that doesn’t make the technology a bad thing. It’s the people who are operating it.
I have Ring and I like it. We’ve had a lot of porch pirates and even break-ins in my nabe recently, probably because of an uptick in the “homeless” and the fact that school’s out.
This is not “racial,” and the only people who think it is are professors who racists themselves, because they always assume that any criminal is going to be black. Not true, most of ours are white.
RING had a security flaw discovered in 2017. Seems that it would sometimes send video to an IP areas is China.
Just saying.
“It’s the people who are operating it.”
Sorta the point.
A massive surveillance system run by a benevolent US almost turned over an election when used by communist sympathizers embedded in the government.
Catch terrorists? Sure. Keep your political adversary (Trump) from getting in office? Not so nice.
The cameras capture imagery beyond your doorstep. Where traffic cameras end, bell cams begin.
And why would that be?
Your ring only sees what it want’s you to see. It’s always transmitting all the time.
Secondly, you had to open a port on your router so you can see the door camera when you are a way.
Have you even looked to see what kind of activity your camera is transmitting?
All you have to do is walk up to the door with your hand held-up blocking your face and then cover the camera with a piece of tape, dirt, paint, etc.
Secondary cameras, especially hidden, should be used as well.
In every home security ad, the perps are always white.
How many of these cameras caught some strange guy going into the house for a couple of hour siesta with the wife? These things bust up marriages!
Libs feel it is unfair to criminals.
"Critics complain that the systems turn neighborhoods into places of constant surveillance and create suspicion that falls heavier on minorities. "
Anyone have any idea how a door camera is racist?
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/doorbell-cams-raise-privacy-fears-and-concerns-about-bias/
My Ring doorbell is white. Therefore...racist.
Not a problem. Just make sure all the criminals in the commercials are White, as is usually done.
Gotta laugh. Watch a commercial for any of the security companies or video doorbell companies. NONE of the criminals are black or latino. Always a big white guy.
Then there’s the reality of crime in the US....
Some people choose to see racism in everything.
If this keeps up, criminals are going to go out of business.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.