And their records can be accessed without oversight.
The sharing with LEO will always then be optionally and at your option, which still provides a similar net security benefit.
Purely localized home storage and IOT stuff which offers similar features like remote access and whatnot, is clearly a really, really difficult problem to solve. Just like smartphone being essentially your entire one ISP coordinated popping from having your whole life in any security agencies hands.
Maybe we need an organization like OpenAI to solve this problem. Like OpenHome or something. A place we can centralize our developer resources to providing a solution to this obvious proto-police state that is being developed out of pure utility, aka usefulness.
Right now my friends moms washing machine and coffee maker are all wifi connected to be controlled and notified when done remotely from here phone. It's entering out lives fast and we need a solution and startups offering similarlly good products - or a private solution which can be sold to the manufacturers like Whirlpool.
I think the better solution is that someone offers a relatively cheap service that has a cloud option that fully encrypts the data and uses e2ee for communication to the server. Though it is hard to prove that you don't own the keys (I mean how many still distrust Signal?).
"In most cases, when police want to search your neighborhood, they need a warrant and a reason to believe something’s amiss. Now “reasonable suspicion” is going the way of dial-up. Fifty police departments across the United States are partnering with Amazon to collect footage from people who use Ring, the company’s internet-connected doorbell. Some are offering discounted or free Ring doorbells in exchange for a pledge to register the devices with law enforcement and submit all requested footage."
You still would be paying Ring for storage here. There is also the platform effects that once you own one, you'll buy more.
While the ethics of the Ring, neighborhood & police relationship are debatable, my thought was much less ethical & more related to reselling data for advertising purposes to cover the costs of the whole system. Such an idea seems more geared towards large city foot traffic areas with lots of eye catching items to provide data with. Shopping centers, sports stadiums, etc., would be ideal.
I suspect most saw it as a way to help their neighbor and since I was specific, it was easy for them to check quickly and share the video if they found what I described.
But I'm really not comfortable with corporate entities mining their consumer devices for data to voluntarily give to the police. Incentivizing customers to give blanket permission to share all this data is unconscionable. It's especially telling that the normal path would require the police to get a judge to sign off on a warrant to get at this data.
It's funny... in another post thread people are talking about a petition to have Microsoft withdraw their membership from the RIAA (in the wake of the youtube-dl takedown fiasco). Why aren't people banding together to demand that Amazon terminate their Ring camera relationship with police?
https://enterprise.verizon.com/products/internet-of-things/s...
Our smart parking solution is a complete solution to track and monitor parking spot occupancy using smart video cameras and computer vision analytics to enable optimization. A dashboard gives you a clear view of parking in your community while parking policy tools help you track trends and modify policies to fit your community.
https://novayagazeta.ru/news/2020/09/17/164324-roskomsvoboda...
It's one of the only times in my life I've elected NOT to open source my work. As trivial as it was to build, I don't want to contribute anything at all to that creepy mess.
That was three years ago. My key takeaway: just assume scenario B is happening already.
Imagine you appear on 50 different CCTV cameras on an average day. Now imagine two different scenarios:
Scenario A: Each one of these cameras is operated by a local business or property management company. The cameras record video that gets overwritten within a few days if there are no incidents or requests from law enforcement.
Scenario B: All of these cameras are on a network operated by a company with contracts for the city, law enforcement, and digital advertising networks. Facial recognition technology tracks you across all 50 locations, with an "anonymized" identifier attached to your biometrics. This identifier can be cross-referenced with other "anonymized" identifiers to build an advertising profile, while another contractor's machine learning system builds a threat profile based on movements of these identifiers, flagging outliers for human review.
Both scenarios have the same number of cameras, but I don't think many would consider the two comparable.