3 ms·

> because i don't care who can look at my front lawn This is extremely selfish. What about your neighbors who walk/drive by your front lawn? You're doing your

by tuxxy 7y ago

> because i don't care who can look at my front lawn This is extremely selfish. What about your neighbors who walk/drive by your front lawn? You're doing your neighborhood a surveillance disservice.

CamperBob2 7y ago
"Public" is a thing distinct from "private." On your property, you get to decide where the dividing line is. That's one of the primary ideas behind the notion of private property. The issue I have is when the property owner isn't told who has access to the resulting still images or video stream, or is actively deceived about it. I'd be reluctant to use a Ring camera at my front door for that reason, and there's no way on Earth I'd install anything like that inside my home.
- lm28469 7y ago
  I'm pretty sure a lot, if not most, door cameras are filming public space.
  - CamperBob2 7y ago
    Yes, that's my point. I have a right to do that, and so do you, and so do Amazon, Google, and the CIA. See, that's the idea behind the word "public." Nobody has to ask user lm28469 on Hacker News for permission to take photos in public. This is a good thing.
    - distances 7y ago
      Depends on jurisdiction. Dash cams are illegal in many countries.
      - CamperBob2 7y ago
        True, only the police are allowed to run dash cams in those countries. We could also mention the trend toward berserk copyright laws that have much the same effect. [1] And these are not good things. Both communal and private interests end up worse off in the long run with laws like these. 1: https://www.asmp.org/copyright-tutorial/photos-public-buildings/ https://www.asmp.org/copyright-tutorial/photos-public-buildi...
- clairity 7y ago
  you'd have gotten a lot more agreement if you had explicitly limited your argument to recording only your own private property, by placement or otherwise. most folks (especially us americans) accept personal propertly rights implicitly, so there's no need to vigorously defend them, especially when that defense implies caring only about yourself and not others.
siffland 7y ago
By not caring about who can look at my front lawn, I am implying if that camera footage gets hacked I do not care. I own my lawn and can do whatever I want with the footage. As for people walking or driving by, they are in public and have zero expectation of privacy. I live in a school zone with a high school of 3500 kids across the street, most walk home. No one would never believe in a million years the crap they do to my lawn and the neighbors. They throw trash in my lawn, leave soda cans and bottles at the end of my driveway so I literally have to either stop in the street and move them or run them over getting into the driveway. They throw things in the back of a pickup truck in my driveway. They do this to all 12 houses on my street. It is nice to have footage in case ANY of this results in criminal damages. And it is legal. So if that is selfish, then I am cool with that.

by tuxxy 7y ago

> because i don't care who can look at my front lawn This is extremely selfish. What about your neighbors who walk/drive by your front lawn? You're doing your neighborhood a surveillance disservice.

CamperBob2 7y ago

"Public" is a thing distinct from "private." On your property, you get to decide where the dividing line is. That's one of the primary ideas behind the notion of private property. The issue I have is when the property owner isn't told who has access to the resulting still images or video stream, or is actively deceived about it. I'd be reluctant to use a Ring camera at my front door for that reason, and there's no way on Earth I'd install anything like that inside my home.

lm28469 7y ago
I'm pretty sure a lot, if not most, door cameras are filming public space.
- CamperBob2 7y ago
  Yes, that's my point. I have a right to do that, and so do you, and so do Amazon, Google, and the CIA. See, that's the idea behind the word "public." Nobody has to ask user lm28469 on Hacker News for permission to take photos in public. This is a good thing.
  - distances 7y ago
    Depends on jurisdiction. Dash cams are illegal in many countries.
    - CamperBob2 7y ago
      True, only the police are allowed to run dash cams in those countries. We could also mention the trend toward berserk copyright laws that have much the same effect. [1] And these are not good things. Both communal and private interests end up worse off in the long run with laws like these. 1: https://www.asmp.org/copyright-tutorial/photos-public-buildings/ https://www.asmp.org/copyright-tutorial/photos-public-buildi...
clairity 7y ago
you'd have gotten a lot more agreement if you had explicitly limited your argument to recording only your own private property, by placement or otherwise. most folks (especially us americans) accept personal propertly rights implicitly, so there's no need to vigorously defend them, especially when that defense implies caring only about yourself and not others.

siffland 7y ago

By not caring about who can look at my front lawn, I am implying if that camera footage gets hacked I do not care. I own my lawn and can do whatever I want with the footage. As for people walking or driving by, they are in public and have zero expectation of privacy. I live in a school zone with a high school of 3500 kids across the street, most walk home. No one would never believe in a million years the crap they do to my lawn and the neighbors. They throw trash in my lawn, leave soda cans and bottles at the end of my driveway so I literally have to either stop in the street and move them or run them over getting into the driveway. They throw things in the back of a pickup truck in my driveway. They do this to all 12 houses on my street. It is nice to have footage in case ANY of this results in criminal damages. And it is legal. So if that is selfish, then I am cool with that.