21 ms·

Who’s Watching Your Porch?

104 points by benryon 7y ago

MisterTea 7y ago
Those rings certainly paid for themselves in stopping the violent break in... oh. well the woman screaming for help was saved when... oh. Well how about... never mind. Ring, and CCTV in general doesn't prevent or even deter crimes nor did it save anyone. The irony with how useless a Ring camera is, is illustrated in all those Amazon package thefts ring captures but didn't stop. The only useful thing is being able to prove to Amazon your package was stolen. A pointless system of waste for lazy people. Boon for the surveillance state.
- Pumpmaster6000 7y ago
  Why does Amazon care if your package got stolen? Isn't it your problem once it hits your door? Never thought about this I guess
  - newnewpdro 7y ago
    It threatens their business if customers aren't comfortable having products delivered at home. But obviously it's a new revenue stream with myriad additional business opportunities for Amazon to capitalize on the paranoia of its customers WRT having their packages stolen, to sell surveillance products to them (and access to law enforcement, ad/marketing interests, etc.).
  - novok 7y ago
    No it isn't unless it's signed for. Even if a video / photo is taken that doesn't prove the person taking the photo took the package afterwards.
    - Nextgrid 7y ago
      The drivers are not always malicious either. Sometimes it's bad training and/or user experience on their equipment. I had several packages delivered which were "signed" for by someone named "through the letterbox". Similarly, one package said dropped off at the door/porch but no sign of it so I asked for a refund as I assumed it's been stolen... 2 days later my neighbour gives it to me because it was actually delivered to them, but the delivery person couldn't select the proper option to let me know so I had no idea.
      - bsharitt 7y ago
        My delivery status with Amazon is frequently something along the lines of "left in the mail room". I live in a free standing single family home in a neighborhood where every one has their own mail boxes.
  - unishark 7y ago
    They don't actually care. They usually eat the cost and send you another one. I guess it's cheaper than the cost of requiring signatures, at least once we're constrained to the subset of the population who can order things online.
    - thrav 7y ago
      I bet someone identified this as a substantial line item that was trending up and they want to push Rings out into the world to try to deter future growth and losses. Who knows... the acquisition might have paid for itself in cost savings.
- apta 7y ago
  The way I see it, they're a tool, part of a bigger picture that aids in security and safety. The issue it seems is that there isn't a proper follow up once the perpetrator gets identified and caught. There doesn't seem to be strict enough punishment for people who get caught to deter them. Or you have ridiculous laws where the thief can sue the owner of the house they broke into because they got hurt or "excessive force" was used to contain them until the police arrive.
  - laughinghan 7y ago
    The evidence is extremely weak that threat of punishment actually successfully deters crimes of opportunity: https://undark.org/2016/05/16/deterrence-punishments-dont-reduce-crime/ https://undark.org/2016/05/16/deterrence-punishments-dont-re... Some premeditated crimes (e.g. first-degree murder, bribery) can be deterred by threat of punishment, but when people are making the snap-decision to commit a crime of opportunity, they aren't carefully weighing the risk vs reward.
    - apta 7y ago
      Studies like this always seem to be confined to Western societies (and particularly the US). Other societies seem to be doing just fine with harsh punishments like the death penalty. There are other factors at play here, but having harsh punishments that are actually applied is one factor in the system. In other countries, serial rapists would be executed for instance. I'm not sure that's the case in the US.
      - Consultant32452 7y ago
        Not that I'm recommending we go this route, but Singapore will literally beat you with a big stick, likely permanently handicapping you, for offenses as small as chewing gum. They have remarkably low crime.
        chickenfries 7y ago
        Chewing gum is a fine. There’s a lot to be said about caning in Singapore but you’re not going to be caned for chewing gum.
- vorpalhex 7y ago
  My Nest Hello (Google's knockoff of the Ring) fits into my home security plan in a few ways. 1. It tells me who is at the door when I'm home and lets me see their face. If it's a good friend I can just tell them to let themselves in, if it's a marketer I can ignore it, etc. This is somewhat just convenience compared to a peephole. 2. It tells me who is at the door when I'm not home. I can let me friends know to come back, if it's a neighbor I can let them know I'll catch up with them later, etc. 3. It lets me keep an eye on packages when I'm traveling. I can ask whoever is house sitting to swing by if there's a buildup of them (which in turn hides that I'm away). 4. It lets me confirm that my pet sitter is indeed swinging by. Sure they could text me every time, but it's easy for people to forget that and it's a hassle for the sitter. 5. When things go wrong, it helps me identify the culprits and circulate those pictures. That may not do much in all circumstances, but at the very least it lets me pass on useful information to my neighbors.
- Bartweiss 7y ago
  Ironically, Ring's fairly low-key appearance undermines the only value it might actually have - as a deterrent. I suspect you'd be better off with a chunky 7/11-style CCTV camera over your front door. And if your goal is to actually prevent theft, you wouldn't even need to turn it on. It's the same issue as home security systems: they run all those goofy ads about a crook sitting in your bathtub because there's almost no real use-case. As a deterrent, an ADT sticker provides all the benefits of a security system for about $2. As a reaction, all it does is tell you that someone has stole your electronics and jewelry. It won't get recovered, the crook won't get ID'd if they wore a mask, probably won't get caught even if they didn't, you'll just be notified a bit sooner. I'm not going to condemn people for getting these products, but only because I think they've been badly and systematically mislead. Products like Ring are sold on the back of an entire narrative of crime, deterrence, and punishment that has essentially no bearing on reality. Crimes against person and property are one of very few issues where I've seen people completely change their position just by seeing accurate data.
  - marcosdumay 7y ago
    > I suspect you'd be better off with a chunky 7/11-style CCTV camera over your front door. Get one of those outdoors camera covers, and fix somewhere people can easily see. Don't bother with an actual camera. There is a simple test for when a camera is useful: if you saw something happening on the camera, will you do anything differently? A camera that watches some hidden corner near your front door that lets you decide not to go in there right now can be useful (but then, getting rid of the corner is much better).
dhsysusbsjsi 7y ago
Ring security is actually useless. We had one at our work and somebody ripped it off the door and stole it, then transferred the device to their account. Yes Ring allows anybody to transfer the device to their account once they steal it. No confirmation email to original account owner. Even worse, this clears all of the video from the original account holder SO YOU CAN’T SEE WHO STOLE IT!!! The whole point of owning a security camera is gone. No footage. Its just a fundamentally poor product. And given all the other poor privacy measures - I’ll never buy one again.
- Nextgrid 7y ago
  This is the dumbest flaw ever. You'd think that a product so good at making everyone feel watched & raising so many privacy concerns would at least be good enough to protect itself... well apparently not.
  - NullPrefix 7y ago
    >This is the dumbest flaw ever Actually, the dumbest flaw ever would be to give all the previous footage to the new "owner".
    - WrtCdEvrydy 7y ago
      I wonder if this also happens, anyone got a spare ring I could transfer to my account for a test?
      - rchaud 7y ago
        I thought Ring didn't actually record the video to the device's storage.
        shubb 7y ago
        But if historic video from the device is no longer associated with the original account, does it get deleted or just owner change? who is to say it doesn't get given to the new account... You'd have to try it and see.
jcrawfordor 7y ago
I run video surveillance at my home out of some combination of paranoia and curiosity. But I run everything myself - cameras are recorded by an in-house NVR, which is an inexpensive single-board computer with a 1TB hard disk, and 'alert' clips are uploaded to a VPS on the off chance of someone breaking in and stealing the NVR. Although open source NVR packages are, in my experience, a massive disaster (either extremely outdated and frustrating to set up and use in the case of ZoneMinder, or extremely feature limited as in the case of the fifty Raspberry Pi-based solutions), commercial software packages like Blue Iris and Xeoma (which is even cross-platform) are inexpensive and have expansive feature sets. I use Blue Iris, which has the downside of requiring Windows, but the upside of generating MQTT messages or HTTP requests on alerts which makes for a lot of easy integration. Xeoma is cross-platform but relatively immature (although I've found the vendor to be extremely responsive to emails) and has a bizarro-land UI that's very tricky to learn to use. On the other hand, consumers don't necessarily need to deal with any of this, because lots of vendors sell NVR appliances that are hardware and software in one product, and they're pretty cheap. Costco even regularly carries them from a couple of major manufacturers. I prefer to do things myself, but I've used appliance NVRs from Swann in a couple of cases and they work fine with extremely easy setup. More recently Ubiquiti has gotten into this space, and I haven't had the opportunity to try their system yet but their products tend to be pretty good quality and ease of use for the rock-bottom prices - and as I understand it their premises-based NVR also runs the UniFi manager, so it makes it really easy to build out a large-campus WiFi-based solution but might also be a neat trick for home use if you want to use the great-for-the-price Ubiquiti APs and/or USG. At the end of the day, I'm not convinced that cloud-based surveillance solutions really offer much to consumers beyond being backed by vendors with very aggressive marketing. Most people know about Ring cameras but don't know that they can buy a completely non-cloud, on-prem solution-in-a-box at the big box store or even, well, from Amazon. And at the end of the day, the manufacturers of these on-premises systems don't get to loop you into a "social network of fear" and analyze your video, so their opportunities to monetize are a lot more limited, and so they charge higher up-front prices. I think a lot of it is just awareness though - Amazon and their competition are pushing their cloud-based solutions very hard, while the on-prem surveillance vendors that have for the most part been around much longer just don't really advertise to the consumer market.
ErikAugust 7y ago
https://beta.trimread.com/articles/3168 https://beta.trimread.com/articles/3168
trekrich 7y ago
what better way to build a surveliance state than get people to do it to them selves.
- nick_kline 7y ago
  This is kind of like the classic book "Fahrenheit 451" by Ray Bradbury. There is a scene where a character is running down the street, and a ubiquitous tv show is on that tells everyone to look out their window for the dangerous person "Right now!" (with their photo shown) so that you can find and capture anyone running away through the city, with everyone coordinated.
- netsharc 7y ago
  The police "working together with Amazon" to offer a rebate is the sentence in the article that gave me the "Oh shit" moment. It's basically police surveillance state through the backdoor of commercial incentive...
neonate 7y ago
http://archive.md/sLqSi http://archive.md/sLqSi
danans 7y ago
Banditry/highwaymen have been a feature of societies with high inequality for a long time. It's a big reason that people congregated behind city walls since time immemorial. These cameras are our new city walls and guards, and given a continuation the trend toward greater inequality, these sorts of technologies will become even more ubiquitous.
- HarryHirsch 7y ago
  Bruce Schneier's had a blog post a few years back about the increase in copper theft. His take was that copper is too valuable and a segment of the population too poor for it not to happen. The same reasoning would apply to porch piracy.
  - vorpalhex 7y ago
    The people who engage in porch piracy are overwhelmingly well off from what we've seen. It's not the poor kid down the block you have to be suspicious of, but your middle class neighbor who probably needs to have an intervention. Despite the physical nature of it, it's an almost white collar crime.
    - soylentcola 7y ago
      Really? Judging by the security cam clips occasionally posted to Nextdoor in my neighborhood, it's usually nearby residents (sometimes repeat offenders) who are known to have drug dependency issues, teens walking around hitting multiple houses, or the occasional drunken asshole walking home at night and deciding to vandalize or steal the box that's still sitting on the porch from earlier in the day. But of course the whole thing about anecdotes and data applies so this may not be the norm. I'd be interested to see data on these sorts of thefts.
- unishark 7y ago
  I think bandits/highwaymen would be those who steal by physical force. Burglars steal surreptitiously. And I think the main reason the wealthy build the walls is because they're the only ones who can afford to. Everyone's safety is improved by hiding behind some good walls.
bhauer 7y ago
I look forward to Ubiquiti's upcoming "UniFi Access" line of access control hardware (e.g., an electric bolt controller with a front-facing door camera embedded in a nice package). Self-hosted like all UniFi gear, meaning video and data are not exfiltrated to a third-party cloud. Plus, it will be managed by and work alongside all of your other UniFi equipment.
- Nextgrid 7y ago
  There's definitely a need for a secure (based on actual cryptography) door entry control system. Most of what I've seen in the field is either HID iClass (no idea how secure they are) or Mifare Classic. The latter doesn't even attempt to use the card's crypto features (which are broken, but it would've at least been an attempt) and just uses the UID of the card which is broadcast in the clear and even the card's datasheet explicitly warns against using it for any kind of security.
  - secabeen 7y ago
    In the commercial space, sure. In the residential space, it would be a pretty small market. A door lock is there to slow down an attacker, or to force them to make a destructive entry via a window. Going much beyond long screws to prevent kick-in, and good tolerances to prevent trivial bump keys is rarely cost-effective.
    - jakobegger 7y ago
      I've talked to a few people who were victims of burglaries, and the value of the stolen stuff never worried them. The violation of their home was what worried them. It messes with you when you know someone broke into your home. So people probably don't worry about cost-effectiveness of their home security system, they just want to feel safe in their home.
      - michaelt 7y ago
        Even if cost is no object, every commercial electronic entry system I've ever seen has had at least one door with a bypass with a conventional key, in case the electronic entry system fails. And any electronic lock with a manual lock in parallel with it can never be more secure against attacks like lockpicking than the manual lock alone. Of course, there are security benefits if you have a cleaner/dog walker/whatever and want to give them access you can revoke without the cost of changing your lock. Or if you're running a commercial installation like an office or AirBnB. Still, I don't think electronic door locks will become mass-market until someone makes one so reliable it doesn't need a mechanical bypass key, which might be impossible.
analog31 7y ago
My suggestion for porch piracy is for everybody in the neighborhood to leave a few random looking packages on their porch. It would greatly raise the effort of a thief to figure out which package is worth stealing.
- rzzzt 7y ago
  I sense a business opportunity... selling decoy packages, including delivery.
  - nikk1 7y ago
    There is a youtube video out where someone created a decoy package and left it on their porch until someone stole it. The theif opened the package only for it to explode glitter everywhere. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoxhDk-hwuo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoxhDk-hwuo
    - gnicholas 7y ago
      That was partially a hoax (the legit creator enlisted helpers, some of whom hoaxed him/us): https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/yw7jej/glitter-bomb-video-staged-fake-package-thieves-youtube-mark-rober-explained-vgtrn https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/yw7jej/glitter-bomb-video...
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- Shivetya 7y ago
  it is not in your best interest to aggravate these people as someone who is more than willing to walk up to strangers home and take stuff can just as equally damage the property or worse. your options are 1) schedule package deliveries to days someone is home 2) schedule deliveries to drop box locations that some services support (amazon locker for example, ups store) 3) ship to someone trusted in the neighborhood 4) ship to work if allowed 5) fake camera, signage, combination thereof 6) buy locally
wry_discontent 7y ago
If you haven't checked it out, there was a Citations Needed podcast episode about this recently. It's a great show, self described as about "media, power, PR, and the history of bullshit." It's usually an interesting listen. https://citationsneeded.libsyn.com/episode-97-porch-pirate-panic-and-the-paranoid-racism-of-snitch-apps https://citationsneeded.libsyn.com/episode-97-porch-pirate-p...
sharot4 7y ago
Another segment of society under 24-hour surveillance is prison populations.
bozoUser 7y ago
How does Nest compare to Ring ? I have seen so many deals on Ring security system and not surprised my entire community is on Ring (since its closer to a Costco) and we are the only household without any kind of security system atm.
- EricE 7y ago
  Quality wise, I'm very satisfied with my Nest Hello. However Google keeps removing features and neutering functionality as they painfully absorb Nest into their Google home crap. For once I'd like one of these vendors that isn't incompetent or evil and actually brings some value to the table :(
EricE 7y ago
Want some real fun? Try to set up Ring without UPNP enabled. Let the games begin!

104 points by benryon 7y ago

Those rings certainly paid for themselves in stopping the violent break in... oh. well the woman screaming for help was saved when... oh. Well how about... never mind. Ring, and CCTV in general doesn't prevent or even deter crimes nor did it save anyone. The irony with how useless a Ring camera is, is illustrated in all those Amazon package thefts ring captures but didn't stop. The only useful thing is being able to prove to Amazon your package was stolen. A pointless system of waste for lazy people. Boon for the surveillance state.

Pumpmaster6000 7y ago
Why does Amazon care if your package got stolen? Isn't it your problem once it hits your door? Never thought about this I guess
- newnewpdro 7y ago
  It threatens their business if customers aren't comfortable having products delivered at home. But obviously it's a new revenue stream with myriad additional business opportunities for Amazon to capitalize on the paranoia of its customers WRT having their packages stolen, to sell surveillance products to them (and access to law enforcement, ad/marketing interests, etc.).
- novok 7y ago
  No it isn't unless it's signed for. Even if a video / photo is taken that doesn't prove the person taking the photo took the package afterwards.
  - Nextgrid 7y ago
    The drivers are not always malicious either. Sometimes it's bad training and/or user experience on their equipment. I had several packages delivered which were "signed" for by someone named "through the letterbox". Similarly, one package said dropped off at the door/porch but no sign of it so I asked for a refund as I assumed it's been stolen... 2 days later my neighbour gives it to me because it was actually delivered to them, but the delivery person couldn't select the proper option to let me know so I had no idea.
    - bsharitt 7y ago
      My delivery status with Amazon is frequently something along the lines of "left in the mail room". I live in a free standing single family home in a neighborhood where every one has their own mail boxes.
- unishark 7y ago
  They don't actually care. They usually eat the cost and send you another one. I guess it's cheaper than the cost of requiring signatures, at least once we're constrained to the subset of the population who can order things online.
  - thrav 7y ago
    I bet someone identified this as a substantial line item that was trending up and they want to push Rings out into the world to try to deter future growth and losses. Who knows... the acquisition might have paid for itself in cost savings.
apta 7y ago
The way I see it, they're a tool, part of a bigger picture that aids in security and safety. The issue it seems is that there isn't a proper follow up once the perpetrator gets identified and caught. There doesn't seem to be strict enough punishment for people who get caught to deter them. Or you have ridiculous laws where the thief can sue the owner of the house they broke into because they got hurt or "excessive force" was used to contain them until the police arrive.
- laughinghan 7y ago
  The evidence is extremely weak that threat of punishment actually successfully deters crimes of opportunity: https://undark.org/2016/05/16/deterrence-punishments-dont-reduce-crime/ https://undark.org/2016/05/16/deterrence-punishments-dont-re... Some premeditated crimes (e.g. first-degree murder, bribery) can be deterred by threat of punishment, but when people are making the snap-decision to commit a crime of opportunity, they aren't carefully weighing the risk vs reward.
  - apta 7y ago
    Studies like this always seem to be confined to Western societies (and particularly the US). Other societies seem to be doing just fine with harsh punishments like the death penalty. There are other factors at play here, but having harsh punishments that are actually applied is one factor in the system. In other countries, serial rapists would be executed for instance. I'm not sure that's the case in the US.
    - Consultant32452 7y ago
      Not that I'm recommending we go this route, but Singapore will literally beat you with a big stick, likely permanently handicapping you, for offenses as small as chewing gum. They have remarkably low crime.
      - chickenfries 7y ago
        Chewing gum is a fine. There’s a lot to be said about caning in Singapore but you’re not going to be caned for chewing gum.
vorpalhex 7y ago
My Nest Hello (Google's knockoff of the Ring) fits into my home security plan in a few ways. 1. It tells me who is at the door when I'm home and lets me see their face. If it's a good friend I can just tell them to let themselves in, if it's a marketer I can ignore it, etc. This is somewhat just convenience compared to a peephole. 2. It tells me who is at the door when I'm not home. I can let me friends know to come back, if it's a neighbor I can let them know I'll catch up with them later, etc. 3. It lets me keep an eye on packages when I'm traveling. I can ask whoever is house sitting to swing by if there's a buildup of them (which in turn hides that I'm away). 4. It lets me confirm that my pet sitter is indeed swinging by. Sure they could text me every time, but it's easy for people to forget that and it's a hassle for the sitter. 5. When things go wrong, it helps me identify the culprits and circulate those pictures. That may not do much in all circumstances, but at the very least it lets me pass on useful information to my neighbors.
Bartweiss 7y ago
Ironically, Ring's fairly low-key appearance undermines the only value it might actually have - as a deterrent. I suspect you'd be better off with a chunky 7/11-style CCTV camera over your front door. And if your goal is to actually prevent theft, you wouldn't even need to turn it on. It's the same issue as home security systems: they run all those goofy ads about a crook sitting in your bathtub because there's almost no real use-case. As a deterrent, an ADT sticker provides all the benefits of a security system for about $2. As a reaction, all it does is tell you that someone has stole your electronics and jewelry. It won't get recovered, the crook won't get ID'd if they wore a mask, probably won't get caught even if they didn't, you'll just be notified a bit sooner. I'm not going to condemn people for getting these products, but only because I think they've been badly and systematically mislead. Products like Ring are sold on the back of an entire narrative of crime, deterrence, and punishment that has essentially no bearing on reality. Crimes against person and property are one of very few issues where I've seen people completely change their position just by seeing accurate data.
- marcosdumay 7y ago
  > I suspect you'd be better off with a chunky 7/11-style CCTV camera over your front door. Get one of those outdoors camera covers, and fix somewhere people can easily see. Don't bother with an actual camera. There is a simple test for when a camera is useful: if you saw something happening on the camera, will you do anything differently? A camera that watches some hidden corner near your front door that lets you decide not to go in there right now can be useful (but then, getting rid of the corner is much better).

dhsysusbsjsi 7y ago

Ring security is actually useless. We had one at our work and somebody ripped it off the door and stole it, then transferred the device to their account. Yes Ring allows anybody to transfer the device to their account once they steal it. No confirmation email to original account owner. Even worse, this clears all of the video from the original account holder SO YOU CAN’T SEE WHO STOLE IT!!! The whole point of owning a security camera is gone. No footage. Its just a fundamentally poor product. And given all the other poor privacy measures - I’ll never buy one again.

Nextgrid 7y ago
This is the dumbest flaw ever. You'd think that a product so good at making everyone feel watched & raising so many privacy concerns would at least be good enough to protect itself... well apparently not.
- NullPrefix 7y ago
  >This is the dumbest flaw ever Actually, the dumbest flaw ever would be to give all the previous footage to the new "owner".
  - WrtCdEvrydy 7y ago
    I wonder if this also happens, anyone got a spare ring I could transfer to my account for a test?
    - rchaud 7y ago
      I thought Ring didn't actually record the video to the device's storage.
      - shubb 7y ago
        But if historic video from the device is no longer associated with the original account, does it get deleted or just owner change? who is to say it doesn't get given to the new account... You'd have to try it and see.

jcrawfordor 7y ago

I run video surveillance at my home out of some combination of paranoia and curiosity. But I run everything myself - cameras are recorded by an in-house NVR, which is an inexpensive single-board computer with a 1TB hard disk, and 'alert' clips are uploaded to a VPS on the off chance of someone breaking in and stealing the NVR. Although open source NVR packages are, in my experience, a massive disaster (either extremely outdated and frustrating to set up and use in the case of ZoneMinder, or extremely feature limited as in the case of the fifty Raspberry Pi-based solutions), commercial software packages like Blue Iris and Xeoma (which is even cross-platform) are inexpensive and have expansive feature sets. I use Blue Iris, which has the downside of requiring Windows, but the upside of generating MQTT messages or HTTP requests on alerts which makes for a lot of easy integration. Xeoma is cross-platform but relatively immature (although I've found the vendor to be extremely responsive to emails) and has a bizarro-land UI that's very tricky to learn to use. On the other hand, consumers don't necessarily need to deal with any of this, because lots of vendors sell NVR appliances that are hardware and software in one product, and they're pretty cheap. Costco even regularly carries them from a couple of major manufacturers. I prefer to do things myself, but I've used appliance NVRs from Swann in a couple of cases and they work fine with extremely easy setup. More recently Ubiquiti has gotten into this space, and I haven't had the opportunity to try their system yet but their products tend to be pretty good quality and ease of use for the rock-bottom prices - and as I understand it their premises-based NVR also runs the UniFi manager, so it makes it really easy to build out a large-campus WiFi-based solution but might also be a neat trick for home use if you want to use the great-for-the-price Ubiquiti APs and/or USG. At the end of the day, I'm not convinced that cloud-based surveillance solutions really offer much to consumers beyond being backed by vendors with very aggressive marketing. Most people know about Ring cameras but don't know that they can buy a completely non-cloud, on-prem solution-in-a-box at the big box store or even, well, from Amazon. And at the end of the day, the manufacturers of these on-premises systems don't get to loop you into a "social network of fear" and analyze your video, so their opportunities to monetize are a lot more limited, and so they charge higher up-front prices. I think a lot of it is just awareness though - Amazon and their competition are pushing their cloud-based solutions very hard, while the on-prem surveillance vendors that have for the most part been around much longer just don't really advertise to the consumer market.

ErikAugust 7y ago

https://beta.trimread.com/articles/3168 https://beta.trimread.com/articles/3168

trekrich 7y ago

what better way to build a surveliance state than get people to do it to them selves.

nick_kline 7y ago
This is kind of like the classic book "Fahrenheit 451" by Ray Bradbury. There is a scene where a character is running down the street, and a ubiquitous tv show is on that tells everyone to look out their window for the dangerous person "Right now!" (with their photo shown) so that you can find and capture anyone running away through the city, with everyone coordinated.
netsharc 7y ago
The police "working together with Amazon" to offer a rebate is the sentence in the article that gave me the "Oh shit" moment. It's basically police surveillance state through the backdoor of commercial incentive...

neonate 7y ago

http://archive.md/sLqSi http://archive.md/sLqSi

danans 7y ago

Banditry/highwaymen have been a feature of societies with high inequality for a long time. It's a big reason that people congregated behind city walls since time immemorial. These cameras are our new city walls and guards, and given a continuation the trend toward greater inequality, these sorts of technologies will become even more ubiquitous.

HarryHirsch 7y ago
Bruce Schneier's had a blog post a few years back about the increase in copper theft. His take was that copper is too valuable and a segment of the population too poor for it not to happen. The same reasoning would apply to porch piracy.
- vorpalhex 7y ago
  The people who engage in porch piracy are overwhelmingly well off from what we've seen. It's not the poor kid down the block you have to be suspicious of, but your middle class neighbor who probably needs to have an intervention. Despite the physical nature of it, it's an almost white collar crime.
  - soylentcola 7y ago
    Really? Judging by the security cam clips occasionally posted to Nextdoor in my neighborhood, it's usually nearby residents (sometimes repeat offenders) who are known to have drug dependency issues, teens walking around hitting multiple houses, or the occasional drunken asshole walking home at night and deciding to vandalize or steal the box that's still sitting on the porch from earlier in the day. But of course the whole thing about anecdotes and data applies so this may not be the norm. I'd be interested to see data on these sorts of thefts.
unishark 7y ago
I think bandits/highwaymen would be those who steal by physical force. Burglars steal surreptitiously. And I think the main reason the wealthy build the walls is because they're the only ones who can afford to. Everyone's safety is improved by hiding behind some good walls.

bhauer 7y ago

I look forward to Ubiquiti's upcoming "UniFi Access" line of access control hardware (e.g., an electric bolt controller with a front-facing door camera embedded in a nice package). Self-hosted like all UniFi gear, meaning video and data are not exfiltrated to a third-party cloud. Plus, it will be managed by and work alongside all of your other UniFi equipment.

Nextgrid 7y ago
There's definitely a need for a secure (based on actual cryptography) door entry control system. Most of what I've seen in the field is either HID iClass (no idea how secure they are) or Mifare Classic. The latter doesn't even attempt to use the card's crypto features (which are broken, but it would've at least been an attempt) and just uses the UID of the card which is broadcast in the clear and even the card's datasheet explicitly warns against using it for any kind of security.
- secabeen 7y ago
  In the commercial space, sure. In the residential space, it would be a pretty small market. A door lock is there to slow down an attacker, or to force them to make a destructive entry via a window. Going much beyond long screws to prevent kick-in, and good tolerances to prevent trivial bump keys is rarely cost-effective.
  - jakobegger 7y ago
    I've talked to a few people who were victims of burglaries, and the value of the stolen stuff never worried them. The violation of their home was what worried them. It messes with you when you know someone broke into your home. So people probably don't worry about cost-effectiveness of their home security system, they just want to feel safe in their home.
    - michaelt 7y ago
      Even if cost is no object, every commercial electronic entry system I've ever seen has had at least one door with a bypass with a conventional key, in case the electronic entry system fails. And any electronic lock with a manual lock in parallel with it can never be more secure against attacks like lockpicking than the manual lock alone. Of course, there are security benefits if you have a cleaner/dog walker/whatever and want to give them access you can revoke without the cost of changing your lock. Or if you're running a commercial installation like an office or AirBnB. Still, I don't think electronic door locks will become mass-market until someone makes one so reliable it doesn't need a mechanical bypass key, which might be impossible.

analog31 7y ago

My suggestion for porch piracy is for everybody in the neighborhood to leave a few random looking packages on their porch. It would greatly raise the effort of a thief to figure out which package is worth stealing.

rzzzt 7y ago
I sense a business opportunity... selling decoy packages, including delivery.
- nikk1 7y ago
  There is a youtube video out where someone created a decoy package and left it on their porch until someone stole it. The theif opened the package only for it to explode glitter everywhere. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoxhDk-hwuo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoxhDk-hwuo
  - gnicholas 7y ago
    That was partially a hoax (the legit creator enlisted helpers, some of whom hoaxed him/us): https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/yw7jej/glitter-bomb-video-staged-fake-package-thieves-youtube-mark-rober-explained-vgtrn https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/yw7jej/glitter-bomb-video...
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
Shivetya 7y ago
it is not in your best interest to aggravate these people as someone who is more than willing to walk up to strangers home and take stuff can just as equally damage the property or worse. your options are 1) schedule package deliveries to days someone is home 2) schedule deliveries to drop box locations that some services support (amazon locker for example, ups store) 3) ship to someone trusted in the neighborhood 4) ship to work if allowed 5) fake camera, signage, combination thereof 6) buy locally

wry_discontent 7y ago

If you haven't checked it out, there was a Citations Needed podcast episode about this recently. It's a great show, self described as about "media, power, PR, and the history of bullshit." It's usually an interesting listen. https://citationsneeded.libsyn.com/episode-97-porch-pirate-panic-and-the-paranoid-racism-of-snitch-apps https://citationsneeded.libsyn.com/episode-97-porch-pirate-p...

sharot4 7y ago

Another segment of society under 24-hour surveillance is prison populations.

bozoUser 7y ago

How does Nest compare to Ring ? I have seen so many deals on Ring security system and not surprised my entire community is on Ring (since its closer to a Costco) and we are the only household without any kind of security system atm.

EricE 7y ago
Quality wise, I'm very satisfied with my Nest Hello. However Google keeps removing features and neutering functionality as they painfully absorb Nest into their Google home crap. For once I'd like one of these vendors that isn't incompetent or evil and actually brings some value to the table :(

EricE 7y ago

Want some real fun? Try to set up Ring without UPNP enabled. Let the games begin!