4 ms·

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... neve

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).

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).