9 ms·

Lots of the comments don't trust Google, but I'm not sure I would trust ADT. I was looking to buy a house, which had an ADT system installed. I just called th

Lots of the comments don't trust Google, but I'm not sure I would trust ADT. I was looking to buy a house, which had an ADT system installed. I just called them up, asked about the address, how much monitoring would cost, etc. and they told me what kind of panel, sensors, etc. were installed at the house. No verification at all. Clearly this would help with their sales, but from the perspective of someone who owns the system; I would not want them to give out details of my security system to anyone.

selykg 6y ago
These types of home security systems are more a deterrent than they are anything else. In fact, the ONLY reason I think I'd personally invest in would be automated alerts for fire or emergency situations. If someone wants into your house, they will get into your house. There's giant glass windows in most homes these days and door locks are hardly much more than a speed bump. All you should look at ADT for is simply making you not the easiest house to get into. But if someone wants into your house, a security system is unlikely to be something that stops them. Edit: to be more clear, I think the deterrent part is the equivalent of putting an ADT sign in a window or nearby. THAT is the deterrent, not the system itself.
- pc86 6y ago
  This is true and is actually one of the ways they sell the system. About five days after we bought our home the ADT salesman came to the door and after seeing that we were on the fence used this as another argument. Like you, I really only wanted it for the fire detection, and the fact that the panel has an emergency button and is located in the back but with clear line of sight to the front door. We did have one break in during the 8 years we lived there, but the German Shepard was what stopped them, not the alarm sign in the yard.
  - selykg 6y ago
    Yea, all the sign does, for someone motivated enough, is tell them how much time they have. "Okay, they have a security system. Break in, grab the tv, grab the other stuff that's visible and worth something, then run" At the end of the day... it will deter those that aren't interested in dealing with it. And for those that aren't deterred it just gives them the info they need to know it's a smash, grab and run situation.
- MichaelApproved 6y ago
  > If someone wants into your house, they will get into your house. Is ADT saying it prevents people from being able to break in? Home security is about alerting police, in case someone does break in, so they don't have time to get many valuables. Newer systems include video, to help convict them. It's not about "you can't get it", it's about "you're more likely to get caught, so don't even try it."
  - selykg 6y ago
    No, I think what I was saying was more a reminder more than anything. Understanding limits is useful in a conversation like this. I don't think someone is more likely to get caught, do you have any sort of documentation to indicate that? I suspect crimes of opportunity might be more likely to be caught I guess, but not someone with any foresight. If a thief goes in under the impression the house has a security system, it would be easy enough to prevent recognition. Oversized jacket, hat, some sort of mask. All of it nondescript/black, no logos, etc. Apply a little bit of thought to this and it's easy. In my area, cops aren't likely to show up immediately anyway. Someone would have minutes, not seconds, to get in and out. Maybe in an area with private security or with a larger police force. That all said though, I think people's fear of crime is much larger than reality. As I said, I think the only value I'd personally find in a system like this is the fire alerts and an emergency button to hit if necessary.
  - rurp 6y ago
    > Home security is about alerting police, in case someone does break in, so they don't have time to get many valuables. I've had to deal with a few break-ins and every police officer I've talked to about it said that most burglars are in and out in a few minutes. They've mentioned that physical deterrents are helpful (ie. bars on windows) but not once have they said that an alarm system would help matters.
  - Gibbon1 6y ago
    > so they don't have time to get many valuables. You might want to be sitting down when I tell you how much your grandmothers Jewelry is worth.
- Shivetya 6y ago
  mine exists solely for my pets in case of fire or other emergency, everything else is covered by insurance. ADT used to have a clause in their contracts you could only cancel during a narrow window near renewal, is that still an issue? They are pretty costly per month compared to some other providers, this even if you own your equipment
  - selykg 6y ago
    Not a clue as I don't use them. I think there are cheaper systems out there that provide fire/emergency options. Simplisafe for instance, haven't looked in awhile so I could be wrong, provides fire alerts and things like that.
- snarfy 6y ago
  It's peace of mind. I know 100% if someone wants into a house, they will get into the house. I know that when people put 'this property protected by Smith & Wesson' signs on their house, it only informs burglars there are guns to be stolen. I always joked I don't want ADT, just the sign. But now that I actually have an alarm system, it's great. If I leave for the weekend, I know nobody has broken in. It won't stop them, but I at least know.
  - sukilot 6y ago
    You can get peace of mind with mental practice. Tech toys aren't needed.
  - Proven 6y ago
    > it only informs burglars there are guns to be stolen. I'd think twice before breaking into a house to steal the owner's gun. It seems easier and safer to try another place and steal something else of similar or higher value.
  - thedogeye 6y ago
    All ADT does is call the police. During the most recent civil unrest incidents the police were not responding to 911 calls like this, making it pretty useless when you actually need it.
    - Pfhreak 6y ago
      Police don't really respond to alarm calls anyways. The high degree of false alarms generally puts responding to these at the bottom of the list of things to respond to.
      - closeparen 6y ago
        In a city. In a wealthy suburban community the police are usually happy to have something more exciting than off-leash pets and minor traffic violations.
  - smabie 6y ago
- joncrane 6y ago
  When I bought my first and current house, the home inspector gave me some amazing advice. The relevant advice here was "I'm not telling you to do this, but you can buy home alarm system stickers on eBay and thieves literally cannot know whether you actually have the system installed or not."
  - sukilot 6y ago
    You need the fake sensors and cameras too.
  - m-p-3 6y ago
    In the city where I live there is a bylaw where you have to register your alarm system with the police, and must display a mandatory label in the window with a serial number visible at all time. I guess a thief could rely on that during their recon.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
- hankthecat 6y ago
  agreed the sticker is a big part of it. Although I will say a super loud alarm going off will probably scare way some people and the police do eventually show up if you have monitoring. If I am away from the house for weeks on end that is nice to have.
- xenocyon 6y ago
  My neighborhood gets a lot of break-ins, and I've tried to understand whether there is a causal link showing that electronic home security lowers break-in risk. The deterrent effect makes intuitive sense, but it's surprisingly hard to find empirical evidence for (even recognizing that it's not the kind of thing you can run an A/B test for). Additionally the internet is so awash in marketing (there's almost never an incentive to tell someone not to buy something) that it's very hard to ascertain the facts, and consumers' behavior in these matters tends to be guided more by perception than true solutions. I had a similar experience when considering a water filter. In that situation, I was able to actually figure out a sensible path, thanks to a very few unbiased websites: test your water or read your locality's water reports to figure out what your drinking water contaminants actually are, then figure out specifically which filter (if any) will address those specific contaminants. Meanwhile, plenty of people will buy a mass-market water filter for "peace of mind" which may actually be neither necessary nor sufficient.
  - nogabebop23 6y ago
    Well my insurance company offers a minor discount if you have an alarm, so that's about as emperical as it gets. From their perspective you're ~ 2% less likely to have a significant claim with an alarm vs. without
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - montereynack 6y ago
    The water filter question is interesting, would you mind sharing which sites you used for guidance? In this same situation right now and having trouble navigating the waters.
    - xenocyon 6y ago
      Ah, I didn't save them unfortunately.
- fnbr 6y ago
  Also, you typically save a few hundred bucks on your insurance by having monitored alarms, so it pays for itself.
  - selykg 6y ago
    Not sure what your insurance is like, but mine is $1050/yr. An alarm system would save me $50, barely two months of service for something cheaper, barely one month on a more expensive plan. I would NOT look at it as lowering insurance.
  - gruez 6y ago
    How typical is this? You'd think if this was "typically" the case, you'd see alarm monitoring signs everywhere, but you don't.
- nogabebop23 6y ago
  My house was broken into with the high tech method of a rock through the sidelight window, right on top of the ADT sticker; so much for that theory. This occurred @ 10am on a weekday when we were out for less than an hour too. We added (real!) cameras after this and for the next 2 years freaked out every time an alert hit our phones. Now there are so many false positives that it's conditioned us to be less uptight. My sister has a monitored alarm where I'm a secondary contact. On a recent alarm they phoned my to ask if I wanted them to call the cops. As I'm (at least) second in line this had to take at least 15 minutes since the alarm, plus the police response time (tip: minor property crime is not a priority for police). The burglars were long gone by the time anyone got there. So my point is it's largely security theatre, like airport security. It makes you feel better I guess but does nothing.
  - Osiris 6y ago
    All this is exactly why I've never paid for a security system. I have some cameras in the house but that's more to monitor the kids when we (parents) are out of the house.
  - akira2501 6y ago
    > So my point is it's largely security theatre, like airport security. It's difficult to improve on as well.. good physical security is directly at odds with accessibility and livability. > It makes you feel better I guess but does nothing. Worse than that.. as you've noted, it's reconditioned your expectations and it belies the fact that you can never truly secure anything in your home. If you truly have something valuable, you can either insure it and hope for the best, or store it somewhere other than a space optimized for sleeping, eating and bathing. If the cost of the security system is less than the discount you get on your insurance policy, then it may be worthwhile purely for that, but it's highly unlikely that the technology will be used to capture the thief let alone recover your property. There is much better and less intrusive technology for that purpose anyways. Home security seems on the same footing with home anti virus.
  - misun78 6y ago
    My inclination for these kind of systems isn't so much to prevent the act from happening in real-time but more around providing law enforcement with enough footage to land the perpetuators in jail. Of course if that part of the system is broken then we're truly screwed no matter what.
- m-p-3 6y ago
  Exactly why I have a security system right now. It's not souch for the theft deterrent than for the connected fire alarm now that I have two kids.
- scarface74 6y ago
  It’s not just a deterrent. It also serves as a warning. If I am in the house, I want to know someone is breaking in. I have a lot of mixed feelings about gun laws, but I am definitely an advocate for anyone being able to have a gun in their home to protect themselves - even though I don’t own one. I would also like to know if someone broke in my home if I am not there. Yes, I am well aware of the statistics about gun ownership in the home, suicides, accidental shootings, etc.
pc86 6y ago
I'm not sure a run-of-the-mill burglar would be able to do anything with panel information. Any burglar sophisticated enough to alter their plans based on type of security panel is going to be going after diamonds and art, not a smash and grab for a used television. Releasing sensor data at all seems like a pretty big flaw, though. Lack of window sensors and number or existence of motion detectors seems like a dataset you wouldn't want getting out without some sort of ID verification (or at all).
- cpwright 6y ago
  It would have been a second home, so centralized fire monitoring and flood sensors would have potentially been useful for us. Things like the panel being hardwired instead of cellular, etc. shouldn't be given out over the phone.
  - stevewodil 6y ago
    To give them the benefit of the doubt, it's possible that they knew the home was just sold because the previous owner had cancelled the subscription for ADT or something and there was no active protection. And maybe they wouldn't have given out that information if it wasn't marked as such in their system. Would be an interesting experiment to start calling about random addresses.
- sukilot 6y ago
  And it's cheaper to buy a new TV once in a decade than pay for a security system.
- hedora 6y ago
  Giving out system information over the phone without verification protects ADT from the “fake ADT sign” problem, or from people under buying systems. I doubt they’re actually that cynical though.
calimac 6y ago
Think about it, you bought the house. There was no active service on the account.
pnathan 6y ago
ADT is super old school tech in the interface. High pressure sales techniques, long term contract. I bailed out of that real fast and ordered the Google Nest system instead.
- JoshGlazebrook 6y ago
  +1 to this. I didn't do enough research and ended up in a 3 year ADT contact with their extremely dated equipment back in 2016. Eventually I just stopped using their equipment all together and removed all of the sensors and switched to Google Nest products. Terminating the contract required paying off 75% of the remaining amount so I ended up just paying monthly on a service I never used because of how pedatory the contract was.
  - jabroni_salad 6y ago
    It's bad enough that you chose it. When I bought my home, one of the conditions was that I take over the contract from the previous owner. I thought that was kind of BS but ADT made it clear that someone would have to pay and the seller made it clear it wasn't going to be her. I ended up paying her to do the cancellation fee so I could avoid getting in bed with ADT.
    - JoshGlazebrook 6y ago
      Heh, I bet the seller was happy to get out of that.
dpeck 6y ago
They’re somewhat useful for monitoring. I don’t expect that they’re much of an actual deterrent and ymmv on if they’re worth the price. But don’t discount the value in monitoring something that you can’t fully control. By the time someone greats into my house they’ll be long gone with anything of value when the police arrive (if they ever do), but having something alert me and the local Fire Department in case of smoke is useful. Same with leak detection and flooded basements, or break-ins. These are things I’d much rather know when they happen so that I can remediate, gather pets that may be wandering the neighborhood after door kicked in, etc during the day than after getting home from a long day at work (not issue in Covid-19 times). Even worse to come home to find a problem when getting back from business trip or family vacation.
1vuio0pswjnm7 6y ago
The goal is data collection. ADT is probably not going to get Google's data. They are limited in what they know about their customers. How much data does ADT have in comparison to Google? Google OTOH is going to get access to about 6.5 million ADT customers. Needless to say, Google already has acquired a lot of data on a lot of people, including those ADT customers. If what ADT knows is now known by Google, then it is not just the details of a security system that might be disclosed by one entity, but the details of the people inside the building. The risk (i.e., the potential damage) of undesired disclosure is greater when one entity has access to "all" data versus when the data is spread amongst multiple entities.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

selykg 6y ago

These types of home security systems are more a deterrent than they are anything else. In fact, the ONLY reason I think I'd personally invest in would be automated alerts for fire or emergency situations. If someone wants into your house, they will get into your house. There's giant glass windows in most homes these days and door locks are hardly much more than a speed bump. All you should look at ADT for is simply making you not the easiest house to get into. But if someone wants into your house, a security system is unlikely to be something that stops them. Edit: to be more clear, I think the deterrent part is the equivalent of putting an ADT sign in a window or nearby. THAT is the deterrent, not the system itself.

pc86 6y ago
This is true and is actually one of the ways they sell the system. About five days after we bought our home the ADT salesman came to the door and after seeing that we were on the fence used this as another argument. Like you, I really only wanted it for the fire detection, and the fact that the panel has an emergency button and is located in the back but with clear line of sight to the front door. We did have one break in during the 8 years we lived there, but the German Shepard was what stopped them, not the alarm sign in the yard.
- selykg 6y ago
  Yea, all the sign does, for someone motivated enough, is tell them how much time they have. "Okay, they have a security system. Break in, grab the tv, grab the other stuff that's visible and worth something, then run" At the end of the day... it will deter those that aren't interested in dealing with it. And for those that aren't deterred it just gives them the info they need to know it's a smash, grab and run situation.
MichaelApproved 6y ago
> If someone wants into your house, they will get into your house. Is ADT saying it prevents people from being able to break in? Home security is about alerting police, in case someone does break in, so they don't have time to get many valuables. Newer systems include video, to help convict them. It's not about "you can't get it", it's about "you're more likely to get caught, so don't even try it."
- selykg 6y ago
  No, I think what I was saying was more a reminder more than anything. Understanding limits is useful in a conversation like this. I don't think someone is more likely to get caught, do you have any sort of documentation to indicate that? I suspect crimes of opportunity might be more likely to be caught I guess, but not someone with any foresight. If a thief goes in under the impression the house has a security system, it would be easy enough to prevent recognition. Oversized jacket, hat, some sort of mask. All of it nondescript/black, no logos, etc. Apply a little bit of thought to this and it's easy. In my area, cops aren't likely to show up immediately anyway. Someone would have minutes, not seconds, to get in and out. Maybe in an area with private security or with a larger police force. That all said though, I think people's fear of crime is much larger than reality. As I said, I think the only value I'd personally find in a system like this is the fire alerts and an emergency button to hit if necessary.
- rurp 6y ago
  > Home security is about alerting police, in case someone does break in, so they don't have time to get many valuables. I've had to deal with a few break-ins and every police officer I've talked to about it said that most burglars are in and out in a few minutes. They've mentioned that physical deterrents are helpful (ie. bars on windows) but not once have they said that an alarm system would help matters.
- Gibbon1 6y ago
  > so they don't have time to get many valuables. You might want to be sitting down when I tell you how much your grandmothers Jewelry is worth.
Shivetya 6y ago
mine exists solely for my pets in case of fire or other emergency, everything else is covered by insurance. ADT used to have a clause in their contracts you could only cancel during a narrow window near renewal, is that still an issue? They are pretty costly per month compared to some other providers, this even if you own your equipment
- selykg 6y ago
  Not a clue as I don't use them. I think there are cheaper systems out there that provide fire/emergency options. Simplisafe for instance, haven't looked in awhile so I could be wrong, provides fire alerts and things like that.
snarfy 6y ago
It's peace of mind. I know 100% if someone wants into a house, they will get into the house. I know that when people put 'this property protected by Smith & Wesson' signs on their house, it only informs burglars there are guns to be stolen. I always joked I don't want ADT, just the sign. But now that I actually have an alarm system, it's great. If I leave for the weekend, I know nobody has broken in. It won't stop them, but I at least know.
- sukilot 6y ago
  You can get peace of mind with mental practice. Tech toys aren't needed.
- Proven 6y ago
  > it only informs burglars there are guns to be stolen. I'd think twice before breaking into a house to steal the owner's gun. It seems easier and safer to try another place and steal something else of similar or higher value.
- thedogeye 6y ago
  All ADT does is call the police. During the most recent civil unrest incidents the police were not responding to 911 calls like this, making it pretty useless when you actually need it.
  - Pfhreak 6y ago
    Police don't really respond to alarm calls anyways. The high degree of false alarms generally puts responding to these at the bottom of the list of things to respond to.
    - closeparen 6y ago
      In a city. In a wealthy suburban community the police are usually happy to have something more exciting than off-leash pets and minor traffic violations.
- smabie 6y ago
joncrane 6y ago
When I bought my first and current house, the home inspector gave me some amazing advice. The relevant advice here was "I'm not telling you to do this, but you can buy home alarm system stickers on eBay and thieves literally cannot know whether you actually have the system installed or not."
- sukilot 6y ago
  You need the fake sensors and cameras too.
- m-p-3 6y ago
  In the city where I live there is a bylaw where you have to register your alarm system with the police, and must display a mandatory label in the window with a serial number visible at all time. I guess a thief could rely on that during their recon.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
hankthecat 6y ago
agreed the sticker is a big part of it. Although I will say a super loud alarm going off will probably scare way some people and the police do eventually show up if you have monitoring. If I am away from the house for weeks on end that is nice to have.
xenocyon 6y ago
My neighborhood gets a lot of break-ins, and I've tried to understand whether there is a causal link showing that electronic home security lowers break-in risk. The deterrent effect makes intuitive sense, but it's surprisingly hard to find empirical evidence for (even recognizing that it's not the kind of thing you can run an A/B test for). Additionally the internet is so awash in marketing (there's almost never an incentive to tell someone not to buy something) that it's very hard to ascertain the facts, and consumers' behavior in these matters tends to be guided more by perception than true solutions. I had a similar experience when considering a water filter. In that situation, I was able to actually figure out a sensible path, thanks to a very few unbiased websites: test your water or read your locality's water reports to figure out what your drinking water contaminants actually are, then figure out specifically which filter (if any) will address those specific contaminants. Meanwhile, plenty of people will buy a mass-market water filter for "peace of mind" which may actually be neither necessary nor sufficient.
- nogabebop23 6y ago
  Well my insurance company offers a minor discount if you have an alarm, so that's about as emperical as it gets. From their perspective you're ~ 2% less likely to have a significant claim with an alarm vs. without
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- montereynack 6y ago
  The water filter question is interesting, would you mind sharing which sites you used for guidance? In this same situation right now and having trouble navigating the waters.
  - xenocyon 6y ago
    Ah, I didn't save them unfortunately.
fnbr 6y ago
Also, you typically save a few hundred bucks on your insurance by having monitored alarms, so it pays for itself.
- selykg 6y ago
  Not sure what your insurance is like, but mine is $1050/yr. An alarm system would save me $50, barely two months of service for something cheaper, barely one month on a more expensive plan. I would NOT look at it as lowering insurance.
- gruez 6y ago
  How typical is this? You'd think if this was "typically" the case, you'd see alarm monitoring signs everywhere, but you don't.
nogabebop23 6y ago
My house was broken into with the high tech method of a rock through the sidelight window, right on top of the ADT sticker; so much for that theory. This occurred @ 10am on a weekday when we were out for less than an hour too. We added (real!) cameras after this and for the next 2 years freaked out every time an alert hit our phones. Now there are so many false positives that it's conditioned us to be less uptight. My sister has a monitored alarm where I'm a secondary contact. On a recent alarm they phoned my to ask if I wanted them to call the cops. As I'm (at least) second in line this had to take at least 15 minutes since the alarm, plus the police response time (tip: minor property crime is not a priority for police). The burglars were long gone by the time anyone got there. So my point is it's largely security theatre, like airport security. It makes you feel better I guess but does nothing.
- Osiris 6y ago
  All this is exactly why I've never paid for a security system. I have some cameras in the house but that's more to monitor the kids when we (parents) are out of the house.
- akira2501 6y ago
  > So my point is it's largely security theatre, like airport security. It's difficult to improve on as well.. good physical security is directly at odds with accessibility and livability. > It makes you feel better I guess but does nothing. Worse than that.. as you've noted, it's reconditioned your expectations and it belies the fact that you can never truly secure anything in your home. If you truly have something valuable, you can either insure it and hope for the best, or store it somewhere other than a space optimized for sleeping, eating and bathing. If the cost of the security system is less than the discount you get on your insurance policy, then it may be worthwhile purely for that, but it's highly unlikely that the technology will be used to capture the thief let alone recover your property. There is much better and less intrusive technology for that purpose anyways. Home security seems on the same footing with home anti virus.
- misun78 6y ago
  My inclination for these kind of systems isn't so much to prevent the act from happening in real-time but more around providing law enforcement with enough footage to land the perpetuators in jail. Of course if that part of the system is broken then we're truly screwed no matter what.
m-p-3 6y ago
Exactly why I have a security system right now. It's not souch for the theft deterrent than for the connected fire alarm now that I have two kids.
scarface74 6y ago
It’s not just a deterrent. It also serves as a warning. If I am in the house, I want to know someone is breaking in. I have a lot of mixed feelings about gun laws, but I am definitely an advocate for anyone being able to have a gun in their home to protect themselves - even though I don’t own one. I would also like to know if someone broke in my home if I am not there. Yes, I am well aware of the statistics about gun ownership in the home, suicides, accidental shootings, etc.

pc86 6y ago

I'm not sure a run-of-the-mill burglar would be able to do anything with panel information. Any burglar sophisticated enough to alter their plans based on type of security panel is going to be going after diamonds and art, not a smash and grab for a used television. Releasing sensor data at all seems like a pretty big flaw, though. Lack of window sensors and number or existence of motion detectors seems like a dataset you wouldn't want getting out without some sort of ID verification (or at all).

cpwright 6y ago
It would have been a second home, so centralized fire monitoring and flood sensors would have potentially been useful for us. Things like the panel being hardwired instead of cellular, etc. shouldn't be given out over the phone.
- stevewodil 6y ago
  To give them the benefit of the doubt, it's possible that they knew the home was just sold because the previous owner had cancelled the subscription for ADT or something and there was no active protection. And maybe they wouldn't have given out that information if it wasn't marked as such in their system. Would be an interesting experiment to start calling about random addresses.
sukilot 6y ago
And it's cheaper to buy a new TV once in a decade than pay for a security system.
hedora 6y ago
Giving out system information over the phone without verification protects ADT from the “fake ADT sign” problem, or from people under buying systems. I doubt they’re actually that cynical though.

calimac 6y ago

Think about it, you bought the house. There was no active service on the account.

pnathan 6y ago

ADT is super old school tech in the interface. High pressure sales techniques, long term contract. I bailed out of that real fast and ordered the Google Nest system instead.

JoshGlazebrook 6y ago
+1 to this. I didn't do enough research and ended up in a 3 year ADT contact with their extremely dated equipment back in 2016. Eventually I just stopped using their equipment all together and removed all of the sensors and switched to Google Nest products. Terminating the contract required paying off 75% of the remaining amount so I ended up just paying monthly on a service I never used because of how pedatory the contract was.
- jabroni_salad 6y ago
  It's bad enough that you chose it. When I bought my home, one of the conditions was that I take over the contract from the previous owner. I thought that was kind of BS but ADT made it clear that someone would have to pay and the seller made it clear it wasn't going to be her. I ended up paying her to do the cancellation fee so I could avoid getting in bed with ADT.
  - JoshGlazebrook 6y ago
    Heh, I bet the seller was happy to get out of that.

dpeck 6y ago

They’re somewhat useful for monitoring. I don’t expect that they’re much of an actual deterrent and ymmv on if they’re worth the price. But don’t discount the value in monitoring something that you can’t fully control. By the time someone greats into my house they’ll be long gone with anything of value when the police arrive (if they ever do), but having something alert me and the local Fire Department in case of smoke is useful. Same with leak detection and flooded basements, or break-ins. These are things I’d much rather know when they happen so that I can remediate, gather pets that may be wandering the neighborhood after door kicked in, etc during the day than after getting home from a long day at work (not issue in Covid-19 times). Even worse to come home to find a problem when getting back from business trip or family vacation.

1vuio0pswjnm7 6y ago

The goal is data collection. ADT is probably not going to get Google's data. They are limited in what they know about their customers. How much data does ADT have in comparison to Google? Google OTOH is going to get access to about 6.5 million ADT customers. Needless to say, Google already has acquired a lot of data on a lot of people, including those ADT customers. If what ADT knows is now known by Google, then it is not just the details of a security system that might be disclosed by one entity, but the details of the people inside the building. The risk (i.e., the potential damage) of undesired disclosure is greater when one entity has access to "all" data versus when the data is spread amongst multiple entities.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]