3 ms·

> In short, the people who "purchased" these cameras do not own them. They do own the camera. They just don't own the cloud service that makes the camera usefu

> In short, the people who "purchased" these cameras do not own them. They do own the camera. They just don't own the cloud service that makes the camera useful. Or even operable. Reminds me of Cory Doctorow's story Unauthorized Bread.

kevincox 4y ago
> but you can never have control over a service someone else runs https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-s...
Semaphor 4y ago
> They do own the camera. They just don't own the cloud service that makes the camera useful. Or even operable. I don’t know the model, but the article makes it seem as if the cameras work perfectly well without it? I hate online-only products and think they are between scam and trap, but this seems more a case of false advertising than anything like that.
- logbiscuitswave 4y ago
  Well-ish depending on your use case. It still requires their app, hub, and cloud services to work even just for steaming. There’s no completely “local only” mode. You can use local storage to save recordings by connecting flash storage to the hub, but it’s only really useful a backup. You can’t view it in the app (you have to sneaker-net the storage to a computer), and it can only save triggered recordings. Basically if you don’t care about storing and saving recordings for future use and only plan to stream from the cameras, then it’ll continue to work (as long as Arlo’s web services work of course).
  - Semaphor 4y ago
    Oh wow, that’s horrible. I wish articles focused on that instead of some minor marketing issue :/
Brian_K_White 4y ago
Does the camera allow the supposed owner to install a firmware that can work with another service of the owner's choosing?
- logbiscuitswave 4y ago
  Hardware is completely proprietary and closed source. All camera communications go through a black box hub device which talks to Arlo’s services. There’s no public API for any part of the hardware or software chain. In other words, unless you’re going to take the time to reverse engineer all of it, you’re completely at their mercy. Even if you opt for local storage you’re still beholden to their black box hub because that’s the only thing the cameras will talk to, and their app because that’s the only thing that will talk to their hub. (HomeKit and other integration exists but it doesn’t provide the full functionality you get from the app, and still requires their hub.)

kevincox 4y ago

> but you can never have control over a service someone else runs https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-s...

Semaphor 4y ago

> They do own the camera. They just don't own the cloud service that makes the camera useful. Or even operable. I don’t know the model, but the article makes it seem as if the cameras work perfectly well without it? I hate online-only products and think they are between scam and trap, but this seems more a case of false advertising than anything like that.

logbiscuitswave 4y ago
Well-ish depending on your use case. It still requires their app, hub, and cloud services to work even just for steaming. There’s no completely “local only” mode. You can use local storage to save recordings by connecting flash storage to the hub, but it’s only really useful a backup. You can’t view it in the app (you have to sneaker-net the storage to a computer), and it can only save triggered recordings. Basically if you don’t care about storing and saving recordings for future use and only plan to stream from the cameras, then it’ll continue to work (as long as Arlo’s web services work of course).
- Semaphor 4y ago
  Oh wow, that’s horrible. I wish articles focused on that instead of some minor marketing issue :/

Brian_K_White 4y ago

Does the camera allow the supposed owner to install a firmware that can work with another service of the owner's choosing?

logbiscuitswave 4y ago
Hardware is completely proprietary and closed source. All camera communications go through a black box hub device which talks to Arlo’s services. There’s no public API for any part of the hardware or software chain. In other words, unless you’re going to take the time to reverse engineer all of it, you’re completely at their mercy. Even if you opt for local storage you’re still beholden to their black box hub because that’s the only thing the cameras will talk to, and their app because that’s the only thing that will talk to their hub. (HomeKit and other integration exists but it doesn’t provide the full functionality you get from the app, and still requires their hub.)