This gets us to the central problem of today’s surveillance state. No one running the cameras wants to be observed. One reason that city officials object to releasing Flock data, for example, must that they themselves are among the recorded. The cameras are on them too; they too can be tracked. Everything means everything for these everywhere cameras.

  • MrSulu@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 day ago

    TWO groups of conversation from this:

    1. Public cameras
    2. People having their own cameras on their own homes

    Public cameras recording our private lives recorded MUST be fully regulated and accountable. Private cameras slightly more tricky. I take the view that self hosting options are the best option. We need more devices that just work for the lay person. RING (and similar) should be considered a shit-show for privacy rights.

    • ArmchairAce1944@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      23 hours ago

      I would never. Ever have a security camera for personal use that uses some kind of cloud-only server. If I need to use a cloud service for a backup that is one thing. But it will primarily be an internal offline recording. Wired setups are superior here.

    • OR3X@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      That’s why I installed an analog camera DVR system in my home. It cheap, reliable, locally hosted, and best of all I’m the only one with access. (Not counting the Chinese government via the mandated backdoor in the DVR firmware) it’s great!

      EDIT: formatting