this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2026
892 points (99.6% liked)

Technology

81078 readers
4289 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A Super Bowl ad for Ring security cameras boasting how the company can scan neighborhoods for missing dogs has prompted some customers to remove or even destroy their cameras.

Online, videos of people removing or destroying their Ring cameras have gone viral. One video posted by Seattle-based artist Maggie Butler shows her pulling off her porch-facing camera and flipping it the middle finger.

Butler explained that she originally bought the camera to protect against package thefts, but decided the pet-tracking system raised too many concerns about government access to data.

"They aren't just tracking lost dogs, they're tracking you and your neighbors," Butler said in the video that has more than 3.2 million views.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 14th_cylon@lemmy.zip 91 points 15 hours ago (6 children)

the problem with these fucking things is that you can't really opt out. even if you don't buy your own, some neighbours will happily buy and install the big brother to watch you from their porch and there is very little you can do about it.

same as you can't really escape the google, even if you don't use single one of their service, there is always the other part to any communication you are having...

[–] JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl 2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

In Belgium, it is legally required to put a sign up if you have cameras, you can't point them at a place including public properties IIRC, and you can force them via the local government to move the camera if they are pointing at your property (at least in theory).

Lasers. Blue lasers are what you can do. https://www.reddit.com/r/Ring/comments/wqxkdq/what_is_this_person_doing_to_my_camera/ (hate to link to reddit but it is a good demo)

[–] 14th_cylon@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

it is similar here in czechia, at least in theory, but the theory will always differ from real life.

you first have to know there is a camera to identify the problem, then if you are in doubt... i don't know, sue them to prove that camera does not capture your property?

it would take few years, because the justice system here works on geological scales. and before you would get any reasonable result, billion other cameras would pop up meantime.

[–] ragas@lemmy.ml 3 points 5 hours ago

Where I live, you can sue if the camera films more than their own property.

[–] johntash@eviltoast.org 7 points 10 hours ago

Maybe we all need to start wearing clothes with bright infrared leds lining them?

[–] ArmchairAce1944@discuss.online 25 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Exactly. I never used Gemini or gave sensitive information/photos to major AI companies, but my family has, including photos of me.

[–] Pupscent@lemmy.ca 16 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

I've never had a Facebook account. I've always hated when people posted pictures I was in and said who I was.

[–] SlimePirate@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 12 hours ago

Meta algorithms have ghost profiles, including dead people or babies not yet born

[–] jambudz@lemmy.zip 7 points 13 hours ago (1 children)
[–] 14th_cylon@lemmy.zip 7 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

break it and be recorded on their camera breaking it. that will end well.

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works -1 points 11 hours ago

Tell me without telling me that you've never needed the police to do anything useful.

[–] jambudz@lemmy.zip -2 points 12 hours ago

You can’t put a mask on and cover your distinguishing features? Weak

[–] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 4 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

IR LEDs don't work on these like with some CCTV cameras, right?

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 9 points 15 hours ago

At close range they'll blind them, but the tech is getting better these days.

What knocks out the camera is the auto exposure, they used to just take the whole sensors input, average it and set the brightness against that value. A lot of the newer surveillance cameras will just ignore the overall and compensate pixel per pixel.

Project farm looked at a bunch

https://youtu.be/j0GZKXWf3vg?t=749