Who could have guessed that having billionaire owned always on surveillance device in your home would lead to this
this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2025
506 points (99.6% liked)
Technology
73139 readers
3932 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- 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.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
It's not like there's been dozens of people warning about it in the last few years. People deserve what they get.
I don't like being under constant surveillance from my neighbors doorbell cameras. This is one of many excellent reasons why.
What I am going to do is use MapComplete to start labeling every house that I come across that has one of these doorbells.
Then I'll post some QR codes around town that link to the map.
Once people start seeing their homes called out on a map then perhaps some of them will feel uncomfortable with that and start to understand just why privacy matters.
I feel like this could backfire if lots of people have the cameras. They might be like, so what? Cameras are normal.
Or worse, thieves will see who doesn't have them and plan their hits accordingly.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I bought a cheap Chinese security camera for a fraction of the cost of a Ring and signed up for their cloud storage system. I'm more comfortable with the Chinese government being able to access footage of my backyard, than the current US administration.
Not too long ago, that statement would have sounded controversial or even crazy. Nowadays though, I’m shocked how much sense it makes to me. Never thought that I would agree with something like that.
Yeah. It's crazy. I would choose neither because I can DIY something secure but for non-technical folks in North America today, the Chinese gov't having your video is safer than a private US corporation. I didn't imagone I could make this judgement back in 2022.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Or you could choose an option that does neither. Why feed the autocrats at all?
eh, you might have a spare day to source a completely uncompromised camera and find someone in a trusted neutral country who runs an unproblematic hosting service and configure a system to do offsite storage in a secure way, but I've got other stuff going on. If you can source me a reasonable alternative I'm happy to use it when it comes time to renew my subscription.
Just buy a Reolink Doorbell. Pop in an SD card. Put in on your wifi or LAN and access it with your browser. You're done. It's all local. There's an optional app that does need an external server, but that's optional and there is no subscription.
Reolink devices still reach out to a bunch of different servers across the world as soon as you connect them to a network.
Always isolate an IP doorbell or camera on its own access point or virtual network, where it can't see or interact with other devices on your local network, and then block it from WAN access.
load more comments
(5 replies)
An offsite server is not under your control and accessible by who knows. Surely it is still a privacy concern.
Privacy is like security in that it costs time. Most people don't spend time on even having a conversation like this but if something bothers you then finding a spare day is easier.
load more comments
(18 replies)
Yep still glad I've never trusted "smart-home" tech.
This is the way.
Why do people want to see who comes to the door?
My brother installed one of these at his house and it makes me uncomfortable, but I know he probably feels safer and more in control by having it, and would value that over my comfort.
Then I start to gaslight myself, "why am I uncomfortable with the surveillance apparatus getting regular identifiable videos of me at a known location"?
FedEx drivers routinely lie about folks not being home to accept delivery, but in reality they never even go up to the door to ring the doorbell or knock on the bell. Having evidence that the driver never showed up can help dealing with FedEx to get a package that they repeatedly fail to deliver.
That's about it though, I don't actually have a doorbell camera at the moment (I did, but it died, and I haven't bothered to replace it), and I really resent the mass adoption of surveillance cameras pointed out at public roads and sidewalks, especially Ring cameras which have been repeatedly shown to be readily available to law enforcement.
This seems to be exclusively American thing. I presume it's a big safety issue there. Here in Thailand people rarely even lock their doors let alone care about something like video doorbells.
We had a burglary a couple of months ago, luckily we have an indoor camera which scared him away when he saw it and nothing was stolen. On the camera recording, we heard that he was ringing the doorbell for a couple of minutes to check if anyone is at home. We now have a camera doorbell (not Ring one though), if we had it then he would see it and avoided our house altogether.
Yeah we have a camera pointed at our driveway from our garage door. It isn't close enough to the road to trigger movement from people walking or driving by.
But if they come inside the fence it'll pick em up.
Also have a couple of cameras watching other random parts of the yard. We live on just under 2 acres, and it's all enclosed in chain link fencing. Next to us is an automotive maintenance shop owned by a buy here pay here lot a few miles closer to town, and they don't always hire the most trustworthy individuals to work on cars....
Why would you not want to see who is at your door? Or know if there is a package there? Plenty of packages get stolen off of porches in my neighborhood
/boggle
How is that not obvious?
Because of porch pirates.
I mean I do, but I just use the peep hole like a normal person's
So, what are people using to get:
- good quality streaming
- doorbell alert
- motion alerts
- local and remote access
- recording storage
Currently using Ring (outside of America) and looking to migrate away. There are some nice other features like distinguishing motion vs people vs vehicles that are nice to have but can live without.
Home assistant + frigate has been serving myself and my family on separate sites for about 2 years. It has definitely kicked my ass, but seeing "privacy friendly" reolink cameras constantly phone home on my firewall assured me it was worth it. Wireguard tunnel in and you have remote access with practically no security concerns*
2nd this configuration. My firewall rules block all external camera traffic and Frigate (once configured) is superb at detecting people without false alerts. All recordings are stored locally. It is disturbing just how much traffic smart devices try to send to China and Amazon, even when not subscribed to cloud services.
Home Assistant makes everything ridiculously flexible and is configured to turn on camera sirens if someone is detected at night or while my alarm system is armed, and disable sirens and alerts when doors have been opened or the alarm has just been turned off. The open Wireguard ports appear closed to scanners so I'm also reasonably comfortable with network security.
Ubiquiti. Cloud gateway max (router + NVR) for $200 with no storage, add your own 2tb nvme, get a ubiquiti doorbell for $300. Little pricy, but simple to setup and all the footage lives locally on the cloud gateway max. No subscription, and you can add more cameras later. The cloud gateway max is an excellent 2.5G router. Slap on a WiFi 7 access point for $200 more and you got yourself a killer home network.
This is the choice if you want to buy the equipment and it works out of the box. Its cheaper if you want to sort of build your own setup but requires more maintenance and setup.
load more comments
(2 replies)
It's solved tech and there are hundreds of alternatives so you can definitely find something local. I've heard Netatmo recommended for Europeans (French, gdpr compliant)
There are many other cameras but most have the same potential to do this sort of shit. Sending video to some server you don't control, on cameras you don't control because it's proprietary, isn't going to cut it if privacy is your goal.
load more comments
(2 replies)
I have a piezoelectric doorbell.
The bell part plugs directly into a wall socket. The button part is completely wireless and batteryless and is affixed near my front door.
Been working like clockwork for a decade to let me know when someone is at the door and I'm home.
If I'm not home, the postman or delivery driver leaves a note to go to the collection center for my package. If it's a small package not requiring signature, they just leave it at the door or in the mailbox if it fits. None of that changes with a camera.
Why overcomplicate life.
The best thing is you don't need any of that. Just install normal doorbell. We all love gadgets but some of them are just not worth it.
Hard agree. What does a video doorbell connected to the internet solve? I'm concerned that people dont trust their neighbors to this extent. Sort of a canary in the coal mine type thing.
I don’t have a doorbell of any kind (the button isn’t even hooked up to anything). My neighbours are jerks but they won’t steal packages or anything like that.
We’re living in a low trust society that used to be a high trust society a few decades ago. I believe all of the problems you see in politics ultimately stem from this. Factionalism is tearing western society apart.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(11 replies)
Reolink Doorbell ( Firewalled from connecting outside LAN) + Frigate (self hosted)
load more comments
(8 replies)
I mean, people are not being forced to buy this shit. So it’s on the idiots who think they have nothing to hide. Just Google something like “why are people ok with cameras inside their house “ and you’ll see many many people basically saying “don’t care, I have nothing to hide, everyone has a pussy/dick”
We still need to protect the idiots. Thats why we're banning asbestos and have safety codes. How is this any different?
How is this any different?
IT and privacy is too abstract for non-tech people. Bring examples with people instead of the tech devices to make an impact.
Things like this:
This is the right approach. Normies won't pay attention to any "your privacy is at risk" argument. But showing them examples (plural, as 1 instance won't do shit either and will just be dismissed) of people getting fucked by all the surveillance COULD make some of them take it into consideration (no guarantees).
I do not agree that people that allow these devices into their homes are idiots. I see them more as "ignorantly lazy".
Isn't roofing too abstract either? 100% majority of people dont know how prevalent asbestos was in roofing material and what even asbestos does but yet if you tell anyone thay their shit has asbestos in it they'll be quick to rush to alternatives. Sometimes people just need to be told what to do.
That's right. But how detrimental asbestos is took time to be made abundantly clear and known, plus "authorities" got involved, so the sheep listened. With surveillance, the same "authorities" want the public to be ignorant so that they can keep it going without us countering it.
Similar situations, but certainly not equal.
load more comments
(2 replies)
People who claim they don't value privacy are simply ignorant of how this can affect them. They don't consider the data falling into the wrong hands. Surely they don't want criminals with unauthorized access at least. It should be obvious that governments don't always have their best interests either.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
view more: next ›