> What an absolutely ridiculously ignorant statement to make.
Why is that an ignorant statement? It's comparing to what one might consider the "gold standard" of spying, so it seems quite a relevant thing to consider if one is after an objective estimate of how much worse wifi sensing might be...
That isn't needed, anyone who cares to can figure that part out. Cameras are cheap enough to put them up and leave them, and you can figure occupancy in many ways. Breaking into your house to place hidden cameras would not be hard - I don't know anything about where you live or your house, but I can confidently say I could get in if I wanted to. (lock picks are not hard to get, and it only takes a few days of observation to figure out when you leave)
> What an absolutely ridiculously ignorant statement to make.
Why is that an ignorant statement? It's comparing to what one might consider the "gold standard" of spying, so it seems quite a relevant thing to consider if one is after an objective estimate of how much worse wifi sensing might be...
But do those cameras and lightbulbs come with a industry standard specification for occupancy sensing.
Occupancy sensing and other surveilence have no place in a wireless communications specification.
That isn't needed, anyone who cares to can figure that part out. Cameras are cheap enough to put them up and leave them, and you can figure occupancy in many ways. Breaking into your house to place hidden cameras would not be hard - I don't know anything about where you live or your house, but I can confidently say I could get in if I wanted to. (lock picks are not hard to get, and it only takes a few days of observation to figure out when you leave)