Comment by aerostable_slug
14 days ago
It seems like people are missing the fact that it's opt-in from the police to the consumer. It's within the end consumer's control to allow the access or not, so by that standard it's not in any way abuse.
It's not Orwellian overreach or, as the EFF claims a breach of Ring's customers' trust, if the customer gives up the data willingly and knowingly.
And lots and lots of people will.
> It seems like people are missing the fact that it's opt-in from the police to the consumer.
There is no such thing short of a physical switch. To believe otherwise is the absolute height of naïveté.
This has been in Ring for years and police have their own dashboard. Most importantly, it was already found Ring or Police have enabled access on their own.
Based on the articles, do you really think Ring and police cannot just get whatever they want?
https://consumer.ftc.gov/consumer-alerts/2023/05/rings-priva...
https://www.reviewed.com/smarthome/features/ring-changes-pol...
https://www.silicon.co.uk/e-regulation/surveillance/amazon-r...
https://theintercept.com/2019/01/10/amazon-ring-security-cam...
People aren't missing the fact - they're getting bad information from a supposedly reputable source. I don't really know how to solve that problem.
Did you audit the code?
[flagged]