Ring founder Jamie Siminoff is back at the helm of the surveillance doorbell company, and with him is the surveillance-first-privacy-last approach that made Ring one of the most maligned tech devices. Not only is the company reintroducing new versions of old features which would allow police to request footage directly from Ring users, it is also introducing a new feature that would allow police to request live-st
Why? It’s logical to want your video footage held offsite so that burglars don’t just take the device you’re storing the footage of them on. Which means paying someone to store it for you. Which means a subscription. Even if you’re running AgentDVR on an offsite server that you control, you’re still paying money to the hosting company.
Wow. Do you have any idea what you sound like there?
(also, it’s not even true on its own terms. A raspberry pi plus all the components and equipment necessary to set up what you’re describing would be easily over $100, I paid $19 for my Chinese internet camera)
Why do I need the footage offsite? Because the burglar might’ve stolen the server/raspberry? I actually have my server storage hidden, if that would even be on the radar of a thief, which I really doubt.
But even if, an encrypted storage of your own choosing still beats random access by who-the-fuck-even-knows.
OK, granted, your 19-moneyz-solution is financially hard to beat, and probably no Chinese really gives a rats ass about your data. But even the thought that some random cloud-admin might just take a peek out of boredom…ugh. But OK, I’m a very private person.
A proper solution that does not suck probably costs a bit more than a ring (dunno what they cost though), but if one owns a house, one probably has a few spare hundreds or thousands for a secure surveillance.