In the olden days, before electricity, I used to …
Are you like 200 years old?
Simple - Because she doesn’t trust the strangers living in the building any more than the strangers on the outside. I don’t blame her one bit, in my lifetime, I’ve seen countless stories of women being raped and/or murdered by other tenants and the complex 's own security.
In the olden days, before electricity, I used to be friendly with a neighbor, and she became convinced that someone was sneaking into her apartment when she was at work, and stealing her underwear and prescription meds. She took a day off because she was under the weather, and one of the maintenance guys, who was always overly-friendly, unlocked her door, and walked right in.
It turned out that he’d been warned about this before, and he was fired. But if she, or other neighbors, had Ring cameras, they would have caught on to him immediately.
groet@feddit.org 3 weeks ago
BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 3 weeks ago
Getting there.
faythofdragons@slrpnk.net 3 weeks ago
My partner is in his 40s and they didn’t have electricity until they moved to the mainland for middle school. There are still large parts of the world that don’t have electricity.
Confused_Emus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
Fair enough. My downstairs neighbor can get a doorbell cam that records locally then.
Dojan@pawb.social 3 weeks ago
Why did a maintenance guy have access to her home?
BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 3 weeks ago
Maintenance in apartment complexes always have access to any apartment, in case of fire, overflowing bathtubs, inspections, deaths, smoke detector battery replacement, etc. They are supposed to give 24 hours notice, but the point is that a nefarious character could gain access to any apartment in the complex, if they don’t keep their master keys secure.
We had a case recently of a murder in a gated complex. A maintenance guy got obsessed by the 19 year old daughter of a resident, and eventually kidnapped, raped, and murdered her. All because he had access to the master keys. They ended up passing some law under her name. I think they have to do a better job of clearing their criminal backgrounds, which would have caught this guy. It seems like keeping the master keys under better security should be a major thing, too.
Dojan@pawb.social 3 weeks ago
That’s nuts.
Like, the landlord/maintenance people here do have a master key, but it doesn’t work unless the flat is locked from the outside and set in a particular position. If you lock it from the inside, or don’t put it in the special position, they can’t access the flat.
BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 3 weeks ago
There are inside devices that could stop someone with a master key, like chain locks, but you have to be in the apartment. Once you leave, you obviously can’t set the chain, and anyone with a master key, or is a good lock picker, can get in.
I’ve never heard of setting the bolt a certain way, except maybe in hotels. Even then, it only works if someone is physically in the room.
IzzyScissor@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
A camera inside her apartment would have the same results without invading the privacy of every other tenant in the building.
BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 3 weeks ago
In that specific case, but most people want to identify people BEFORE they enter their promises. I’m not opening my door to any cops, for instance, unless they can slide a warrant under the door.
You are missing the point entirely. There are about a million reasonable reasons someone would want to have a doorbell camera, and they have every right to them. The owner of the camera isn’t violating your privacy, AMAZON is doing that by collecting the data from a privately-owned source who hasn’t given permission to hijack data from their device.
Don’t be mad at the tenant for protecting their safety, be mad at Amazon for exploiting that reasonable fear, encouraging people to get Ring cameras, and then stealing the data they collect.
stickly@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Is it too much to ask for a doorbell camera to operate like a doorbell? We’ve had peepholes on doors that can be opened and checked when needed for years with no problem, why do we suddenly need constant surveillance of the public commons? This is also on the owner for buying into the scare tactics.
IMO it should be flat out illegal to have any permanent camera that monitors a public space. I don’t consent to have a stalker track when I enter and leave my home, I won’t consent to have a neighbor do the same.
ArmchairAce1944@discuss.online 3 weeks ago
Exactly. Why the fuck is it on at all times?
BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 2 weeks ago
This isn’t the 20th century. We get a LOT more deliveries these days, and a lot of them are expensive small electronics, like phones. They sit there on our front step all day , while we are at work, tempting porch pirates.
About the only thing keeping those jackals from stealing EVERYTHING, is the fact that they know there are cameras on the house, and also most of the houses surrounding the target. That scares off all but the most desperate thieves.
Peep holes are the most basic security precaution, but they are severely limited. They are distorted, and can be easily beaten by ducking. You may look out and see one guy, while three more are below the peep hole. They don’t record, so there is no evidence to identify troublemakers later. They can’t be accessed remotely, so you can’t see who is messing with your house while you’re out.
To extend your logic, we shouldn’t use cars, because bicycles did the job just fine. Or phones, because we could just yell to our neighbors. Or stoves, because open fires cook food good enough. Or computers, because writing on paper always worked fine. For that matter, why use ballpoint pens, when a quill pen always worked good enough.
Why bother to improve?
IzzyScissor@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
There are also a million ways to achieve the same goals without agreeing to be Amazon’s snitch for your entire building. Amazon isn’t stealing the data. The ring camera owner sold everyone out.
Also, just so we’re clear, the maintenance worker still had access to her apartment and could have just lied about the reasons. It would not have stopped him in any meaningful way.
“But she would have known who it was!” … yeah, AFTER he was inside her apartment. It doesn’t even do the one thing you’re claiming it would be useful for.
ericatty@infosec.pub 2 weeks ago
Yeah, except if he knew everyone that entered the apartment at any time was recorded, it would maybe have been a deterrent.
Her other option could be a hidden nanny cam trained on the door so she’d have proof she wasn’t crazy.
But again the issue isn’t people wanting to know who is outside their door, or entering without their knowledge. The issue is the camera companies keeping all the footage for themselves.
We have an off brand camera aimed at our porch for porch pirates. It’s not going to get someone walking by on the street. We have it only recording to the sdcard.
But we can live view and it alerts through the app. We don’t use the cloud service or AI. But there’s nothing stopping the app from screenshotting alerts and sending them somewhere.
I’m trying to figure out how to have an actual closed system so only computers under my control can access camera(s)