What Happens When 'Ring Neighbors' Are Always Watching? (denverpost.com) 98
The New York Times reports on "Ring Neighbors," a local social networking service launched by Amazon in 2018 where users "share videos of delivery people carelessly throwing packages, or failing to wait for an answer at the door; others share footage of mail people navigating treacherous ice, or merely waving at the camera."
On a U.S. Postal Service forum, a mail carrier asked: "Anyone else feel kind of creeped out that people are recording and watching you, up close, deliver mail to their house or is it just me...?" The company also selects videos from its users to be shared on Ring TV, a video portal run by the company, under categories such as "Crime Prevention," "Suspicious Activity" and "Family & Friends." The videos are, essentially, free ads: The terrifying ones might convince viewers to buy cameras of their own; funny or sweet ones, at a minimum, condition viewers to understand front-door surveillance as normal, or even fun...
Ring videos also provide a constant stream of news and news-like material for media outlets. The headlines that accompany those videos portray an America both macabre and surreal: "Screams for Help Caught on Ring Camera," in Sacramento; "Man pleads for help on doorbell camera after being carjacked, shot in Arizona," in Phoenix; "WOMAN CAUGHT ON MEDFORD DOORBELL CAMERA WITH STOLEN GUN," in Oregon; "Alien abduction' caught on doorbell cam," in Porter, Tex. (it was a glitch); "Doorbell camera captures Wichita boy's plea for help after getting lost." And then there are videos like one shared by Rob Fox, in McDonough, Ga., in which his dog, locked out of the house, learns to use his doorbell. Mr. Fox posted the video to Facebook and then Reddit, from which the story drew news coverage. Ring contacted him, too, he said, to ask whether the company could use the footage in marketing materials.
Elsewhere, the footage is billed as entertainment. In early December, "America's Funniest Home Videos," which has been aggregating viewer videos since the 1980s, released a best-of compilation: "Funny Doorbell Camera Fails." It is composed almost entirely of people falling down...
Home surveillance means you're never quite home, but you're never completely away from home, either.
Footage from one Florida camera showed a bearded man who "licks the doorbell repeatedly. Then he stands back and stares," according to the Times.
And they also report that Ring cameras are now also being stolen, "leaving their owners with a final few seconds of footage — a hand, a face, a mask — before losing their connections."
Ring videos also provide a constant stream of news and news-like material for media outlets. The headlines that accompany those videos portray an America both macabre and surreal: "Screams for Help Caught on Ring Camera," in Sacramento; "Man pleads for help on doorbell camera after being carjacked, shot in Arizona," in Phoenix; "WOMAN CAUGHT ON MEDFORD DOORBELL CAMERA WITH STOLEN GUN," in Oregon; "Alien abduction' caught on doorbell cam," in Porter, Tex. (it was a glitch); "Doorbell camera captures Wichita boy's plea for help after getting lost." And then there are videos like one shared by Rob Fox, in McDonough, Ga., in which his dog, locked out of the house, learns to use his doorbell. Mr. Fox posted the video to Facebook and then Reddit, from which the story drew news coverage. Ring contacted him, too, he said, to ask whether the company could use the footage in marketing materials.
Elsewhere, the footage is billed as entertainment. In early December, "America's Funniest Home Videos," which has been aggregating viewer videos since the 1980s, released a best-of compilation: "Funny Doorbell Camera Fails." It is composed almost entirely of people falling down...
Home surveillance means you're never quite home, but you're never completely away from home, either.
Footage from one Florida camera showed a bearded man who "licks the doorbell repeatedly. Then he stands back and stares," according to the Times.
And they also report that Ring cameras are now also being stolen, "leaving their owners with a final few seconds of footage — a hand, a face, a mask — before losing their connections."
It's just you and your pals (Score:1, Insightful)
"Anyone else feel kind of creeped out that people are recording and watching you, up close, deliver mail to their house or is it just me...?"
Do your fucking job as you are supposed to and you'll be OK.
You're a public servant and you have no expectation of privacy when you are on the job.
People even can film you IN the post office.
https://nppa.org/sites/default... [nppa.org]
Ye olde "nothing to hide" broken window fallacy. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not about what one got to "hide". It's what they want to *find*.
To paraphrase Cardinal Richelieu: Give me six packages, delivered by the finest mailman, and I will find something to have his life destroyed.
Or six comments by you on the Internet, to have the cops determine probable cause and imminent danger, to kick in your door and "find" something else.
Maybe that one picture on your PC that isn't underage but can be construed as such. Or the weed under your couch cushion. Or maybe some weird law that nobody uses in that way but they will today because of reasons.
And all I have to do, is "watch you". /s
All you have to do, to avoid the above, is just do your fucking job.
Asshole.
Re:It's just you and your pals (Score:5, Insightful)
Do your fucking job as you are supposed to and you'll be OK.
You're a public servant and you have no expectation of privacy when you are on the job.
While true, I think this ties a bit into the discussion about blanket surveillance generally. Whether talking about weakening or breaking encryption, the general collection, sale and use of all sorts of data, like browsing history, location data and statistics on whom is in contact with whom. I always hear the argument, "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear". (your statement reminded me of that) And then I always hear this counter point, "Just because I have nothing to hide, doesn't mean I don't have a right to privacy"
Now yes, a public servant may in fact have a job because of tax payers money... I'm not convinced that a public servant should be subjected to loss of the right to privacy either.
I'm not sure how popular this opinion is, but I don't like going to Walmart as a paying customer, and then have to face things like those facial recognition cameras on self checkouts, and mandatory bag/receipt checks when leaving the store. Treating every single customer as a probable criminal isn't making the the problem go away, it's just creating a new problem.
Just my two cents...
Re:It's just you and your pals (Score:4, Insightful)
"While true, I think this ties a bit into the discussion about blanket surveillance generally. "
You mean because WE are filmed by security cameras each time we step in a Post Office and THEY complain if WE return the favor?
Re: (Score:3)
Yea, no I agree with you, I intended to have the tone of my comment draw that comparison.
I meant to imply that they do it to us, which doesn't seem right; us doing it to them doesn't really fix the problem. I feel like it just kind of solidifies that the practice at all is justified and acceptable. I think everybody should outright take a stance and say it's not acceptable.
The thing is, once the data is collected and on the cloud somewhere, it's inevitably able to get in the bad actor's hands. Who is goi
Re: It's just you and your pals (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
This might shock you....
But did you know that buying a CD, making a digital backup of it, both listening to that digital back and also making a torrent so others can listen to the same music for free is a little bit different than just buying a CD and listening to it? It's also a lot different than buying a CD, making a digital backup and listening to that digital backup. And it's oddly similar to what the article is talking about, except we aren't talking about the interests of rich copyright holders, bu
Re: (Score:2)
It's my property I'll film it if I want to. Rich people have been doing it for decades and nobody bitched, but now that normal, everyday people can afford security cameras it's suddenly a Privacy Problem? Fuck you.
This. This, so much.
Re: (Score:2)
The guy in front of the door bell is your property?
Re: (Score:2)
"The guy in front of the door bell is your property?"
The Post Office is. But you are not allowed to bring your mutt inside, Poster 7 says so.
https://about.usps.com/posters... [usps.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
There's actually a social justice campaign out there to have people post signs that they are using a video doorbell in your august presence. Yes, porch pirates are becoming a protected class, like spotted owls.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually many (most?) states have laws on the books requiring notices when video monitoring is in process. They've been generally ignored since they were passed.
Re: (Score:2)
Go ahead and record your property.
Just don't record mine.
And stop using "film" as a verb.
Re: (Score:2)
"Go ahead and record your property.
Just don't record mine."
Sure, if I can see it from the street or the easement, I can, I'm allowed and I will.
Re: (Score:3)
"While true, I think this ties a bit into the discussion about blanket surveillance generally. "
I might film him doing his job but I'm really more interested in the guy coming after him, undoing his job and stealing my stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think you're fundamentally wrong in wanting to protect your property. We've had CCTV systems and all sorts of security since forever. But there is a huge change in how this data is being used. I think in the case of the article, the real problem is people are sharing footage of their homes in the same ways they share other things on social media.
The article specifically talks about things like having feeds of "LUL people fell", or traumatic things like a guy getting car jacked and shot; having th
Re: (Score:2)
what are the odds these people gave permission for that to be shared?
I might be wrong, and I love to learn, but my recollection of photographers rights says the odds are 100% if they are in public.
Re: (Score:3)
A dangerous path to walk to be sure...
I guess my response is... is leaving a recording device on 24/7, having everything uploaded to the cloud for the use of a major corp. for purposes of advertising and building hype the same as being a photographer?
Are we (normal private folk.) the same as those who acknowledge being a public figure?
I don't deny what your saying, I just think on some level its kind of like demanding to know why a person hates oranges when they simply stated they like bananas....
Re: (Score:2)
Are we (normal private folk.) the same as those who acknowledge being a public figure?
Yep, we always have been. Today instead of the village gossip we have social media.
Re: (Score:2)
I guess my response is... is leaving a recording device on 24/7, having everything uploaded to the cloud for the use of a major corp. for purposes of advertising and building hype the same as being a photographer?
Commercial use has always been different, but until the footage is used for a commercial use I'd say yes, where the photographer stores the data and who can access it are probably not relevant. The entity wishing to use the work commercially probably has the burden of making sure it's legal to do so. I'd imagine a recording of a person in the process of committing a crime loses a lot of protections but I don't' know.
Audio is a different story in some jurisdictions. Not where I live, but not everyplace in th
Re: It's just you and your pals (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
WTF is a "public store"? Libertarians are so stupid. Yes, you have an obligation. It is called being a human being.
Re: (Score:2)
Bag/receipt checks are NOT mandatory in public stores. You have no obligation to stop or interact with any store employee the instant payment has been tendered. That is now fully and absolutely your property. Walk right past them. If they say something, politely decline. If they press on, ask them if they are accusing you of a crime.
^^^THIS
I just say, "No thank you!" and keep walking.
Yes, I've had a few of the wanna-be-cops follow me but after I keep politely telling them "No, no, no, no..." they eventually give up.
Re: (Score:2)
What gets me is when they have a long line to the receipt checker. First it was Costco. Now it's Walmart.
Re: (Score:2)
Costco is a little different.
It's a membership only store, and the agreement/contract you sign with them has a clause in the text that obligates you to allow them to check your receipt.
Walmart is like BestBuy, you've signed no contract with them and have no obligation to show them anything.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Costco's remedies are limited to terminating your membership if you don't stop
Yes, although I don't know if they ever really do that or not. It would be an interesting test.
Re: (Score:3)
I prefer a society where employees can have an expectation of some privacy.
Re: (Score:2)
Did you mean public servant? Taxes don't pay their salaries, stamps do. The US Post office at least is self funded. FedEx and UPS are of course private entities.
Your argument needs work. And some thought.
Re: (Score:2)
You did not answer the question with that bucket of vitriol.
Even if it is perfectly legal for people to film you every second of every day you're on the job, no matter what you're doing while you're at work, that can definitely feel creepy.
Re: (Score:2)
A guy delivering mail or food is not a public servant.
And yes, it is creepy that you can not do your job without being peeped on ...
Re: (Score:2)
If I sit on my porch all day and watch you and everyone else who was in the neighborhood, as your great-grandparents undoubtedly did, is it "creepy"?
YES! (Score:3)
1) If you know city ordinances better than everybody on your block; you ARE a total ass hole and all your neighbors HATE you because you are the one who files all the anonymous violations you can see. Those people ruin the life for others and takes away your comfort, freedom, and privacy.
2) You have no legal right to record my private property from your private property no matter what 3rd party contract you agree to. If I'm on public property, then I'm fair game. If I'm on your property it becomes a grey a
Re: (Score:2)
1) If you know city ordinances better than everybody on your block; you ARE a total ass hole and all your neighbors HATE you because you are the one who files all the anonymous violations you can see. Those people ruin the life for others and takes away your comfort, freedom, and privacy.
People with guns who pass, enforce, and uphold those city ordinances have a place in that also.
Re: (Score:2)
Did anyone feel creeped out in the days before television when the evening's activity was to sit on the porch and watch the neighbors and the kids playing in the street?
The whole idea of being anonymous except for those brief moments when you don't want to be is less than a century old. Humans have never had "privacy" as it's construed today in all of the history of civilization.
You also have to consider the savings (Score:5, Insightful)
on your homeowner/renters insurance when you have some type of security system in place.
On your front door, depending on what it's set up to see, not horrible, until they get bricked because they're too old.
Inside your home? Just say nope.
Re: You also have to consider the savings (Score:3, Insightful)
Funny... you see as acceptable... what here in Germany is an official crime.
Maybe you need to live through your own Fifth Reich to learn why that is wrong, too.
You certainly already got the president and DHS and NSA and USA PARTIOT Act and strong nationalism and slave labor concentration camps (Cheney's for-profit prisons and black sites like Guantanamo Bay) and the lost national pride and the large amount of disgruntled poor people and even the racism (=the belief that there is such a thing as races) prere
Re: (Score:1)
Those leaders spoke of using unity to help their fellow man. The likes of Stalin and Hitler spoke of unity in a "I'm OK, you're OK, they're not OK" ideology. It's dehumanizing someone different and precedes many military invasions.
In the 1960s, the USA spent much time wondering what a technology-driven German Stasi/"Big brother" society would be like. Then the internet happened and many people adopted a 'look at me' narcissism. Those people want to be noticed and don't think of the danger that follows t
Re: (Score:2)
A ring camera would not give any discount only homeowners policy, only central station systems give a discount.
Re: (Score:3)
I have a security system (separate from my cameras) and I get a discount on my homeowner's policy. And no, it's not centrally monitored.
Re: (Score:2)
Mind me asking which company? Allstate didn’t ask questions when I said I had one, but then I asked a few years later and they indicated central monitoring was required. Reminds me... I need to integrate leak detection...
Re: (Score:2)
It's State Farm, and they gave us a 5% discount if I recall correctly.
Re: (Score:1)
In Europe the best defence at the moment seems to be to flood them with GDPR requests. You can submit an access request every time you appear on their camera. Access requests are better than removal requests because it's hard to verify that removal was actually done, but they can't avoid giving you the data.
Reminds me of the GDR. (Score:3, Informative)
Family members denouncing their own family.
Or Nazi collaborators dnenouncing others in the village.
My grandma told me, that in the village we lived in and the surrounding ones, such people were strung up on the church towers after the war.
It is the most evil way to gain control ever, as nobody can be trusted anymore. Not even your own child!
(This literally happeend, when Hitler Youth kids denounced their own parents, and jad them put in concentration camps.)
I know this case here is not as extreme.
But there's nothing like a good hyperbole, to sharpen the senses.
Re: (Score:1)
Criminals actually have to "take" to be reported doing crime.
ie it can be seen and so can who is dong the crime.
Taking a delivery from a working person who saved up to buy is not "political". It is a crime. The criminal is stealing the box.
Stealing a product in a box is not a political fog of war "after the war" event. It is just stealing by average criminals down a street..
Re "denounced their own parents" A criminal seen stealing a bo
Brave New World (Score:3)
So are you for Brave New World or against it? ... A. Huxley
The use of your video recordings and data can not be determined in advance when you are not in completely control of your data. The Nazi would totally have used you to turn in your parents by gaining access to your data (no warrant needed either.) You didn't intend to have your camera help incriminate your friends/family. You also didn't intend for your own private papers (now a cell phone) be used against you without any limitations (no warrant
Re: (Score:1)
Installing a new version of networked CCTV is something a person can still do on their own property.
After the crime the person who installed the camera system can then give the police the images of the person doing the crime.
The wider world can also share in who is doing the crime in that part of the USA.
Re "beginning to be done outside of government"... in the gov stopped crime down city streets over the past decades then good peopl
Re: Brave New World (Score:1)
In most American big cities, the police simply don't give a fuck about property crime committed against commoners. Go ahead, report that theft, watch the cop roll her eyes or maybe even laugh in your face.
You say it's city politics. I'm not so sure. Culture is upstream of politics. I suspect it has more to do with the "Darth Vader" culture that has taken over as our law enforcers have slowly morphed from policemen into a paramilitary occupation force.
_Everyone_ wants honest decent cops enforcing virtuous la
no (Score:2)
Police cost money; investigators cost even more money. You don't want to pay the $$$ to have that capable of a police force. The cost of labor to get you back your shit is probably not worth the value of your shit.
Ever talk to somebody how actually knows the situation? no. Well, they will tell you that they have plenty of things for police to do that are more important. Even if we as a society move away from our desire for storm troopers it will not fix most of these property theft problems. You'd have
Re: (Score:1)
So a poor person just has to accept the missing package they "saved" their wage for due to the politics of "metrics"?
Re " stats are too stupid."
A package a poor person expected to open and now has to replace, pay for again due to a criminal stealing the package is not a "stat"... thats a crime.
A crime city police should stop given city laws and police pay...
How many more decades of metrics and stats should good people have to accept in areas of the USA that allow
Sales teams (Score:5, Interesting)
Just yesterday evening a sheriff and suit dressed type person were going door to door down my street, where it was the sheriff doing the sales pitch for Ring door bells, saying there have been rising reports on the block of delivered packages being stolen.
As someone who frequently has amazon deliveries, at times ending up being 3-4 packages over as many days, every week or two, I do question the claim quite a bit.
But even assuming it is 100% true such thefts are spiking as of last week, the really terrifying part is how hand-in-hand Ring and local police departments continue to get.
The sheriff and I spoke a good two minutes or so, where "figuratively half" of the conversation was very specifically him talking up Ring.
Mr suit man didn't say a single word the whole time. I'm guessing his only job is to complete any sales/orders for the things.
My neighborhood is very low crime, but the percentage of people living on this part of the block is mostly senior citizens. I can only imagine how successful a sheriff making such a sales pitch was that day.
I'm far more worried about a coming spike in Ring cameras than I am about the current level of package theft.
Re: (Score:3)
Just yesterday evening a sheriff and suit dressed type person were going door to door down my street, where it was the sheriff doing the sales pitch for Ring door bells, saying there have been rising reports on the block of delivered packages being stolen.
I see multiple reports of stolen packages accompanied by Ring or similar footage every week on Nextdoor and Facebook.
I have yet to hear of anyone being caught and prosecuted. Usually the thief assumes they're there, covers their face, and parks up off-camera.
Outside of the occasional video gone viral, do they actually have any effect?
Re: (Score:2)
that's the whole point of lots of Ring cameras on a street, a thief will be caught by the neighbor's camera
these people are also connected to some kind of organized crime so it's not just a nuisance that your stuff is stolen
Re: (Score:3)
They have caught a couple of what the police claim were the most prolific porch pirates in my area, thanks to the doorbell cameras. But based on what I see reported, it feels like just two of many out there stealing.
The problem really is that in a city of hundreds of thousands or millions, even a picture isnt always that helpful.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re " do they actually have any effect?" People can see who is doing the crime. Who to avoid. Who not to accept. Who not to open a door for.
That builds a more difficult part of a city for criminals to wonder around doing crime in.
People know who is doing crime, the time of day, methods, the clothing look and "skill" the average criminal attempts to use to look "average".
Like they b
Re: (Score:2)
Yes I am OK with zero packages being stolen.
I'm very offended by you suggesting otherwise. Why should I have to put up with thievery just because you desire it to be so?
Why do you have a problem with that? You repeatedly stated a falsehood so can only assume you want that to be the truth.
You would probably have less bad things happen to you if you didn't believe every lie a sales person says to you as if it was truthful. Sales people always lie. It's their job, it's their life. They can't help it.
But y
Re:Sales teams (Score:4, Insightful)
Did you ask the Sheriff how his attempts to catch the thief or thieves are going?
Did he explain what he's doing about it, beyond trying to make it the home owners' problem?
Did you ask him how much commission he gets from Ring sales?
Did you ask whether accepting bribes from private companies is a state or federal offence for a police officer?
Or did you just spend two minutes letting him try and sell to you?
Re: (Score:2)
With all the Ring door hacks around, thieves probably have it super easy now to find "the right door".
And I really wonder if one is so stupid to steal a package and is revealing his face doing it, unless you have a camera at the bottom of your door filming upwards into his face.
99% Chance (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure you used some interesting math to arrive at the 99% figure. But then, 75% of all statistics are fake /s
Are you creeped out by the cameras at the USPS? (Score:5, Insightful)
> On a U.S. Postal Service forum, a mail carrier asked: "Anyone else feel kind of creeped out that people are recording and watching you, up close, deliver mail to their house or is it just me...?
Are you also creeped out by the 10s of cameras at the USPS?
Re: (Score:2)
No, but then the USPS isn't using someone else's video, for free and unattributed, to create ads like Ring is.
Map? (Score:2)
Any one know of where to find a map of Ring doorbells? Best I found was this (and it is very generic): https://www.banfacialrecogniti... [banfacialrecognition.com]
As someone who walks a lot for health, I walk different neighborhoods to keep from being bored. I'd love to know which neighborhoods to avoid these things. It's been non-stop news about how terrible they are for months now! I want no part of them, yet just walking by means that I'm probably getting facial scanned, tagged, and put into some database for doing nothing more th
Re:Map? (Score:4, Interesting)
It's been non-stop news about how terrible they are for months now!
Yeah, really odd isn't it? It is always "Ring". Why not any of the other hundreds of security cameras out there? It is almost as if someone is out to push a narrative or something.
Re: (Score:2)
Someones narrative or not, I'd rather not be under Amazon's surveillance. Yeah, yeah. I get it. There are cameras everywhere so I'm probably on lots of cameras regardless of where I walk. But the vast majority of those cameras aren't capturing and building profiles the way Amazon is. If I can avoid Ring cameras and Alexa devices, then I will.
Re: (Score:1)
As someone who walks a lot for health, I walk different neighborhoods to keep from being bored. I'd love to know which neighborhoods to avoid these things.
As someone who enjoys mugging others, I would be very much interested if you'd care to share the map, and your updated route, when found. Thanks!
Re: (Score:1)
Clever! How long did to take for you to think up that? No wonder why you posted AC...
I know of several neighborhoods that are quite safe to walk in where there aren't Amazon spy cameras everywhere. Also, I'm not about to install their social media malware either, but supposedly the Neighbors app lets you see where other Ring devices are in a neighborhood. I've heard a coworker talk about it before so I will ask him on Monday if he'd show me how detailed he can get.
Worst case scenario, I just start taking mo
Re: (Score:1)
So you're willing to violate the privacy of Ring doorbell owners in order to maximize your own privacy. How egalitarian of you.
Re: (Score:3)
You are pathetic.
His goal is his own private interest to not engage in privacy violations. His seeking out of locations of cameras is in NO WAY a violation of anyone else's privacy.
Re: (Score:2)
And the camera owners' goal is their own private interest in preventing crime on private property
Publishing the location of cameras placed on private property is not a violation of privacy? But publishing someone's location when inside or adjacent to that property is a violation of privacy? Please, pull the other one.
New market (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's a basic wifi cnnection at 2.4GHz. Jamming should pose no difficulty, if you are willing to break the law. I used to have a set of cheap wireless headphones that would kill wireless connectivity for everything on 2.4GHz in the room when in use - and I am sure there are even more shoddily-designed, crappy transmitters out there.
Reported as a prowler on Ring, boss found out. (Score:4, Funny)
That's why... (Score:2)
And they also report that Ring cameras are now also being stolen, "leaving their owners with a final few seconds of footage — a hand, a face, a mask — before losing their connections."
And that's why I have multiple cameras watching each area from multiple angles, most of them mounted well out of reach.
Yes, you could tear my doorbell cam (NOT a Ring model) off the door, but you'd still be captured on two or three other cameras.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And the police would happily ignore the footage from all of them.
Not when I call to report that there's "a guy bleeding on my lawn." I mean, he must have fallen down the steps or something. I have no idea why the cameras don't show what happened to him. Sometimes they randomly drop the video.
Re: (Score:2)
Not when I call to report that there's "a guy bleeding on my lawn." I mean, he must have fallen down the steps or something. I have no idea why the cameras don't show what happened to him. Sometimes they randomly drop the video.
Ahh, you must have installed official police cameras.
Re: (Score:2)
Ahh, you must have installed official police cameras.
Yup, they're the "Murder Certified(r)" ones, made from discarded body cameras that "malfunctioned" at a critical time.
Re: That's why... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh my favorite internet tough guy murders man over stealing $20 gadget.
It was $75 plus shipping so quit yer bitchin'.
Does it *ALWAYS have to be (Score:2)
Does it always have to be a bearded man from Florida?
I'd like it to be, say, something else. Like a guy in a hazmat suit, with a couple of questions. Or what about a couple asking for directions to the beach.
No, it doesn't (Score:3)
Instead it might be this cute couple [youtube.com] from Las Vegas.
Install a secure delivery box at your home (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Ring is useful and helpful. (Score:2)
End Alien Abduction (Score:1)
End Alien Abduction, require ICE to wait for them to get in trouble. Chasing them down is a waste of money if they're not committing serious crimes.
CCTV has "recovered" so many missing packages! (Score:1)
CCTV on my house, the number of times I've had package delivery companies say they delivered and have the paperwork but my CCTV shows nothing. I once even got film a mail delivery person turning up with something for me, seeing no car in the driveway and just throwing the package on my neighbours lawn!! I've had delivery vans pull up, no car and walking up the road with my package. Once had to wait 7 days for a neighbour who'd been on vacation to come home, find my package soaked and ruined on their lawn an
EXCELLENT! (Score:2)
Huh? (Score:2)
"Home surveillance means you're never quite home, but you're never completely away from home, either."
No, it doesn't mean this even remotely. In fact, it means exactly none of that.