> The resulting settlement required Ring to delete content that was found to be unlawfully obtained, establish stronger security protections and pay a hefty fine.
5.6 million dollar fine is hardly hefty for Amazon.
I think a bigger issue is that AI is being used to censor footage from the owners of the camera themselves. There's been stories about gunshots being censored from the owners of the camera by Ring.
Why would you pay for a security device, which would prevent you from having access to your own security data in case of a security incident?
Honestly, this is one of the many reasons I'd never get a Ring. Quite frankly, I don't even understand why they're so popular given that the hardware is quite subpar, dependability/reliability is dismal, the subscriptions are mandatory, and alternatives from all the other brands are so plentiful. Even Blink, even though it's also owned by Amazon, has a better rep and feature set (2-year battery life, local recording, super small size compared to Ring, to name a few features, although reportedly it still requires an internet connection at all times).
> I think a bigger issue is that AI is being used to censor footage from the owners of the camera themselves. There's been stories about gunshots being censored from the owners of the camera by Ring.
Can you provide sources for this? I just spent a few minutes looking and couldn't find anything, but I'd be super interested in learning more about it.
Once again, this is covered by that evergreen advice: Do Not Talk to the Police.
This includes not just speech but data sharing. There the downside of self-implication rarely justifies the benefit. You're likely not an exception, and only a lawyer can answer that question for your particular circumstances.
Ring is a privacy nightmare already. They previously settled with the FTC [1], but that doesn't mean the problem is fundamentally fixed.
[1] https://apnews.com/article/ring-doorbell-camera-settlement-f...
> The resulting settlement required Ring to delete content that was found to be unlawfully obtained, establish stronger security protections and pay a hefty fine.
5.6 million dollar fine is hardly hefty for Amazon.
Yes, and it's apparent that nothing has changed.
Just yesterday: "Customers say unknown devices gained access to their accounts"
[1] https://www.delawareonline.com/story/news/2025/07/18/ring-ca...
If it's limited to the doorbell, I see no issue with this, who doesn't want cops looking at our front porch and entrance?
I think a bigger issue is that AI is being used to censor footage from the owners of the camera themselves. There's been stories about gunshots being censored from the owners of the camera by Ring.
Why would you pay for a security device, which would prevent you from having access to your own security data in case of a security incident?
Honestly, this is one of the many reasons I'd never get a Ring. Quite frankly, I don't even understand why they're so popular given that the hardware is quite subpar, dependability/reliability is dismal, the subscriptions are mandatory, and alternatives from all the other brands are so plentiful. Even Blink, even though it's also owned by Amazon, has a better rep and feature set (2-year battery life, local recording, super small size compared to Ring, to name a few features, although reportedly it still requires an internet connection at all times).
> I think a bigger issue is that AI is being used to censor footage from the owners of the camera themselves. There's been stories about gunshots being censored from the owners of the camera by Ring.
Can you provide sources for this? I just spent a few minutes looking and couldn't find anything, but I'd be super interested in learning more about it.
Maybe just being there deters people from trying.
Could get a fake one to mount on a door
Eufy self-hosting (mostly*) FTW. Project Farm also determined their cameras were pretty good too.
* Except for notifications enabled.
Once again, this is covered by that evergreen advice: Do Not Talk to the Police.
This includes not just speech but data sharing. There the downside of self-implication rarely justifies the benefit. You're likely not an exception, and only a lawyer can answer that question for your particular circumstances.
itll never get better cuz people will continue to buy this techbro glowy crap
What are the alternatives and what makes them a better choice for consumer use-cases.