this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2026
507 points (99.6% liked)

Technology

81078 readers
4180 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
507
Why are people disconnecting or destroying their Ring cameras? (www.usatoday.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works to c/technology@lemmy.world
90 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

A Super Bowl ad for Ring security cameras boasting how the company can scan neighborhoods for missing dogs has prompted some customers to remove or even destroy their cameras.

Online, videos of people removing or destroying their Ring cameras have gone viral. One video posted by Seattle-based artist Maggie Butler shows her pulling off her porch-facing camera and flipping it the middle finger.

Butler explained that she originally bought the camera to protect against package thefts, but decided the pet-tracking system raised too many concerns about government access to data.

"They aren't just tracking lost dogs, they're tracking you and your neighbors," Butler said in the video that has more than 3.2 million views.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ZoopZeZoop@lemmy.world 9 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

I've been worried about security, and therefore haven't even researched the options. I'd like to have one, but I don't want people able to see what's happening without me allowing it for specific footage. Only guaranteed way was to just not have any. I could do local only, but there is less utility with that. So, it wasn't worth the effort and cost.

[–] Funwayguy@lemmy.world 9 points 5 hours ago

I have my reolink cameras setup on an internal network without direct internet access, but have a server running Frigate and a VPN that I can remote into from my phone. Gives me full control of where the recordings are backed up and remote access controls. This setup works for their doorbells too which is neat.

[–] rc__buggy@sh.itjust.works 5 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

PoE, no wifi for me. The DVR is in the rack, I keep meaning to back it up to a cloud account of some sort but haven't gotten around to it so if you break into my house and steal the NVR I won't have a record of you being there.

[–] ThePantser@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 hours ago

I have my security alerts sent to Telegram from Frigate just so it's in another location for that reason.