Leaked Email Suggests Ring Plans To Expand 'Search Party' Surveillance Beyond Dogs (404media.co) 47
Ring's AI-powered "Search Party" feature, which links neighborhood cameras into a networked surveillance system to find lost dogs, was never intended to stop at pets, according to an internal email from founder Jamie Siminoff obtained by 404 Media.
Siminoff told employees in early October, shortly after the feature launched, that Search Party was introduced "first for finding dogs" and that the technology would eventually help "zero out crime in neighborhoods." The on-by-default feature faced intense backlash after Ring promoted it during a Super Bowl ad. Ring has since also rolled out "Familiar Faces," a facial recognition tool that identifies friends and family on a user's camera, and "Fire Watch," an AI-based fire alert system.
A Ring spokesperson told the publication Search Party does not process human biometrics or track people.
Siminoff told employees in early October, shortly after the feature launched, that Search Party was introduced "first for finding dogs" and that the technology would eventually help "zero out crime in neighborhoods." The on-by-default feature faced intense backlash after Ring promoted it during a Super Bowl ad. Ring has since also rolled out "Familiar Faces," a facial recognition tool that identifies friends and family on a user's camera, and "Fire Watch," an AI-based fire alert system.
A Ring spokesperson told the publication Search Party does not process human biometrics or track people.
Also in the league email... (Score:5, Insightful)
...well, not that shocked (Score:1)
Building up that lack of trust... (Score:1)
FP should be moderated shallow and too obvious? Oh yeah, no such dimensions on Slashdot, though I guess that negative insight could be described as shallow...
I can actually think of a positive use case related to a new form of Internet-based crime, though now I'm worried about giving the crooks more ideas. Once the crime spree had included a murder (that got some public attention) the local police were able to trace enough of what was going on to arrest the masterminds fairly quickly, but then it took a lon
Re: (Score:1)
Super Bowl (Score:5, Insightful)
I knew this when I saw the ad.
Re:Super Bowl (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, was a super common observation. People immediately recognized this was the most warm and fuzzy use case and pitched first, to pave the way for the really profitable and less warm and fuzzy use cases.
They don't process human biometrics.. (Score:5, Insightful)
But they provide facial recognition of familiar people. What kind of doublespeak is this?
Re:They don't process human biometrics.. (Score:4, Insightful)
I believe they forgot the phrase "at this exact moment in time".
Re: (Score:3)
I believe they forgot the phrase "at this exact moment in time".
"... which has now passed."
Re: (Score:2)
Well (Score:2)
DUH.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
because the law is corrupt and classist?
and this won't just stop at the unlawful, will it?
Re:ELI5... why is this bad? (Score:4, Insightful)
why is being able to scan for fugitives and people trying to evade the law bad?.
they always crow about the so-called benefits. but they never want to talk about the part where the system gets abused.
Re:ELI5... why is this bad? (Score:5, Insightful)
Are your garbage bins not precisely in the location required by your home owners' association? Lawn a trifle too long, or maybe cut with an unapproved pattern?
Do you live in a "border" city, i.e. one that is within 100 miles of a coast, land border or international airport? Have you been engaging in antisocial behaviour such as gathering in groups and/or protesting outside of designated free speech zones?
Have you carried identifiable literature or membership insignia from a non-state sanctioned organization, or entered or exited a known or suspected meeting place of such an organization or residence of known or suspected members of such an organization?
Re:ELI5... why is this bad? (Score:5, Insightful)
Look at it this way: this is not the first mass surveillance tool available to government agencies. Pick any of the ones currently deployed and you will be able to find a history of agents abusing the system to stalk their ex-girlfriends, domestic partners, etc. and even attempt to interfere with their lives or liberties (see spiteful additions to the Do Not Fly list).
That's individual abuse alone, before even considering the propensity for law enforcement agencies to deploy technologies unlawfully or inappropriately, or for an agency or administration to inappropriately label a group of people criminals for exercising speech rights the government finds inconvenient.
Re:ELI5... why is this bad? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
>why is being able to scan for undesirables bad
Because the word is softer than your skull. Mass scanning benefits the scanners and those connected, not your commoner ass. You probably think it could never affect you, until suddenly it's an "outrage" and you learn about the three-a-day you and everyone simply never get hauled in for because enforcement is selective. Always has been. The legal system is a cudgel for those above you to weaponize and on occasion some rule that keeps peasants off each other.
W
Re: (Score:1)
It's not about what is a crime now, it's about what new crimes are invented to put you in prison when you step out of line.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
ELI5... why is being able to scan for fugitives and people trying to evade the law bad? If it helps catch a felon or find a missing child, it is worth it.
Obvious shill is obvious. While you're at it Mr. Shill, why not advocate for everyone having to have - by law - a huge barcode tattooed on their forehead?
That scenario isn't nearly as far down the slippery slope you're on as you may imagine it is. Or maybe your authoritarian soul is actually counting on how short that distance is.
So ... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Good and bad (Score:2)
The tech could be good if it reduced real crime, murder, theft, burglary, vandalism, etc
The tech is really bad if it is used for political purposes, minor traffic violations, or evidence in divorce cases
oopsie (Score:3)
We accidentally cyberpunked ourselves.
Start obfuscating your face (Score:2)
"Expand" (Score:5, Interesting)
For the slow in the audience, this was the purpose all along. The "find missing dogs" thing was the marketing approach to sell this furthering of this new addition to the surveillance state.
Title Correction: (Score:4, Informative)
"Leaked Email Suggests Ring are Privacy Rapists"
There FTFY.
Bezos as Gollum (Score:2)
Turns out Bezos kind of looks like the movie depiction of Gollum. His precious.
It was always going to happen (Score:2)
That's why Amazon wanted to acquire Ring.
I have a ring camera and I'm hesitant to install it for this reason.
LK
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forget the robot vacuums. Now they know floorplans and square footage.
Re: (Score:1)
Cats (Score:3)
Expand it to cats, the ones who shit on my lawn.
ringspan (Score:4, Insightful)
Plans to, planned to, or (Score:1)
"planned to, bad PR forced us to canceled plans, but if we can get away with it in the future we would still really like to"?
just look at the news (Score:2, Interesting)
An elderly woman was seemingly kidnapped from her home. There is some video. There is a massive investigation. Did video help? Kinda.
I've reported many crimes (around our offices at night) with video. Unless the cop the reviews the video knows the person it does not help. Sure there may be evidence if they catch someone, but that person is getting away with it most of the time.
The idea that lots of cameras, all tracking everything all the time, can solve or prevent all crime is bullshit.
Making it affordable
Panopticon (Score:2)
Great, so we are recreating the panopticon. Outstanding /s
So much for hope for the future, guess we deserve our cyberpunk dystopia hellscape that is coming.
Tone deaf execs (Score:1)