this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2026
860 points (99.3% liked)

Technology

81118 readers
3322 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
 

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
[–] rc__buggy@sh.itjust.works 31 points 1 day ago (5 children)

I chose Reolink. AFAICT it's not leaking anything outside my network and it's fairly inexpensive. Not as cheap as the subsidized Ring brand but hey, at least I own them.

[–] digger@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 day ago

I've got a few Reolinks. I have them set to record to a local SD card and have blocked outside internet so that they're not phoning home.

[–] akilou@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 day ago

I have a reolink that I use as a baby monitor. It's on our wifi but I set up my router to prevent it from accessing the internet. So you can only access it if you're phone is on the wifi. And it records onto an SD card.

[–] ZoopZeZoop@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day 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 1 day 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 4 points 1 day 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 1 day ago

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

[–] bagsy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Put your reolink in privacy mode so it wont contact the reolink servers. Then set up Frigate to record a week of data. You dont need much space for 7 days of a couple of cameras.

[–] rc__buggy@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

I have their NVR and yeah, it's all in privacy mode.

[–] Xaphanos@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

I have a QNAP. Free dvr software. I buy cheap rtsp-capable cameras and roll my own.