Slenver wrote: ↑Mon Dec 18, 2023 3:49 pm
I've got a few, all Ring ones. Been very pleased generally.
With Ring specifically, they haven't made huge improvements for each new model, so you can save a load of wedge by just buying the cheaper models. Think ours are like v2 or something, current is 4 maybe. You've missed both Prime day and Black Friday though, when Amazon pretty much give them away.
The subscription isn't peanuts, but it does cover as many cameras as you have in one place I think. Or maybe just the higher tier... either way, it makes more sense if you have a few of them.
Bear in mind you want to have a strong wifi signal to wherever they are, plus you need to recharge every couple of months.
Worth it though.
I'm intrigued. In what way are they worth it? Spend any time on nextdoor.com and there's endless footage of scrotes who don't give a toss about cameras and zero reports of the scrotes ever falling down the station stairs...not that we have a Police Station any more. You might as well put dummy cameras etc up for all the deterrent effect they have.
All contextual and subjective really. I live in a genteel countryside location and we don't really have any crime. I mean, I'm sure we do but I'm not really aware of it. Whether the cameras are a deterrent or not, or would have value in the case of a burglary I couldn't really say. But they give some peace of mind.
More usefully, I know when someone's at the door
We have a doorbell AND a knocker!
Doubt is not a pleasant condition.
But certainty is an absurd one.
Voltaire
Count Steer wrote: ↑Mon Dec 18, 2023 4:32 pm
I'm intrigued. In what way are they worth it?
Perhaps not necessarily always a benefit to the owner.
It's quite common on the police obdocs to see them searching an entire neighbourhood for cctv.
e.g. The crash investigation programme, a hit and run fatal. They had footage from a house across a valley, so could determine the vehicle's speed at impact.
I'm intrigued. In what way are they worth it? Spend any time on nextdoor.com and there's endless footage of scrotes who don't give a toss about cameras and zero reports of the scrotes ever falling down the station stairs...not that we have a Police Station any more. You might as well put dummy cameras etc up for all the deterrent effect they have.
All contextual and subjective really. I live in a genteel countryside location and we don't really have any crime. I mean, I'm sure we do but I'm not really aware of it. Whether the cameras are a deterrent or not, or would have value in the case of a burglary I couldn't really say. But they give some peace of mind.
More usefully, I know when someone's at the door
We have a doorbell AND a knocker!
I mean, they did always kinda work. But it's useful when you're out* to tell a delivery driver where to stick a parcel etc.
Count Steer wrote: ↑Mon Dec 18, 2023 4:32 pm
I'm intrigued. In what way are they worth it?
Perhaps not necessarily always a benefit to the owner.
It's quite common on the police obdocs to see them searching an entire neighbourhood for cctv.
e.g. The crash investigation programme, a hit and run fatal. They had footage from a house across a valley, so could determine the vehicle's speed at impact.
Unless the laws have changed, your fixed domestic camera should not give coverage of land beyond your curtilage. It would be interesting to see if anyone challenges camera footage because the camera shouldn't have been filming people going about their legitimate business outside of your land. I don't suppose it will happen as we're merrily heading off down the total surveillance route, with facial recognition, without any thought to what that actually means.
I await the first case of someone objecting to being filmed by a dash cam.
Doubt is not a pleasant condition.
But certainty is an absurd one.
Voltaire
Count Steer wrote: ↑Mon Dec 18, 2023 4:32 pm
I'm intrigued. In what way are they worth it?
Perhaps not necessarily always a benefit to the owner.
It's quite common on the police obdocs to see them searching an entire neighbourhood for cctv.
e.g. The crash investigation programme, a hit and run fatal. They had footage from a house across a valley, so could determine the vehicle's speed at impact.
Unless the laws have changed, your fixed domestic camera should not give coverage of land beyond your curtilage. It would be interesting to see if anyone challenges camera footage because the camera shouldn't have been filming people going about their legitimate business outside of your land. I don't suppose it will happen as we're merrily heading off down the total surveillance route, with facial recognition, without any thought to what that actually means.
I await the first case of someone objecting to being filmed by a dash cam.
TBH, it's not really in your interest anyway. If you're recording general traffic then it'd just trigger and send alerts constantly. Plus, if running from batteries (like me), you'd have to charge them all the time.
You can edit which areas of the image trigger recording, though obviously this isn't going to be much use for a house that opens straight onto a road.
You'd need to watch the programme for more but, playing Devil's advocate, they might have owned the fields in the valley too
The car was subsequently left outside a local shop. According to the driver, the impact stopped the engine and he coasted there. According to the shop's cctv ( ) he parked it.
Count Steer wrote: ↑Mon Dec 18, 2023 4:32 pm
I'm intrigued. In what way are they worth it?
Perhaps not necessarily always a benefit to the owner.
It's quite common on the police obdocs to see them searching an entire neighbourhood for cctv.
e.g. The crash investigation programme, a hit and run fatal. They had footage from a house across a valley, so could determine the vehicle's speed at impact.
Unless the laws have changed, your fixed domestic camera should not give coverage of land beyond your curtilage. It would be interesting to see if anyone challenges camera footage because the camera shouldn't have been filming people going about their legitimate business outside of your land. I don't suppose it will happen as we're merrily heading off down the total surveillance route, with facial recognition, without any thought to what that actually means.
I await the first case of someone objecting to being filmed by a dash cam.
You can video the street outside your property, the only guidelines are that you may have to comply with GDPR. As has been mentioned, if you video high traffic areas then it's going to be constantly activating the camera. Other than that there's no laws which say you can't video in the public areas outside your house. Not really any different from people using a mobile to video in public areas, in a way that's more intrusive.
Perhaps not necessarily always a benefit to the owner.
It's quite common on the police obdocs to see them searching an entire neighbourhood for cctv.
e.g. The crash investigation programme, a hit and run fatal. They had footage from a house across a valley, so could determine the vehicle's speed at impact.
Unless the laws have changed, your fixed domestic camera should not give coverage of land beyond your curtilage. It would be interesting to see if anyone challenges camera footage because the camera shouldn't have been filming people going about their legitimate business outside of your land. I don't suppose it will happen as we're merrily heading off down the total surveillance route, with facial recognition, without any thought to what that actually means.
I await the first case of someone objecting to being filmed by a dash cam.
You can video the street outside your property, the only guidelines are that you may have to comply with GDPR. As has been mentioned, if you video high traffic areas then it's going to be constantly activating the camera. Other than that there's no laws which say you can't video in the public areas outside your house. Not really any different from people using a mobile to video in public areas, in a way that's more intrusive.
Yeah, I bet people read this, comply with GDPR and delete old footage etc.
Unless the laws have changed, your fixed domestic camera should not give coverage of land beyond your curtilage. It would be interesting to see if anyone challenges camera footage because the camera shouldn't have been filming people going about their legitimate business outside of your land. I don't suppose it will happen as we're merrily heading off down the total surveillance route, with facial recognition, without any thought to what that actually means.
I await the first case of someone objecting to being filmed by a dash cam.
You can video the street outside your property, the only guidelines are that you may have to comply with GDPR. As has been mentioned, if you video high traffic areas then it's going to be constantly activating the camera. Other than that there's no laws which say you can't video in the public areas outside your house. Not really any different from people using a mobile to video in public areas, in a way that's more intrusive.
Yeah, I bet people read this, comply with GDPR and delete old footage etc.
Still, it's cheaper than paying for an effective police force eh? Crime, together we'll crack it.
Don't need to, Ring deletes it for you. Keeps it for 60 days, unless you want to keep it, drops off the system. GDPR sorted as part of your monthly charge. Easy.
Not cheaper or as effective as the police (well, maybe it is ), just as addition for people that want them, great to have choices eh?
So tell me, iirc you're job, just how many convictions per hours of domestic footage has your unit made? How many convictions per hour of dashcam? If my analysis is correct it's a fraction of a % (I assume civvies do the trawling through it all, but before long you'll have recruit 'citizen analysers' as the footage grows exponentially).
We're one of the most CCTVd nations on the planet but can't stop industrial scale shoplifting, why's that?
Doubt is not a pleasant condition.
But certainty is an absurd one.
Voltaire
Count Steer wrote: ↑Mon Dec 18, 2023 7:49 pm How many convictions per hour of dashcam?
In July 2023, just 4% of submissions to the West Midlands Police dashcam portal resulted in positive action. Last month, 734 submissions were made with 81% resulting in a positive outcome, including court summons, fixed penalty notices, driver education and warning letters.
Count Steer wrote: ↑Mon Dec 18, 2023 7:49 pm How many convictions per hour of dashcam?
In July 2023, just 4% of submissions to the West Midlands Police dashcam portal resulted in positive action. Last month, 734 submissions were made with 81% resulting in a positive outcome, including court summons, fixed penalty notices, driver education and warning letters.
Do you think that we could realistically - budget unlimited - replace every video doorbell, cctv camera and dashcam (and street cctv, etc.) and the public would happily accept it?
Count Steer wrote: ↑Mon Dec 18, 2023 7:49 pm
So tell me, iirc you're job, just how many convictions per hours of domestic footage has your unit made? How many convictions per hour of dashcam? If my analysis is correct it's a fraction of a % (I assume civvies do the trawling through it all, but before long you'll have recruit 'citizen analysers' as the footage grows exponentially).
We're one of the most CCTVd nations on the planet but can't stop industrial scale shoplifting, why's that?
As I work in the Driver Training Unit (for 6 yrs), absolutely none
As for dashcams etc, there is a dept attached to the safety camera partnership that does view and potentially prosecute drivers for offences. As for the stats, I have no idea, nor any interest in it to find out. I prefer the old ways of actually having police on the streets/ RPU in vehicles detecting offences. But I don't make the rules. That's one of the reasons I am where I am
Count Steer wrote: ↑Mon Dec 18, 2023 7:49 pm
So tell me, iirc you're job, just how many convictions per hours of domestic footage has your unit made? How many convictions per hour of dashcam? If my analysis is correct it's a fraction of a % (I assume civvies do the trawling through it all, but before long you'll have recruit 'citizen analysers' as the footage grows exponentially).
We're one of the most CCTVd nations on the planet but can't stop industrial scale shoplifting, why's that?
I watched a couple of those detective shows the other day (think it was The Met) following a couple of murder investigations. What struck me was that every case was solved and convicted on the basis of CCTV, including from doorbell cameras where police had got hold of the footage.
They seem to have specialised cctv detectives who’s job it is to identify and obtain possible sources of footage.
I have a Ring Gen2, have to charge it up every 10 weeks or so. The Gen2 is the most popular one, later versions don't offer much more but are more expensive.
I have a workshop in my back garden and spend a fair amount of time out there, the doorbell links to the amazon alexa which is in the workshop and notifies me if anyone comes to the door or presses the bell. Interestingly the alexa notifies me much quicker than the phone does, sometimes the phone has up to a 30 second delay.
My neighbour also has a Gen2 and quite often he is at work when he gets deliveries so he talks to them via the doorbell and tells them to deliver it to me.
They are good things and without mine I would sometimes hesitate to spend time in my workshop incase I missed deliveries etc.
