Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

AIBU for thinking that devices which are marketed as upgrades of old fashioned tech are basically now just widespread forms of surveillance in many different forms?

32 replies

millymog11 · 06/10/2023 13:08

What percentage of the public do you think buy things like ring doorbells, baby monitors, car cams etc not primarily (whatever they profess / say at the time they buy it) for the purpose of the gadget (for example seeing who is at the front door) - but primarily for the purpose of surveillance both internally and outside the home?

By this I don't mean they are actively trying to catch someone out (or not at the time they buy it) but that the main purpose of what they have bought ends up not being seeing who is at the door / seeing how the baby is doing etc - but monitoring someone else or using it as evidence for something (eg to tell a home insurance firm that you have cameras on your house etc)

I am just interested in how widespread this is and how much consumers have changed in their attitude.

For example, if you ever go and knock on someone's front door (I dont mean a relative I mean a friend or you have to for some business like reason on an ad hoc basis) do you automatically assume you will be recorded on camera?

OP posts:
OhmygodDont · 06/10/2023 16:51

My house is covered in the stuff be that alexas blink cameras ring doors bell etc etc

Does other people having them bother me? Not really. Do I think footage is use for nefarious reasons mostly not. I mean yes some abusive people will use it to track and monitor people, I don’t think companies really give a shit about actively watching us. Much more Interested in our shopping habits and such to get our cash.

Am I concerned that someone’s ring may say catch me chatting shit about them no because I’m not stupid enough to stand there doing that.

You can’t sell the footage to the police, if they want it and have reason they can just get a warrant.

I think the cameras are good in the sense they can put together time lines on crimes and on missing people. On thefts and other things. Like when some sod took my take away and the take away was not believing me till I offered to let them come check my footage personally 😂

myhusbandwantsadog · 06/10/2023 17:39

I think cctv is great. My relative was murdered and the killer was convicted mainly due to cctv evidence at a time when public cctv in streets was still very controversial. It turned out later that the killer had done it before so at least one dangerous man is serving a life sentence thanks to cctv.

ThreeFeetTall · 06/10/2023 17:58

I find the live facial recognition stuff scary. If your face is on a database of people not to let in somewhere then you can't enter. Or if your face looks very similar to someone else. I know in theory they could be monitored by people with common sense and corrected but as things get more automated it could get pretty unpleasant. 'Computer says no' on a massive scale. I'm no conspiracy theorist and the police etc should use technology but hope it can regulated somehow.

BlueYonder57 · 06/10/2023 18:01

I have CCTV for protection purposes. In many years I have rarely looked at the footage. In fact it's usually the police asking me if I have footage of something else on the street when I look at it! I have no time to look at what the neighbours or anyone else is doing. I have a life.

mumda · 06/10/2023 18:22

Baby monitoring systems ... recording to the cloud. Why?

CantFindTheBeat · 06/10/2023 18:25

I understand what you're saying, OP.

We are gradually normalising levels of intrusion that would probably have required 'warrants' (or authorisation/processes etc) in the past.

I don't personally 'worry' about it, as I think you can't put Pandora back in the box.

But I do think it will eventually be used to restrict and control in ways we haven't anticipated, if needed, the more connected the systems, services and sensors get.

Imagine lockdown - majority of people abided by the rules, who might not 'next time'.

Much more data is now available to see who's doing what and where, without leaving your desk.

EmmaEmerald · 06/10/2023 19:07

CantFindTheBeat · 06/10/2023 18:25

I understand what you're saying, OP.

We are gradually normalising levels of intrusion that would probably have required 'warrants' (or authorisation/processes etc) in the past.

I don't personally 'worry' about it, as I think you can't put Pandora back in the box.

But I do think it will eventually be used to restrict and control in ways we haven't anticipated, if needed, the more connected the systems, services and sensors get.

Imagine lockdown - majority of people abided by the rules, who might not 'next time'.

Much more data is now available to see who's doing what and where, without leaving your desk.

Yes
I'm totally seeing OP point, I just wondered if something new had happened as it's such an old concern.

some MPs have spoken out against facial recognition just today. It's particularly bad at distinguishing ethnic minorities, of which I am one.

i am sorry if I came across stroppy OP. I am a bit stroppy tbh, because stuff that us so called CTs have been warning about for years are suddenly popping up and it's all very "well, we tried to warn you for years".

i didn't take my phone out with me in lockdown and all tracking options that can be switched off are switched off.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page