did my civic duty today:went to a local donut shopnoticed they had a new ring camera up

[viss@mastodon.social]

did my civic duty today:
went to a local donut shop
noticed they had a new ring camera up.
i ask the nice hispanic girl behind the counter "hey you know ice can see through that ring camera, right?"
she goes UHHHH NO WTF I HAVE ONE AT HOME
"tear it out of the wall. yank the power. ring gives ice free access to those"

[jalefkowit@vmst.io]

@Viss Each one, teach one

[jesstheunstill@infosec.exchange]

@Viss At the VERY least, put tape over the camera and cancel your cloud subscription until you can get it replaced

[phillip@social.lol]

@Viss Every turn away from Ring is a good turn

[h2onolan@infosec.exchange]

@Viss kudos. Sharing is caring.

[da_667@infosec.exchange]

@Viss good work, brother

[viss@mastodon.social]

@da_667 every little bit counts

[viss@mastodon.social]

@Herndonite

[viss@mastodon.social]

@Herndonite but the bigger question, is why are you defending flock and ice?

[viss@mastodon.social]

@Herndonite framing it as anything other than "ice can see through ring cameras" is softening it, and 100% of the time some rando responds to a thread with nothing but a link to a snopes link, it implies they are "calling bullshit".

so if i say "ring can see through ice cameras" and you reply with nothing but a link to a snopes article, it implies you are calling bullshit on my statement.

which in this context means you are defending ring and ice from me.