SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the begun-the-surveillance-wars-have dept.
Some property managers want to install smart home systems and technology like facial recognition because they consider it a convenience for tenants and a security measure. The technology could deter thieves from entering the building, while also making it easier for residents to get inside.
Tenants worry the technology is a new way for landlords to keep a close eye on people in their homes. In New York, a smart intercom system was being pitched to landlords as a way of catching and evicting tenants going against the building's code of conduct.
Property technology is essentially unregulated because it's relatively new. There are no laws covering it, though members of Congress have proposed a bill to keep facial recognition out of federally funded housing. Tenants worry about surveillance and privacy when smart home systems are in place, and have sued landlords for the right to use physical keys.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by bzipitidoo on Sunday November 24 2019, @02:28PM (15 children)
So, fear of surveillance outdid fear of theft and burglary. Or, was it the hassle factor?
What really puts the lie to these schemes, is, why can't they simply use unobtrusive monitoring of entrances with plain old security cameras, instead of putting everyone through the hassle of pausing and posing for a mugshot every single fricking time they want to go home? One thing you can do with a key or a code is give it to a friend or family member so they can sleep there, get something for you, check the place, feed the pets while you are away, etc.
When are we going to see more pushback on gates and fences? Some areas it's all but impossible to find an apartment complex that isn't gated. Their real security value is practically nothing, and they're a nuisance. Want pizza delivered to your apartment? Got to give drivers a code, or buzz them in. I've been wondering, who wants those stupid gates anyway? The residents, or the landlords? Or neither, and it's a scheme of corruption and bribery in which the city has imposed onerous requirements on apartments, for several reasons, such as harassing poor people for being poor and discouraging them from living in the area, and driving more business to fence and gate builders and maintainers. How many times now, I wonder, has a gate critically delayed emergency responders from reaching those in need, thereby causing unnecessary deaths?
(Score: 5, Informative) by JoeMerchant on Sunday November 24 2019, @02:46PM (6 children)
Gates and fences stop almost no intruder, but they do make it a lot clearer who is an intruder and who is not - those pizza delivery guys who are being hassled are pretty close to "intruder class." As a matter of practical reality: a neighborhood I lived in in Miami installed an entry gate, no technical "restriction of access" anyone could get in anytime without prior authorization from anybody - residents had "fast pass" cards, and others got their license numbers logged before driving in. Pedestrian access was not impeded at all. Petty crime in the neighborhood dropped off by over 90% after the installation of the gate, and stayed down. We still had a car stolen one rainy night, and some idiots stole a dead battery out of my truck, but that was it for 10 years, in the prior 10 years you could have expected a whole lot more problems - whole home robberies where they back a truck up to the door and empty the place, etc.
My first thought when I read the proposed bill for keeping facial recognition out of federally funded housing was that they didn't want to upset the black market economy which dominates those housing projects. Sudden imposition of "real legal security" in those neighborhoods could have serious consequences for not only people's livelihoods, but also the effective security/stability of the neighborhoods.
I'm sure there are stats on that. In my Miami neighborhood, the first responders practiced driving their vehicles in and out of the neighborhood on the sidewalks. Again, the street blockages and security gate didn't really stop anybody from doing anything, but they made it a whole lot more obvious when people were doing things they shouldn't be. Cops can't stop you for driving on a public road, but they can stop you for driving on a sidewalk.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 5, Interesting) by EEMac on Sunday November 24 2019, @06:00PM (5 children)
Jerry Pournelle [jerrypournelle.com] had some experience here.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Monday November 25 2019, @03:15AM (4 children)
We had a similar event in the Miami neighborhood with code enforcement. Some new neighbors went to a meeting and started chanting "enforce the law, enforce the LAW!" so, code enforcement came through and wrote every violation they saw... people were fined $1000 for "over-trimming" trees (that's what's on the books) My boat which had been parked peacefully in view for 5+ years (and actually complimented by the neighbors as a really nice looking boat...) was issued a $500/day citation, starting in 14 days- but it took 13 days for the registered letter to reach me. The heavy handed enforcement lasted exactly one cycle, there were still about 2/400 houses who were in favor of continuing it, but the city backed off anyway.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 25 2019, @09:38AM (3 children)
So an insincere effort to "enforce the law".
FTFY. The city didn't have to do work, such as "enforce the law" or clean up the code regulations.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday November 25 2019, @02:30PM (2 children)
Debatable as to what "the city" actually wants - the city of Miami basically doesn't give two fucks about code enforcement, they have some pretty heavy laws on the books to pull out when desired, but 99.9+% of the time they turn a blind eye.
The meeting with the chanting neighbors (new residents: proudly flaming homosexuals, by the way, just so you get the full flavor of the scene) wasn't attended by the chief code enforcement officer, he had a family thing to do that night. I met with him the day after my letter arrived, he said his subordinates should have handled that better and calmed the situation during the meeting, but... in any event, he told me if I put up a small fence so the boat wasn't visible from the street, then his officers couldn't write any more violations on it. He also implied that it was highly unlikely that any further enforcement activity was forthcoming, and for the 2 more years I lived there that was true. I don't think the city actually collected much revenue from the fiasco beyond the $1000 for the tree, and in any event the people doing the enforcement don't personally or professionally benefit from that revenue.
Now, the nearby city of Miami Shores did enjoy running up those $500 per day violations up to and above the value of the home and land... they left them as a lien on any future sales transactions, and were later judged unconscionable and thrown out.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday November 26 2019, @11:44PM (1 child)
I think it's fair to say that what they do is a strong indication of what they want. In your story, the city could have just selectively enforced whatever regs the big mouths wanted (say going from 0.1% enforcement to 0.102% enforcement). Instead, they made a huge show of enforcing everything they could think of in a month on that neighborhood. Then when the enforcement fell back to the status quo, they suddenly reverted to what they were doing all along.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday November 27 2019, @03:03AM
I was at the meeting - incase you missed it, the big mouths were literally screaming queens and they were specifically chanting "just enforce the law, just enforce the LAW" they didn't want one law enforced, they wanted ALL the laws enforced, from grass height to expired auto registrations and everything else. They were new to home ownership.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 5, Interesting) by looorg on Sunday November 24 2019, @04:29PM
It probably depends on which emergency service and what kind of barrier/gate/fence etc there is. From what I have been told by the boys in the FD they will either ram small gates and barriers as needed and they bring equipment to deal with other hindrances. It's probably worse for Ambulances and PD since they don't tend to have that size of vehicles and equipment under normal circumstances.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 25 2019, @06:40AM (6 children)
My apartment building isn't gated. You do need a key to open the door to the vestibule, and an intercom system allows delivery folks to let you know they're downstairs, you can converse with them, and you can remotely unlock the door for them so they can bring you your pizza, sushi, pav bhaji, pomegranate green tea with strawberry boba, Cassoulet, beer, weed or even a hooker(s).
There are cameras on the door, but they aren't useful to the tenants. What's more, the managing agent refuses to provide video footage to the police even when they know a crime has been committed in view of the cameras. So that's a win/win.
All in all, it works quite well.
Not sure why *anyone* would want facial recognition or other biometrics to allow entry.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 25 2019, @08:34AM
Why? To get us used to increasing levels of surveillance in every facet of our lives, under the guise of security. But mass surveillance of all forms is far worse for freedom and democracy than any crime it could ever hope to solve.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 25 2019, @09:42AM (4 children)
That'll work until the police get a search warrant. Then they'll stop refusing or go to jail/get their property (possibly including said property) seized.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 25 2019, @01:22PM (3 children)
That assumes that the police actually care. Which they don't.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday November 26 2019, @02:50AM (2 children)
Until they do. Plenty of circumstances will generate care in our law enforcement professionals.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 26 2019, @04:10AM (1 child)
Yeah. Like when lippy, unarmed brown folks need to be taught a lesson. With lead.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday November 26 2019, @01:14PM