[bernierocks]

"shift away from liberty."

We have the freedom to choose a company like Ring/Amazon. It's not forced on us by the government.

"We didn't have a major terror attack in the US using airplanes before 9/11 either"

We also didn't have the terrorists with that level of sophistication. We still do today. Increased security definitely has a role in a decrease of terror attacks, but how much or how little would be needed to maintain this level? That much is unknown.

[vorpalhex]

Post hoc ergo propter hoc. Terrorists have always been complex - both foreign and domestic, both in the last century and the last millenia. Terrorism is not new. Profiting nakedly off of the threat of it is.. well, unusual.

Remember that the people selling you security are not reliable indicators of truth. They are profiteers - and you are the one they profit from.

You can choose to do business with Amazon - but you can't choose if their cameras record you or if your facial profile gets added to their services. You don't get to object when the fed subpeonas AWS for that info because you don't get standing. You are not the consumer, you are the product.

[bernierocks]

"Profiting nakedly off of the threat of it is.. well, unusual."

We aren't talking about profiting from terrorists. We are talking about the idea of increased security making you safer from terrorists.

I suppose by this thinking, we should get rid of most firewalls, 2FA, and password managers because it won't actually make you safer.

Good safety practices are generally not convenient. It sounds like most people don't want the hassle of dealing with inconveniences at the airport, which will make them safer.

"Remember that the people selling you security are not reliable indicators of truth. They are profiteers - and you are the one they profit from."

I installed cameras because there were breakins in my neighborhood..and it paid off. Not only did I catch thieves in my house, I was able to give the footage to the police. Many of my neighbors have caught people breaking into cars and people trespassing on their property after midnight.

"but you can't choose if their cameras record you or if your facial profile gets added to their services. You don't get to object when the fed subpeonas AWS for that info because you don't get standing. You are not the consumer, you are the product."

You can trot out this cliche, but it doesn't make it true. I'm the consumer..and it's not like any of these other ring cameras (besides the ones I installed myself) are pointing inside my house. My neighbors all have cameras and it only records public space.

I have no problem with this. I have no expectation of privacy when I'm out in public and neither should you.

[vorpalhex]

2FA is effective when done properly - but the TSA has a horrendous failure rate on their audits. You're confusing legitimate security (locks on your door, 2FA, firewalls) with theater (Most airport security, bag checks).

Nobody cares when your neighbor captures you leaving your house, or the local coffee house records you buying breakfast. When someone can see all the cameras though then they can do things like map out your day or make a list of your contacts - things which are not public and are privacy invasive.

And yes, AWS is capturing facial data and storing it - and providing the tools for others to do it cheaply. I got to play with their toolkit yesterday and it was trivially easy.

It is not about convenience - it is about your right to do things the government doesn't like freely. The government doesn't care for activists, whistleblowers or protestors - and it has and will abuse it's power to attack them.

You should have a problem with this. You should have a problem with for profit companies building profiles on your children. You should be upset when your human rights are curtailed under the lie of security. Humans were not meant to be farm animals for corporate consumption.