[netsharc]

I guess this comment will be burned to the ground [instead of people telling me why they disagree], and yeah a single username and password is bad, but the article smells like fear-mongering. "Zomg, strangers will look at your children!", even though the kids are in a place that is semi-public, and the viewers are mostly remote.

Hmm, then again, if someone was filming my children, I'd be creeped out. And if someone was using this to identify kids and their day-to-day patterns (e.g. pick up hours), they could theoritically show up 10 minutes earlier, say they're there sent by the parents to pick up someone, and "the kid is wearing a blue top and yellow shorts" or whatever. But IMO kidnap scares are overblown, and if a nursery falls for that trick without calling the parents first, they should be shut down for being too stupid.

[II2II]

It is a very real concern.

Most people know that taking an interest in children who are not in their care is frowned upon and will not watch other people's children unless there is very good reason to. As a result, someone watching children with unknown motivations is suspect. Should it be that way? Probably not, but it is given the social context.

This is even evident in public spaces. If an unknown person is watching children, someone will strike up a conversation with them. It isn't about being friendly. In fact, the person responsible for the safety of the children is probably quite annoyed. The point of that conversation to let the unknown person know that their presence is known and that they are being monitored. Why? A social norm is being violated so extra care must be taken. Is the concern excessive? Perhaps, but it is negligence if extra care is not taken and something happens.

That social expectation does not simply disappear when technology is involved. In some ways, the violation is worse since it is easier for that unknown person to conceal their presence.

(Source: I am involved with recreation programming.)

[leipert]

> but the article smells like fear-mongering. "Zomg, strangers will look at your children!"

1) It should be reasonable to expect some privacy when you give your kids into the care of other people. There is a whole lot difference: someone can walk by a day care and see kids playing outside and anyone on the internet can access these systems. I don’t know how these nurseries work that use these systems, but I assume that not that many people have access to the kids, only staff and maybe other parents/guardians.

2) The company producing these camera systems claims them to be more secure than online banking. This is flat out wrong, one might even argue fraud.

[lazyasciiart]

I have picked up my sisters children from four different nurseries over the years, and absolutely none of them would let you pick up a child without having had the parent previously give your name and identifying information to them. One of them I had to go in and show id before i was on the list. And even then they had to tell the nursery specifically each day that I was picking them up instead of a parent. The big risk for kidnapping at nurseries or schools is non-custodial parents. This means the threat model is someone who knows the children, knows their schedule and is recognized and possibly welcomed by the children. Learning what time they normally leave is worthless.

[mplewis]

Is your child's bedroom semi-public?

[jowsie]

This is a system sold to commercial nurseries, not installed in peoples homes.

[YeBanKo]

Yeah, and in this commercial nurseries children spend a good amount of time. So its their second bedroom.

[recursive]

I don't understand that at all. If I spend a lot of time at Starbucks, is that my second bedroom? Why are other people using the bathroom attached to my bedroom?