Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I would absolutely not work in a home where I was being filmed. Even if the family offered me full disclosure, I just wouldn't do it. And most esp. if I had my child with me.
It would just open myself and my child up to too many sickos out in the world OP and set myself up for too much harm.
Didn't you see the Yahoo! story a month ago? A nanny was being watched by a complete stranger on the baby monitor and she suddenly heard a voice and freaked out. Thankfully he wasn't a sicko, he jokingly made a comment to her about something like, "Don't forget to feed the baby..." or along those lines...but as the article stated, he could have been anyone, he could have seen or heard anything, etc.
Anytime anything electronic is used like this, it is vulnerable to hackers who are always one step ahead of the game.
For a family to put a nanny in such a situation is just mean to me.
Sure, they compare it to having cameras in their offices, etc. But it is much different when a nanny works alone in a private home vs. a corporate office.
Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out.
Duh.
Wow if you only knew how the world really worked you would be shocked. Also, no "hacker" has the desire to watch the nanny as she watches Maury.
Anonymous wrote:I would absolutely not work in a home where I was being filmed. Even if the family offered me full disclosure, I just wouldn't do it. And most esp. if I had my child with me.
It would just open myself and my child up to too many sickos out in the world OP and set myself up for too much harm.
Didn't you see the Yahoo! story a month ago? A nanny was being watched by a complete stranger on the baby monitor and she suddenly heard a voice and freaked out. Thankfully he wasn't a sicko, he jokingly made a comment to her about something like, "Don't forget to feed the baby..." or along those lines...but as the article stated, he could have been anyone, he could have seen or heard anything, etc.
Anytime anything electronic is used like this, it is vulnerable to hackers who are always one step ahead of the game.
For a family to put a nanny in such a situation is just mean to me.
Sure, they compare it to having cameras in their offices, etc. But it is much different when a nanny works alone in a private home vs. a corporate office.
Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out.
Duh.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Are you sure they're recording. My
employers have cameras too, but they are
like webcams, they don't record.
It's even scarier if they are open-feed type cameras. There are plenty of websites that stream unsecured cameras (many are nanny cams) all day, and I doubt the people being filmed have any clue their entire day has been broadcast on the internet.
I get the desire for nanny cams but there is just too much room for impropriety, IMO. I left my last job when I discovered that there were two undisclosed cameras in the home.
http://www.theverge.com/2013/1/22/3902698/trendnet-security-camera-streams-mapped-out
you link said that site has been removed and the security issue resolved. So 2-3 years ago maybe there was an issue but not any more.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Are you sure they're recording. My
employers have cameras too, but they are
like webcams, they don't record.
It's even scarier if they are open-feed type cameras. There are plenty of websites that stream unsecured cameras (many are nanny cams) all day, and I doubt the people being filmed have any clue their entire day has been broadcast on the internet.
I get the desire for nanny cams but there is just too much room for impropriety, IMO. I left my last job when I discovered that there were two undisclosed cameras in the home.
http://www.theverge.com/2013/1/22/3902698/trendnet-security-camera-streams-mapped-out
Anonymous wrote:Are you sure they're recording. My
employers have cameras too, but they are
like webcams, they don't record.