deflock.me

parent

[–] Nefara@lemmy.world 48 points 2 months ago* (1 child)

Some HOA's are literally just to pay for the maintenance of a shared private drive, which IMO is reasonable. So, we explicitly refused to make any offers or consider any homes in HOA's which didn't let us see their charter. Interestingly enough, that was all of them... makes you think.

parent

[–] ikidd@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 2 months ago

Where I'm from, the board has to make all documentation and meeting minutes available to people considering purchasing.

And it's a damn good thing they do, I've had friends discover some pretty expensive things that were lurking in the wings for future costs, like mold abatement and foundation problems.

parent

[–] altphoto@lemmy.today 17 points 2 months ago

This is my number one requirement.

parent

[–] Brosplosion@lemmy.zip 0 points 2 months ago (1 child)

Depends on the HOA. Some are basically microdictatorships, some are just actually a group of homeowners trying to make sure their neighborhood doesn't fall apart. Several of the houses down the road that don't have HOAs have broken furniture and smashed cars in their front yards. Imagine trying to sell your home living next to that.

We pay about $500 a year to our HOA, and that gives us access to a neighborhood playground/yearly events/etc. Only time we had to reach out was to build a fence and it was just verifying we were in the guidelines for type of fence allowed and not encroaching neighbors.

parent

[–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago

Just remember that the board and rules can change over time. What seems reasonable now may not be what you'll be dealing with next year.

parent

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 75 points 2 months ago (4 children)

also ring cameras are spying too. i see them still installed in most houses.

[–] Eheran@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Is there a link or something about this?

parent

[–] Someonelol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Just go take a walk in a couple of residential areas. You'll see them fairly quickly.

parent

[–] Eheran@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (1 child)

I love these US centric responses. There is a world outside of the USA. I have never seen such a thing.

parent

[–] mirshafie@europe.pub 3 points 2 months ago

Ring video doorbells do exist in Europe, but they're not very common. Apparently they are very common in the US, and they record video of things it sees. I think the legitimate use-case is to record if your packages (that are left by the door) are tampered with or stolen.

Here's an article: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/07/amazon-ring-cashes-techno-authoritarianism-and-mass-surveillance

parent

[–] Wildone@sh.itjust.works 120 points 2 months ago* (6 children)

My hoa has this. Wish I knew before I moved in. My car got vandalized, and the offender was their friend. They decided to protect him and not give out the recording. Also sent out email with disclaimer: cameras are not for our safety or security. What are they for then?!?! Stalking us?!?

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] grue@lemmy.world 92 points 2 months ago (3 children)

That's an instant "sue and subpoena the footage"

parent

[+] Wildone@sh.itjust.works -10 points 2 months ago* (2 children)

Sue who? I don't know the guy. And I have no proof. All i have is a bad photo of him near my car.

parent

[–] the_mighty_kracken@lemmy.world 70 points 2 months ago

You don't sue the guy, you sue the hoa and/or the person who told you they weren't going to give you evidence.

parent

[–] wyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 months ago

You aren't expected to do the legwork. That's what an attorney is for.

parent

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago (1 child)

You need to run to be your HOA president.

parent

[–] Wildone@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 months ago*

I need to be popular in this "high school" (building) to even have a chance of getting any hoa board member position.

parent

[–] Tiresia@slrpnk.net 53 points 2 months ago

Billionaires: Yes, your property values are much lower now. How about you sell to us before things get worse?

[–] wyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.com 51 points 2 months ago

The fact that your HOA is surveiling your house and its residents is disgusting enough to at least meet with an attorney, IMHO. 🖖🏼

[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 49 points 2 months ago (4 children)

My HOA has them and advertises them as a way to keep the neighborhood safer. Most people buy it. I hope the tide turns on these though and that more stories like this continue to show they can affect bottom lines.

[–] Saledovil@sh.itjust.works 21 points 2 months ago (3 children)

I have this theory that visibly disabled security devices harm the public perception of safety more than no devices being there in the first place.

parent

[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Yeah, I'm still all for flockjacks and flock stumps though.

parent

[–] wyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 2 months ago (1 child)

Don't forget the 3D-printable Flock Sock —to protect the dear cameras from harmful radiation, of course.

parent

[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago

Also for your balls. It's well known that flock radiation shrinks your balls.

parent

[–] OnyxRex@lemmy.dbzer0.com 219 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (62 children)

Flock cameras aside, I would never buy a home that's part of an HOA. There have been too many stories over the last 10 years of these terrible people abusing their power, up-to and including stealing people's home out from under them. That neighborhood is unlivable.

hideshow 62 child comments

[–] LilB0kChoy@reddthat.com 85 points 2 months ago (39 children)

Something like 35% of all homes in the US are governed by HOAs and roughly 2/3 of all new developments are adopting HOAs.

hideshow 39 child comments

parent

[–] IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 106 points 2 months ago (33 children)

Reason number 4629 why I'll never be immigrating to the US. "Land of the free" my ass.

hideshow 33 child comments

parent

[–] Peppycito@sh.itjust.works 36 points 2 months ago (14 children)

I've recently just understood what a HOA is. As a Canadian I thought they were "Unincorporated Municipalities" or there's also "Rate Payers Associations" which is like a proto-town where there's a group providing town-like services amongst themselves. Which to me is some sick ass anarchist shit. But an HOA is just letting your neigbours tell you what to do? That's lame.

hideshow 14 child comments

parent

[–] Lumelore@lemmy.blahaj.zone 75 points 2 months ago (3 children)

HOAs were created because racists didn't want black people in their neighborhood. I fucking hate HOAs.

parent

[–] Peppycito@sh.itjust.works 20 points 2 months ago (1 child)

Judging by another guys post, HOA's are way of offloading a whole new tax structure on individual neighborhoods. The whole being racist thing is how they convinced everyone to pay it.

parent

[–] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 months ago

Yeah, the town didn’t even plow or maintain the roads in some HOAs. And the property tax “savings” instead go to scumbag property management conglomerates.

parent

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

Wait until you learn about when they created SATs.

parent

[–] TipRing@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago (4 children)

I don't have an HOA but my property operates under deed restrictions that limit property owners in meaningful ways, establishing usage of the wells, easements, number of structures and so forth.

One of my neighbors repeatedly referred to herself as "the head of the HOA" and I told her she needed to stop saying that because we don't have one. I didn't say as much but I would hire an attorney to send a C&D if she were to keep that up.

parent

[–] Peppycito@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 months ago

HOA's! Fuck me. I mean, say what you want about the tenets of municipalities, Dude, at least it's a system of governance!

parent

[–] ChexMax@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (1 child)

My neighborhood is deed restricted but most of the rules are just how to be a good neighbor. Trash cans can only be out from this time to this time. Your grass can't be over grown. Personally, I like the structure and I like living on a street where everyone agrees we want our immediate environment to look and feel nice. I've never heard of anything ever having to be enforced because everyone just does it, and when someone doesn't, it usually just means they need to be checked on.

parent

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 point 2 months ago

The grass thing would frustrate me as someone anti lawn and want to engage in more sustainable alternative methods of maintaining a yard. I also dislike rules on how you can paint your house.

You also have to keep in mind that whoever enforces this stuff can easily go from "neighbors checking in" to "neighborhood nutjob brings a ruler on walks to issue fines" with some changes in neighbors

parent

[–] kevin2107@lemmy.world 1 point 2 months ago

you'd both be morons in that situation

parent

[–] SarahValentine@pawb.social 6 points 2 months ago*

But an HOA is just letting your neigbours tell you what to do? That’s lame.

Sure, but there's a chance they could become the ones fucking their neighbors over for cheap thrills! That makes it okay! /s

parent

[–] SwingingTheLamp@piefed.zip 4 points 2 months ago (3 children)

HOAs vary a lot. In my city, every new development has one as a condition of getting permits from the city. That's mainly because cars and their infrastructure are stupidly expensive, the city just can't afford to maintain it all without raising property taxes. I have friends who live in an HOA neighborhood, and basically they just pay an extra monthly bill to cover snow removal, maintenance of common areas, and such. For them, it's nothing like the horror stories of HOAs that can take your house if your mailbox is the wrong color. It is just a group providing services that the city can't afford anymore.

parent

[–] Peppycito@sh.itjust.works 12 points 2 months ago (1 child)

So they aren't a proto-city like an unassumed municipality, they are like a posto-city where late stage capitalism goes to retire and find a new revenu stream.

parent

[–] SwingingTheLamp@piefed.zip 1 point 2 months ago

Some of them, yeah.

parent

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 7 points 2 months ago

kinda funny though in that the city only exists to do that stuff so why not get rid of it and have the county run all the little developer cities.

parent

[–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

It is free, but that privilege doesn't come for free.

As long as you have enough money and don't step on the toes of other people who have money, you can seemingly get away with everything.

parent

[–] SapphironZA@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 months ago

More like land of free to be asses.

parent

[–] DonutsRMeh@lemmy.world -5 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Don’t let the internet scare you. The USA is still amazing. I’m an immigrant myself and I could’ve never asked for a better place.

parent

[–] fyzzlefry@retrolemmy.com 1 point 2 months ago

What are you comparing it to?

parent

[–] the_wizard_of_0Z@lemmy.ca -4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 child)

This is like the dumbest shit I have ever heard. You are no authority of anything. Why should anyone care what you think? Lots of people are immigrants. We have kids in cages and you are a insane person. You sound like a cop or a human who has lost its instinct to survive. Yeah the grass is greener but that is just because it is made of plastic.

parent

[–] DonutsRMeh@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

Ok

parent

[+] LilB0kChoy@reddthat.com -10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (11 children)

HOAs or something of similar form exist in a lot of places. They require residents to be involved though. Anybody who lives in an HOA or similar and doesn’t participate (go to meetings, read their bylaws etc.) contributes to the organization being abused.

HOAs are most frequently[citation needed] found in the United States, Japan, Canada, Australia, and the Philippines,[3] and to some extent in other countries, such as New Zealand, Israel, Mauritius, South Africa, most of the countries of the European Union, such as Denmark, France, Germany, Spain, the Netherlands, Ireland, Austria, Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria, Greece, Sweden, Belgium, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, Cyprus, Luxembourg, Estonia, Slovakia and Slovenia, and some of the Latin American countries, such as Chile, Argentina, Brazil and Mexico.

hideshow 11 child comments

parent

[–] IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 months ago (1 child)

I'm in Canada. As it says further down that Wikipedia article, HOAs for detached homes are very rare. Condo boards exist, but mostly by necessity if sharing a building.

parent

[–] LilB0kChoy@reddthat.com 1 point 2 months ago

Strata’s in Canada and HOAs in the US largely serve the same purpose with the biggest difference being financial interest in common property.

parent

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 months ago (4 children)

HOA are not in Canada.

Closest we have is strata when an apartment or condo is owned by all the owners having a share.

You have yearly vote for who sits on council, and bylaws can be changed by voting. The Strata does not have to approve your purchase into the unit like HOAs do to restrict the type of person who can own.

parent

[–] LilB0kChoy@reddthat.com 2 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Both stratas and HOAs can have bylaws that allow them to approve buyers. The most significant difference between an HOA and a Strata Corp. is that in Strata’s the owners have a financial interest in the common property.

parent

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 1 point 2 months ago* (2 children)

Looks like only financial approval (to ensure you can afford strata fees), and occupant count approval (like not a 10 person family in a 1 bedroom apartment) but Canada doesnt allow discriminatory buyer approval like HOAs in the states...strata just can't say no because no.

And rental bylaw got squashed with COVID

parent

[–] LilB0kChoy@reddthat.com 2 points 2 months ago (1 child)

HOAs in the US are governed by the Fair Housing Act and can’t just say “no because no”.

The 1968 act expanded on previous acts and prohibited discrimination concerning the sale, rental, and financing of housing based on race, religion, national origin, and since 1974, sex. Since 1988, the act protects people with disabilitiesand families with children. Pregnant women are also protected from illegal discrimination because they have been given familial status with their unborn child being the other family member.

You might be confusing deed covenants with HOAs.

parent

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 1 point 2 months ago

Mostly my info was based on a documentary of HOAs that were still saying no, probably with excuses, to keep black people out of their neighborhood

parent

[–] untropvertimide@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 months ago (3 children)

They require residents to be involved though. Anybody who lives in an HOA or similar and doesn’t participate (go to meetings, read their bylaws etc.) contributes to the organization being abused.

That's actually wrong. Homeowners associations require homeowners to be involved, not residents. There is actually a very strong difference between the meanings of "homeowner" and "resident".

In France a form of "HOA" exists for what some countries call condominium: co-owned lot of houses (FR: "lotissement"), or co-owned multi-appartments complexes. Only co-owners can participate to the full general assembly or be elected as a representative member in the "Conseil syndical" (aka. "CS", the council of co-owners representatives) ? Whether these owners reside in the complex does not matter, and such owners can be "moral entities" (ex: companies). On the other hand, residing rentees are not invited to participate, even remotely, to any of these general or CS-restricted assemblies. Usually these HOA and their provider named "syndic de copropriété" manage the complex as a whole, as they managed any part of the complex that is not a part of a unit. (aka. "common parts") The rentees are usually not even supposed to interact directly with the HOA.

Personal anecdote: residing as a rentee in an appartement inside a co-owned complex can lead to some interesting conflicts. For example, when the HOA doesn't maintain common water pipes, and these pipes flood the rented appartment, whose owner is neither available nor reactive. I've experienced the rentee side in this situation. Not fun. And it wasn't the clean water input. (And if you claim the owner wasn't fit to be a decent landlord, I'll actually agree. They weren't a malevolent, bad-faith greddy scum of a landlord, but they were indeed an incompetent one.)

parent

[–] LilB0kChoy@reddthat.com 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Pedantic but technically correct, which is the best kind of correct, they say. My point still stands though. HOAs are just a smaller form of private government which requires involvement, voting and understanding of the homeowners involved.

I’m not particularly fond of HOAs and I’d prefer to see a return to community development like it used to be. The city itself being involved, designating common spaces for a neighborhood or community like parks, community centers, sports fields/facilities etc. instead of that falling under a private entity.

I’ll share my own personal anecdote: we bought our home ~6ish years ago and we had an HOA which was largely pointless. I organized the homeowners and engaged with the HOA processes and, today, we have an HOA in name only.

It’s too expensive and difficult to dissolve the HOA so instead we all agreed to stop paying dues, return what had already been paid and abandon the HOA.

Fortunately for us, the homeowners not only owned the homes but also the property each home sits on and there was no community property or services to deal with.

parent

[–] untropvertimide@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 months ago (1 child)

Fortunately for us, the homeowners not only owned the homes but also the property each home sits on and there was no community property or services to deal with.

Dose "homeowner" in the USA refer to someone that eihtre don't own the home or the land on which it sits ?

I don't know if it is legal in France cause I have no skill in property right, but I never heard of this case. The closer I heard of if a shop "owner" (franchisee) that builds and open a franchise shop, but the franchise owning big company actually owns the land and the building. Never heard anything like it for homes, despite knowing the existence of systems like "viager".

My point still stands though. HOAs are just a smaller form of private government which requires involvement, voting and understanding of the homeowners involved.

True, with limitations. As said by others, there can be conflicts between multiple duties for a homeowner. (e.g. HOA meeting VS work obligation.) So the HOA should also have some systems to adapt to external constraints, like a procuration system for votes.

Also if some members of the HOA commit abuses, the responsibility of thei abuses will mostly sit on them. The non commited homeowner share a part of responsibility because of their negligence, bu the biggest part of responsibility is always owned by the perpetrators themselves, never by the victims. This part should never be omitted when communicating about abuses, as its omission carry a strong risk of shifting the responsability to the victims of said abuses. (That's probably why there are so strong reactions to your point.)

I'll fininsh with a fun fact about French HOA :

The HOA themselves are mostly infamous in very big complexes with many units, because of the difficulty to make so many interests align (that formulation is meant to include absentee/negligent owners.)
The really infamous ones are the "syndic de copropriété", commonly perceived as being greedy bad faith companies, abusing power despite merely being service providers for the HOA. (But from what I understand having one is mandatory, which plays a part in their disproportionate power.)

parent

[–] LilB0kChoy@reddthat.com 1 point 2 months ago

Dose "homeowner" in the USA refer to someone that eihtre don't own the home or the land on which it sits ?

It can. It’s most common in townhomes where you own the house but everything outside of it including the exterior of the residence is “common property” or mobile home lots where you own the house itself but pay “rent” for the lot, utilities and common property maintenance.

As said by others, there can be conflicts between multiple duties for a homeowner.

I’ve never heard of an HOA that holds meetings where decisions are made or a vote is needed during working hours outside of retirement communities. Generally an HOA needs a quorum, typically 2/3 I believe, to enact bylaw changes, take certain actions etc. HOA disclosure is also required, at least where I am, at time of sale. Nobody should be “surprised” by an HOA.

Also if some members of the HOA commit abuses, the responsibility of thei abuses will mostly sit on them.

Yes and no. If a homeowner has participated I believe that’s true. If a homeowner buys a home with an HOA and doesn’t read the bylaws beforehand, doesn’t read meeting notes, attend elections, share their complaints/concerns then they’ve, at least tacitly, endorsed the HOAs operations.

That's probably why there are so strong reactions to your point.

I think there are strong reactions for one of two reasons. For one, too many Americans are happy to not get involved and participate and then play victim. Second, I think many people don’t actually understand how HOAs truly work, or their sum total of experience is stories they’ve read or heard from others.

parent

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 7 points 2 months ago (4 children)

I have heard many municipalities only allow new construction as planned communities because they don't want to do the trash and local roads and simplifies connections water/sewer wise and they require water run off management and such.

parent

[–] grue@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

The municipalities know the suburbs are a Ponzi scheme and don't want to be left holding the bag. Single-family homes on large lots simply don't generate enough tax revenue to pay for the infrastructure they use.

parent

[–] LilB0kChoy@reddthat.com 1 point 2 months ago (2 children)

I’d imagine it varies greatly by municipality but I’ve known of a number of new developments where I am where the local laws required developers to establish and manage an HOA while they build.

The developer hands it over to the property owners to run after a determined amount of time.

parent

[–] smh@slrpnk.net 3 points 2 months ago (1 child)

I bought a home built in the 90s that technically had an HOA because the town required one when the subdivision was built. The HOA was defunct until 2010 or so when someone wanted to add an addition to their house. They put in for permission from the town. Town said "did the HOA approve it?" Homeowner went "HOA? Oh, I guess we should have one of those." After that, the HOA existed to rubber stamp home additions and send out email reminders to get your septic tank pumped. No fuss, no fees.

Current home is a condo with a shared roof. HOA is much more hands on and my biggest complaint is they suck at communicating expectations. Like, I'm fine following rules. I'm autistic, it's kind of my thing. Just tell me what they are before you yell at me for breaking them. (note: I'm easy to yell at because I have a history of abuse, yelling is more a tone of voice than a volume thing.)

On the other hand, anything outside my walls isn't my problem and it's way cheaper than renting was. And I go to the monthly meetings.

parent

[–] LilB0kChoy@reddthat.com 3 points 2 months ago

Just tell me what they are before you yell at me for breaking them.

This is perfectly reasonable, as well as warning requirements and remediation time before any penalties apply.

I would never buy a house in an HOA if the state it’s in doesn’t have disclosure laws like mine. Where we live you get the CC&Rs, bylaws, articles of incorporation, rules and regulations, recent meeting minutes, the current budget and reserve study, the assessment schedule, any special assessments, pending litigation, and an estoppel certificate from the management company prior to purchase.

parent

[–] toynbee@piefed.social 14 points 2 months ago (6 children)

But it's FOR THE GREATER GOOD.

hideshow 6 child comments

parent

[–] Sidyctism2@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 2 months ago (2 children)

More like the gated good

parent

[–] toynbee@piefed.social 5 points 2 months ago (1 child)

Your point is not invalid, but in this case I was referencing Hot Fuzz.

parent

[–] wyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 months ago

thegreatergoood

parent

[–] hedge_lord@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

The Greater Good.

parent

[–] dethedrus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 months ago

... before you could say 'gypsy scum' we were knee deep in dog muck, thieving kids and crusty jugglers!

parent

[–] OnyxRex@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 2 months ago

parent

[–] ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Daily reminder that one of the most famous serial killers stopped killing after he became president of an HOA because he got just as much satisfaction from it as he did torturing people to death.

Can't remember if it was Dahmer or the BTK killer but the point is still there

parent

[–] CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago (1 child)

Was he president of an HOA? I thought he was just a very annoying municipal compliance officer. I can see how people would cross those streams, given both roles are built for assholes who want to measure your grass height with a ruler and check your house paint against a swatch.

parent

[–] ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago*

Honestly I don't remember but like you said it's along the same vein

Edit: Just looked it up and you are correct. It was the BTK killer.

parent

[–] plateee@piefed.social 11 points 2 months ago (4 children)

My HOA seems to be one of the best options - $300/year and zero rules about bins being x inches from the house, paint restrictions, etc. The money goes towards the subdivision pool and that's it.

But I'm worried that the two trustees (who are in their 70s) will kick it and someone less hands off will take over.

parent

[–] blargh513@sh.itjust.works 16 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Oh sweet summer child.

Nobody thinks THEIR HOA can turn to shit, but all it takes is maybe five people to take over and fuck it entirely. I moved into a one of these shitbag neighborhoods because it was the only thing available at the time that fit the budget and met the other criteria. Buying during late covid was a mess. I've spent a LOT of time pouring over the legal documents, charters, etc and pulling as many docs out of the county recorder's website as I could find. The pastiche of state and local laws that interleave into HOAs is a confusing mess at best. In the case of mine, the board members got something through that changed the voting requirements for dissolution of the HOA from 60% to 95%. No, they did not hold a vote to do it, they just did it via the procedures laid out in the founding documents. I've NEVER witness or been invited to any voting activities, yet we have a new board president somehow. It's the same group of ten white boomers that just trade back and forth. Right now, the only thing that's holding them down is that they pissed away all the money so they have little to nothing left to engage in any sort of legal battles with homeowners. However, they did just raise the fees (again, no voting that I am aware of) so that may change.

Your HOA may be benign now, but all it takes are a handful of assholes to fuck up the whole thing and create misery in the process. A few boomer busybodies, maybe one lawyer and you're fucked.

Also, many of these things will "sell" the management to a 3rd party that will run them like a slumlord. They will send people out to generate infractions and fines that they get to keep. Grass too long, fine. Mailbox not right, another fine. Garbage out too early/late, that's a fine. Most of the money goes to the management company, the board trustees will put the rest into the HOA funds, but there is almost zero oversight for what happens to the money.

HOAs are bullshit I would love to burn mine down; I'm half tempted to start a legal battle with mine just because I know that they dont' have a lot of money and I might be able to bully them into something, but I'd never get rid of it. Plus it would be an expensive gamble.

parent

[–] NightFantom@slrpnk.net 17 points 2 months ago (1 child)

Would it hurt to sound less condescending?

parent

[–] Crashumbc@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

No, that post is factual.

parent

[–] trebach@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago

Mine failed to file the correct paperwork with the state and lost all their enforcement power over land they don't directly own.

parent

[–] FenrirIII@lemmy.world -2 points 2 months ago (4 children)

You say that until you live next to someone who literally parks multiple vehicles in their front yard, blasts loud music all day (and most of the night), has dpgs running loose, and then starts building a second house on the edge of your property.

Many Americans are selfish, stupid people who will do whatever they want until someone stops them. We all know calling the cops is useless and often just escalates the assholery. I'd rather deal with an HOA run by geriatrics than a pissed off trashy person who has endless access to gasoline.

parent

[–] OnyxRex@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 2 months ago* (1 child)

music would be a problem but I won't complain about the cars in their front yard if they don't complain about the giant garden in mine. Besides, maybe they'd let me borrow their jack stand or help me change my rotors.

parent

[–] FenrirIII@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

I appreciate that you want to see the potential positives, but it's just not realistic. If it's a cool person, like the kind that would help you out, they're probably not the same person who acts so obnoxiously and rudely.

parent

[–] wyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 2 months ago* (1 child)

Well, that's a false equivalency if I ever saw one.

parent

[–] FenrirIII@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago

And OP I'm responding too isn't making a sweeping generalization? It's not a false equivalency to compare an actual experience without an HOA to someone's made-up generalization about HOAs. The fact that people so blindly repeat this broken line of thinking proves that most people have never actually dealt with an HOA. Sure, there are bad ones, but not every single one.

It's a circlejerk of uninformed people who just want to hate on something they really know nothing about.

parent

[–] Crashumbc@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

"for the entire history of HOAs" fixed that for you

parent

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

One of the most basic people I know lives in one and when I asked him why, he just said the properly values are high. He not the most creative person and doesn't really care about politics or anything really, so it works for him.

parent

[–] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 36 points 2 months ago (8 children)

The municipalities are allowing it and the police are gobbling them up. As someone commented below, a fucking Ring camera is near identical to a Flock. In the near future, I'm certain Ring will also offer a camera, with options, that will read your ass.

hideshow 8 child comments

[–] f4f4f4f4f4f4f4f4@sopuli.xyz 12 points 2 months ago (6 children)

They already do gait analysis. It's not a leap to assume that Amazon can identify you from the motion of your ass as you walk.

hideshow 6 child comments

parent

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago (5 children)

They already do gait analysis

Are you sure? As far as I've seen that's just pop sci-fi bullshit that has never been proven to work in the real world.

hideshow 5 child comments

parent

[–] f4f4f4f4f4f4f4f4@sopuli.xyz 3 points 2 months ago (4 children)

This is an interesting read: https://recfaces.com/articles/what-is-gait-recognition

You can do it at home with open-source software like OpenCV. The world's largest companies that have been collecting and analyzing surveillance data for more than a decade are now desperate to find profitable use cases for their "AI"...

parent

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago (3 children)

This paper makes it sound like it's still basically guesswork. It's a lot like lie detector tests. They don't really work, but maybe they can be somewhat useful tools when combined with lots of other things?

parent

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 months ago (1 child)

I want to preface this with: I agree with you.

But the success of most things algorithm related are nowhere near 100%. Look at facial recognition, or even fingerprint recognition. There are false positives, to the point that innocent people have been convicted on them.

All tech has a margin of error, and it’s us idiots (meaning humans in general) that place an oversized trust in it.

parent

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 months ago

There's a difference between things that are based in sound science but aren't 100% accurate, and things that are based on, at best, untested hypotheses.

I'd put gait analysis along with things like bite mark analysis, phrenology, etc. The appropriate level of trust in it is near zero percent. But, largely because it's expensive, people convince themselves that something that expensive has to work. It's similar to a lie detector test. They strap so many different things to you to measure your body, and have an expert in the machine who studies what's happening. That leads people to believe that it has to work, at least a bit. But, there's a reason why lie detector tests are generally not admissible in court. Even though they genuinely can tell... something, the potential for them to be misunderstood by the jury is too high for them to be allowed into evidence.

parent

[–] Cherries@lemmy.world 1 point 2 months ago

Police already arrest the wrong people, even when they have the name and address for a warrant. Even when the person doesn't match the picture they are given, police lock 'em up anyway.

Unfortunately, it doesn't matter how accurate stuff like this is; it'll just be another tool assholes, not just the police, use to justify being mean to people they don't like.