I actually bought some of those face masks and they were quite meh.
2 Likes
I like these ideas! Hopefully Wyze looks at them!
1 Like
That’s an excellent idea!!
I have some more questions.
I became a customer with Wyze before November and had already purchased some Wyze Cams. I had 5 before November.
However, since then and actually recently like within the last month I purchased 2 more cams (clearly I didn’t have any idea this would happen).
Anyway, are all my cameras still free because I was a customer before November and got the email? Or is it only the Cams I purchased before November that are free? (I say free but will probably donate some money each month. Or subscribe to CamPlus)
Also, what is going on with people who became a customer after November? How do I tell my neighbors who I have told about Wyze that they don’t have free Person Detection anymore?
Thank you
5 Likes
I will also have this problem with every one of my real world friends and neighbors and visitors and co-workers that I have told about Wyze. 
It’s much safer to speak garbage about products…
4 Likes
Doubt if I would pay for person detection. The AI for person detection appears to be fairly primitive. Part of the detection is that it looks for a round object on top of something moving. A box or anything else that blocks a round head appears to defeat the AI of the person detection.
I had a friend here yesterday asking about my cameras. He is looking at getting at least one for his garage.
I’m happy I didn’t mention Person Detection at all. I did tell him there was no necessary subscription fees. I wonder how long that won’t be a lie.
4 Likes
This is the reason I got rid of my “ring” doorbell, when a notification comes in at your door, you check your app to see the person live, but the app won’t connect as the CAM is trying to connect to your cloud at the same time to upload and save the video file, This causes a conflict as you are trying to view the live feed, So I cancelled “ring” for this and I will not subscribe to this new cloud, as I suspect it will do the same thing. Have you guys tested this?
4 Likes
I can understand the costs. I use my Wyze cam not for 24 /7 but only turn it on when I want to see things if I’m not home, then turn it off. I’m a senior ,and retired, home most of the time, but I find the Wyze cam very useful when I’m away. Perhaps charging on a per minute basis, or something like that would work. Best regards Jim
1 Like
A couple years ago, I had a theory that the reason RTSP/ONVIF was so greatly resisted by Wyze was because I thought they might have future plans for subscription services as a way to make money and wanted to keep it all reliant on their servers to do that. I particularly thought that was the case due to the great price for the cameras themselves, kind of like a printer/ink business model. I was surprised when the RTSP firmware actually happened, although very minimally and unsupported.
4 Likes
Excellent observation! Actually they should be able to easily charge on a “per motion clip submitted for analysis” basis.
This would very accurately and fairly reflect the computing load being put on their cloud servers by any one user.
I’m an early adopter and have helped 5 family members set up there wyze cameras and smart homes. The reason I selected wyze was because there was no subscription model! I am ok with a wyze edge device (controller, hub, PC, etc.) that processes and stores camera video, does motion capture, person detection, etc. at the edge for $200+ and minimizes or eliminates the use of the cloud processing for personal data. A monthly subscription fee for every future cloud software feature is not for me. A better solution is to build your own edge wyze video server and integrate with smartthings, hubitat or build your own wyze hub that does both.
3 Likes
I think the approach outlined in the email covers this. Free if you want; pay if you choose. While anyone can sue for anything, if I were Wyze, I’d look for legal fee relief when the lawsuits fail.
Received this email today, since I did participate in the beta program. I did question the cloud long term feasibility in my mind, since cloud and processing images isn’t free.
As an owner of 6 Wyze Cams, I can say that moving to cloud compared to previous firmware person detection has SLOWED my entire network. The overhead to Wyze servers, isn’t just your burden, since it impacts my own house network.
I would propose that the AI model now be compressed to a cappuccino machine language code executable (this optimizes size to the smallest size with fastest is execution) to emulate previous onboard person detection. Write to MicroSD would mitigate cloud and personal network burden.
Hope this idea will emerge as phase 2 of person recognition.
4 Likes
Not sure if you are joking in some way. Cappuccino the Mac framework?
Will the cloud-based person detection perform better than the on-camera XNOR.ai? If you can eliminate false positives for shadows of trees moving the in wind that would be a significant upgrade. You could also save a lot of cloud storage by filtering out ambient lighting changes, shadows, and flying insects, dust, and leaves. I wouldn’t want to host that processing on my PC, but if you sold a tiny AI and storage booster box I’d be happy to plug it in and add it to my wifi to store all of the noise and extended video and only upload the relevant parts of good events to the cloud.
5 Likes
So far I would have to say no.
People are getting vey different results though.
1 Like
I second all of that.
As anyone would suspect, the cloud-based PD speed performance is worse that the on-camera PD, especially in marginal internet connection situations.
The accuracy performance is a toss up in my experience. Running one of each side by side in the same window, results have been more or less the same.
The difference is that only the new cloud based AI will ever be improved, so have to wait and see if that outweighs the responsiveness hit…
1 Like