The Future of Video Surveillance 38
An anonymous reader writes ""In heavily monitored London, England...the average person is filmed by more than 300 cameras each day." Technology Review outlines what we can expect from the eye in the sky in the near future."
away around it all (Score:5, Informative)
Re:away around it all (Score:1)
I guess the only bad part would be if they could automate the monitoring and build huge databases. But it's a long way (and an expensiv
Re:away around it all (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:away around it all (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:away around it all (Score:3, Informative)
Unfortunately, this is no longer necessarily the case. People in the UK were using the lack of personal identification as a defence to speeding charges. There are now a new breed of cameras found on our roads that face towards the driver rather than away precisely so that a clear facial image can be captured. If you think they can't clearly see you, try a web search for some of
Trafic cameras (Score:3, Informative)
I am assuming that it was only there as a deterent, and that the cops would not be sending out speeding tickets to those that where, but it sill bothers me that my licene plate was recorded when I was not speeding.
I live in the UK BTW.
* Not my real licence plate.
Why is it an issue? (Score:5, Insightful)
And no, the argument ' if you aren't doing anything wrong' is not acceptable. Its my life, they can goto hell they don't need to be watching me buy a damned burger or walk to my car.
Basic privacy is part of the rights of all people. This violates it.. but you people allow it in the name of 'safety'.. its not the governments job to take care of you , its YOURS.. get it straight and do it. This all has to stop.
Re:Why is it an issue? (Score:3, Interesting)
Dosent make it right. (Score:3, Insightful)
Its no one's business. Peroid.
There is a difference between being seen by a person on the other side of the street and recording your activites. Think about it really hard and you will also understand.
If you dont see it as being investigated, then you are part of the problem, for allowing it to happen.
Re:Dosent make it right. (Score:2)
So what do we do? We create a superclass to watch us, the government. It governs us, by definition. We asked them to keep up our public properties. They are responding the best way they know how. We want them to catch criminals, and they are responding. If all we really wanted (As a society) was privacy and protection
Re:Not quite right. (Score:3, Insightful)
You are taking a situation of necessity, and turning it into a justification for something that isn't correct, ethical, or warranted. If I want to get from my home to another location, I have no other reasonable alternative than to use the public roadways, walkways, and other areas. I believe these are often referred to as the commons - that is, resources available for the benefit and enj
Re:Why is it an issue? (Score:1)
So? Don't I have the right to not be treated like a criminal, or a rat in a cage? I am a free man, and deserve a certain amount of respect due simply to that fact alone. "Stay out of my business, and I'll stay out of yours." This basic precept is part of what allows society to function.
You're right that we've never had complete anonymity. But neither did we waive all right to privacy,
Re:Why is it an issue? (Score:1)
"Stay out of my business, and I'll stay out of yours."
Ok then, let's keep the government out of ALL your business, like maintaining roads, catching traffic offenders and criminals, providing emergency s
Re:Why is it an issue? (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't even know where to start attacking this post, so I'll just go through it piece by piece.
I drive safely and, by and large, legally. And yet, I have been flashed by speed cameras on several occasions now when I wasn't going over the limit. Maybe they were the fakes with cheap sensors, maybe they were misconfigured, who knows? It was certainly very unnerving at the time, and I spent the nex
Re:Why is it an issue? (Score:2)
its not the governments job to take care of you , its YOURS.. get it straight and do it. This all has to stop.
The primary job of government is, in fact, t
Re:away around it all (Score:2, Interesting)
Despite automated monitoring being a long way down the road, someone should still try to prevent it. This should be fought so that it doesn't become legal because it isn't explicitly illegal.
Not that it matters, because unless there are powerfull (read: rich) people reading /., then legislation will continue along the lines of their intere
Re:away around it all (Score:2)
Wear a hat, a fake beard and don't look up if you are that concerned!
What in the world would you be afraid of being seen by cameras for? They are 99% not monitored, they arent in any way linked so that someone could determine where you were going, and who cares where you are going anyways!
I hope people are spending time and money videotaping me, because its only going to damage their equipment
Re:away around it all (Score:1)
"Everything is deleted immediately." (Score:2)
"Trying to avoid provoking privacy fears, Keith Fallon, a Computer Recognition Systems project engineer, says, "we're not saving any of the information we capture. Everything is deleted immediately." But the company could change its mind and start saving the data at any time. No one on the road would know."
So, these are useful how?
Re:"Everything is deleted immediately." (Score:2)
Ubiquitous surveillance (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Ubiquitous surveillance (Score:3, Interesting)
The reasons we have surveillance cameras is, I guess, that they are cost effective. I don't see them going away (politically, there will always be something more pressing to spend money on, or so it will be argued).
But in the tradition of Juvenal, how about monitoring cameras
Re:Ubiquitous surveillance (Score:2)
That's the best argument against public usage you can make? Bear in mind, the act of placing the bomb is likely to be caught and stored, even if nobody realizes it at the time.
But in the tradition of Juvenal, how about monitoring cameras and microphones on each and every person who monitors the surveillance cameras, with public access?
Excellent solution. Came
Re:Ubiquitous surveillance (Score:1)
Sigh. People always make the mistake of going for extreeme examples. How about - my work may use it to see that I'm calling in sick or moonlighting or something. The media might use it to keep tabs on celebrities
Excellent solution. Cameras might be on every street corner, but nowhere will they be as numerous as in the police stations and City Hall. Public servants, after all...
Sounds like too much effort to me. To watch the watchers,
Re:Ubiquitous surveillance (Score:2)
The problem is that logs can be tampered with. I think the real solution is ala Greg Bear's books, where they have the Oversight office. On any given case you can make two petitions to oversight and ask them to give you access to insanely detailed records kept on every person; In most cases the requests are completely denied, or if you do get information back it's spotty as he
Re:Ubiquitous surveillance (Score:1)
That is true. Another possibility is the surveilance equipment would be tampered with to gain unauthorised and untraceable access. This leads me to the conclusion that most safguards are inadequate.
A double-edged sword (Score:4, Insightful)
As has been already said: like it or not, the cameras are here to stay. They serve many truly useful purposes. (The jury is still out as to whether tracking red-light scofflaws is among those useful purposes.) However, as we have seen many times, any useful technology can be abused. The only thing that will keep the Total Information Awareness project from becoming an Orwellian nightmare is the public's insistance on accountability. As an aside: Just don't ask me right now if I believe that the public is capable of insisting on any such thing. The short answer is cautiously optimistic, but not before we're slapped repeatedly in the face to make us aware again of why accountability is a Good Thing.
Re:A double-edged sword (Score:1)
You've hit the nail on the head. We are innocent until proven guilty. Every citizen has the right to not be treated like a criminal. Constant "panopticon" style surveillance is exactly that - treating every member of society like a criminal.
Laudatory desires for control? (Score:1)
But the rise of omnipresent surveillance will be driven as much by ordinary citizens' understandable--even laudatory--desires for security, control, and comfort as by the imperatives of business and government.
Am I the only one who finds the wording offensive? grr... good ordinary citizens opting for control my arse! When stuff like this gets printed in mass media I get pissed off...
Ergo... (Score:3, Funny)
In heavily monitored London, England...the average person is filmed by more than 300 cameras each day.
News Item: Residents of London England are reported to be much more fashionable of late since they became aware of being monitored.
"Yes, I've started combing my hair over my bald spot," said Jack Sprightly, pub owner in the East End.
"I've noticed a lot my customers, too, have started to shave on a more regular basis and to change their clothes before coming over to the pub from working in the garage."
"I'm all in favor of the new surveillance measures if it means `looking smart and proper' for a change."
"Most blokes are in favor of it once they find out the benefits," said Jack. "Many of them haven't had a date in years, but were pleasantly surprised how a few minutes of personal grooming has improved their lot in life."