Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Lockheed Martin Hardware to Protect NYC Transit

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 8 years ago | from the 1,984-watchful-eyes dept.

Security 436

Gerhardius writes "Lockheed Martin has been awarded a $212 million contract to provide cameras and sensors for New York City subways, bridges and tunnels." The entire program is being conducted under the guise of anti-terrorism and includes plans for a possible wireless network which would allow cellular phones to be used in case of emergency.

cancel ×

436 comments

IN SOVIET RUSSIA (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13385682)

NYC transit protected LOCKHEED!!!

lol gay niggers 20721 k5 omg wtf

PROOF OR STFU (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13385689)

lol niggers

Lockheed? (2, Interesting)

Eightyford (893696) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385690)

I thought they only made airplanes? Tell me Cheney wasn't CEO of them too...

I'm only half joking by the way, karma be damned.

Re:Lockheed? (1)

varmittang (849469) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385728)

You will be surprised, they make a whole lot of that don't deal with planes. And much of that stuff is Security related.

Re:Lockheed? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13386129)

lol what?

that was a long time ago (4, Insightful)

mnemonic_ (164550) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385744)

Lockheed Martin is now the world's largest defense contractor, handling everything from sea/air/land/space vehicle development to "system of systems" integration (which basically could be anything). Had they merged with Northrop (as was planned) in the 90s, they would have had a good chance at stifling Boeing's growth into the defense market.

Re:Lockheed? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13385815)

I love how people make extreme left-wing comments and then add, "I hope my karma won't suffer for this." Seriously, people, this is Slashdot. Saying "Bush may not be evil" is more likely to get a -1, Troll.

Re:Lockheed? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13385916)

Y'know, Bush might not really be all that evil.

Re:Lockheed? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13385952)

How many buttes [buttes.com] exsist in the universe?

Re:Lockheed? (1)

glitch23 (557124) | more than 8 years ago | (#13386024)

Lockheed Martin also is involved in the Information Technology sector. The LMIT division of Lockheed Martin does a lot of consulting for the gov't (myself being a subcontractor on multiple projects with some LMIT employees). There is also the LMIS (Information Services) division. Not being an LM employee I do not know the differences between the 2 divisions but I do believe they are minor. In any case, both divisions provide consulting services to the gov't in the information technology sector.

In other news (2, Funny)

superpulpsicle (533373) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385697)

New subway train panels are now armed with homing missiles. Followed by M-16s under every seat in case of emergency. Train headlights have also been replaced with vulcan cannons.

So... (0)

game kid (805301) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385852)

...the next arcade shooter won't have fighter jets?

Kick ass. I'd love to be a express train op, blasting any local-stop trains that get in the way.

Yes, I can imagine it. Raiden IV--blast militant gangs, corrupt cops and the occasional billionaire Mayor (in his giant metallic mothership, of course)...with a missle-toting flying train. And a purple proton laser. Or something.

(Well, III [the-magicbox.com] was taken, so...)

Re:In other news (1)

teledyne (325332) | more than 8 years ago | (#13386003)

What's so funny about the parent post?

They really do.

traffic cams (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13385702)

I am sure this will work as well as the traffic cams the monitor in maryland .....

I wonder if the cameras will run some form of linux?
or maybe just some type of rtos.

Re:traffic cams (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13385886)

I wonder if the cameras will run some form of linux?
or maybe just some type of rtos.


The Pentagon only allows Microsoft Windows operating-systems. For security reasons.

Guise? (5, Insightful)

Rayaru (898516) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385703)

It seems pretty a fairly legit description of what the money is being used for.

Re:Guise? (4, Insightful)

CrazyJim1 (809850) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385750)

Yah, I think Congress really tries to do its best for homeland security, and not knowing what is feasably possible, they try everything, and chalk wasted dollars up to "research", since they learned what is feasable and what is not.

I'm sure its very lucrative to get one of thse government jobs to install technology or research dynamite smelling bacteria. I'm curious how surveillance is going to work. At first thought it doesn't seem like it is somehow going to be able to detect and prevent terrorists? I bet it will cut down on the number of people who jump over the subway tool booths.

Re:Guise? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13385807)

Your reference to the tube killing is outdated, records have recently been released revealing that Menezes did not do any of the things described in the initially media reports. Wikinews entry, content less valuable than source links but linked for ease of reference to those source links: http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Brazilian_shot_by_poli ce_on_London_Underground_was_not_acting_suspicious ly [wikinews.org]

Re:Guise? (1)

TapeCutter (624760) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385900)

Public video cameras are impartial, thier evidence cuts both ways and keeps everyone "honest".

welcome to slashdot (5, Funny)

mnemonic_ (164550) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385796)

Security cameras are in every supermarket, mall and gas station in the US, and motion sensors are installed in many utility tunnels already (too many urban explorers these days). I guess ScuttleMonkey is trying to say that these cameras and sensors will be actually used to spy on molemen. The US government has never respected the rights of its good, subway-living, citizens.

Heaven forbid they track people's pictures and locations! Who knew that 9-11 could lead to the security-measures of a 7-11?

Re:Guise? (2, Insightful)

ciroknight (601098) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385813)

For how long? If you ask me, people's jump to conclusions about the risk of terrorism are the same people who would jump to conclusions about Jews, African Americans, or any other conclusion that was sponsored by the state.

Anti-Terrorism means Anti-freedom. The terrorists have won because we have allowed them to. We're all now so afraid of using public transport we have to install sensors and cameras, and so instead we drive our cars, harming the environment, and costing us a fortune due to the newly raised gas prices, which, one could argue, the money trail leads right back to the terrorists through OPEC. (Of course, this is highly speculative, and reactionary; it'd be nearly impossible to follow the money through OPEC)

At least they should have said what the cameras would be used for. "Hey, people. If you want the police to be able to catch criminals in subways, instead of us sticking officers down there, we're gonna stick a camera. While an officer might be able to catch the person right away, a camera will catch it all on film, where it'll be more useful to the prosecution, but not nessicarly help you right away.

"We know this is an inconvienience, but you are in a public place, and your expectation of privacy is little if any. We won't use this to spy on you, so you don't have to wear your tinfoil hats. But it'll be cheaper than sticking a bunch of cops down there. Thanks, that's all."

Re:Guise? (1)

goodcow (654816) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385917)

Unless you yourself live in New York, please don't claim the terrorists have won because "we're all now so afraid of using public transport."

I live in New York. I'm not afraid to use the busses and subways, and considering I get onto a cram-packed 6 train every day, the vast majority of my fellow-New Yorkers don't either.

These measures, even if they are in reaction to terrorism, should've been put in place years ago anyway for the simple fact of keeping people out of locations they shouldn't be in in the first place. They'll also have the side benefit of contributing to convictions for crimes by street thugs like robberies.

As for the argument that there should be cops there instead, for one, with the amount of stations, and the grand size of the systems, this just isn't practical from a financial standpoint. And secondly, I would find it more invasive to have cops at every entrance and exit rather than cameras.

Re:Guise? (2, Insightful)

wytcld (179112) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385922)

The point from the recent London bombings would be that the cameras allowed the police to quickly identify the perps and zero in on their accomplices -- and an innocent Brazilian electrician.

The way to balance this stuff is to make a whole lot of stuff no longer criminal. Yes, go after the real terrorists. No, don't use these cameras to stop kids from selling pot to each other. Yes, catch muggers with them. No, don't bust people for drinking a cola where you don't want them to. If you get rid of the laws which provide for all sorts of silly and wasteful reasons for busting people, then cameras aren't on balance a bad thing. Unless the person watching you through them just happens to know the person you're kissing passionately on the platform is not your spouse, and uses the facial-features database to ring your cell phone to demand payment for silence.

But really, do the sort of people who'd do that live in New York City??

Re:Guise? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13386112)

We're all now so afraid of using public transport we have to install sensors and cameras, and so instead we drive our cars...

You don't live in NYC, do you? Real New Yorkers don't even own cars.

Re:Guise? (1)

hereschenes (813329) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385863)

I'm with you man. Mod the article description as Flamebait. Just because there have been some questionable decisions and terrible mistakes committed with respect to preventing terrorists from carrying out their perverted desires... it doesn't mean that every anti-terrorist action is automatically tainted.

Guise?-Porn Bill. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13386048)

In keeping with Slashdot. Maybe they should have said "under the guise of porn".

Re:Guise? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13386095)

Yea it is tainted.

Look, I agree, attacking civilian targets is bitch. But people don't act without a motive, regardless of how sick, deranged, ill, or angry they are. It's important to understand your enemies motives and goals.

Israel was officially created after WWII by the Allies. Israel and Palestine have been at war with each other for fifty years. We continue to support Israel today.

Israel is the main reason why the Islamic extreme give a fuck about the USA.

So great, a bunch of cameras. Catch the guy blowing himself up on camera, really useful. I'd rather our government take the whole sum of money they have devoted to 'Homeland Security' and put it towards education. Instead we have the rich people in power, taking money from the rest of us, and giving it to each other with bullshit backpats like this one.

Also, note: TWELVE MILLION DOLLARS. You think no one else could do it for less? Please. I'll do it for 5!

Re:Guise? (1)

snuf23 (182335) | more than 8 years ago | (#13386055)

Yep. It's a guise. Actually this is being funded by RIAA/MPAA. The cameras have super magneto xray vision and can detect illegal MP3 bits located on any iPod. OGG isn't supported yet, but word on the street is that it's coming.
The also sniff out DVDR and CDR content with a 97.1% accuracy.
All this information is cross referenced through a massive database and whammo you get sent a check for the exact cost of everything illegal in your possesion.
Works just like those insta-ticket traffic cameras.

I for one... (3, Funny)

Wazukkithemaster (826055) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385707)

Welcome our new cellphone using, military aircraft designing, subway securing overlords? no wait... you just want to know whats in my bag...

Guise? (2, Insightful)

bwalling (195998) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385713)

The entire program is being conducted under the guise of anti-terrorism

Or, it's possible that it really is about prevention of attacks. NYC is a very likely target and everyone just saw what happened in London. Of course, if it makes you happier to believe that everyone is out to get you, then go on.

Re:Guise? (1)

bhirsch (785803) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385768)

You must be new here.

How would it prevent the kind of stuff (1, Redundant)

melted (227442) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385775)

How would it prevent the kind of stuff that happened in London, though? Can this thing see trhough the backpack of a suicide bomber?

To me the whole thing looks like another instance of "synergy" between government and a large corporation whereby a little bit of my (taxpayer's) money gets given to some execs at LM with a bit of help from some senator whom they helped to get elected.

Will it solve ANY problem at all? I highly doubt it.

Re:Guise? (4, Insightful)

nuggz (69912) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385798)

This will work because
A The cameras in London stopped the first attack
B The cameras in London stopped the second attack.
C The 9/11 attackers used their own ID to board the plane.
D In all the above attacks the perpetrators were caught on film before the attacks, so this is obviously effective somehow.

Massive invasions of privacy and surveillance don't stop terrorist attacks. Adding information to overloaded analysis systems won't stop terrorist attacks. Adding more laws and giving more power to law enforcement won't stop terrorist attacks. Invading other countries won't stop terrorist attacks.

Properly analysing the information that is available might help thwart attacks.

In many of the recent attacks both the technique, target and perpetrators were already KNOWN. Law enforcement was just unable to effectively use that knowledge.

These plans seem to have it backwards, the problem isn't that the information doesn't exist, it's that people don't know what to do with it.

Re:Guise? (5, Insightful)

DDiabolical (902284) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385837)

The usual ignorance.

The cameras in London enabled them to identity who the suicide bombers were. If a suicide bomber jumped on a train on the underground in NYC, and blew himself up, we couldn't even figure out who did it!

The images captured in the London attacks meant the police could find out who they were, where they lived, who they had contact with, where they had travelled, etc etc etc.

The failed July 21st attacks meant the police could track them down, and arrest them!

You can't even comprehend the amount of intelligence that may have now been attained with the arrests of these terrorists.

However, you seem happy enough to let terrorists try and try again, without knowing who is behind attacks, until they're successful.

Re:Guise? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13385908)

The cameras in London enabled them to identity who the suicide bombers were.
But strangely enough when they shot one of the 'identified' terrorists it turned out that he wasn't one after all. Even stranger is the fact that apparently all cameras where off during this little incident...

Re:Guise? (1)

hobbes75 (245657) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385980)

Rarely saw such an insightful comment of an Anonymous Coward.

Re:Guise? (2, Insightful)

Vile Slime (638816) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385910)

> If a suicide bomber jumped on a train on the underground in NYC, and blew himself up, we couldn't even figure out who did it!

I hardly think you're right. The bombers aren't trying to make any big secret about who they are. As evidenced by the 9-11 hijackers, they carried legitimate ids.

You basically have a set of people who thumb their noses at others and are quite happy to smile into the cameras as they do it (or carry an id, i.e. 9-11). They want people to know who they are in a sense.

On a similar note, I hear it happens all the time in London with common crooks (am I wrong) where they don't care, they just need to steal that ipod to get their next fix, who cares if they look into the camera.

Re:Guise? (5, Insightful)

TheNationalist (908193) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385931)

Actually, the London bombers were first identified by their identification cards found at the scene of the crime, not the camera footage. The camera footage was merely used as auxillary information.

Besides, if a person is going to blow himself up, how will cameras help at all? It surely isn't going to deter them.

Re:Guise? (0)

rblum (211213) | more than 8 years ago | (#13386007)

The cameras in London enabled them to identity who the suicide bombers were. If a suicide bomber jumped on a train on the underground in NYC, and blew himself up, we couldn't even figure out who did it!


That's certainly worth $212 million - the bastard might do it again!

Re:Guise? (4, Insightful)

pi_rules (123171) | more than 8 years ago | (#13386082)

The cameras in London enabled them to identity who the suicide bombers were. If a suicide bomber jumped on a train on the underground in NYC, and blew himself up, we couldn't even figure out who did it!


Good point. Suicide bombers don't leave ANY evidence behind that might clue people into their identity.

Except their body.

The images captured in the London attacks meant the police could find out who they were, where they lived, who they had contact with, where they had travelled, etc etc etc.


No, it only told them what they looked like. They still had to figure out who they were, where they lived, who they had contact with, where they have travelled, etc.

You're being lied to. Wake up.

Re:Guise? (0)

Stephen Samuel (106962) | more than 8 years ago | (#13386134)

The images captured in the London attacks meant the police could find out who they were, where they lived, who they had contact with, where they had travelled, etc etc etc.

Yep... They picked up the pieces and gave them a life sentence.... Or is that a death sentence?

I'm guessing that there are already cameras in the NYC underground, so it wouldn't be that hard to figure out who blew themselves up there, today.

Thing to note here is that they're going far beyond that. Most of the city is going to end up wired for sound. 1984 was dated 20 years too early.

Re:Guise? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13385846)

Amen brotha

Re:Guise? (3, Insightful)

That's Unpossible! (722232) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385857)

I would also like to criticize the use of the word "guise," but I have the sick feeling that the editor that used this word doesn't understand what "guise" means.

This will work because
A The cameras in London stopped the first attack
B The cameras in London stopped the second attack.
C The 9/11 attackers used their own ID to board the plane.
D In all the above attacks the perpetrators were caught on film before the attacks, so this is obviously effective somehow.


You are ignorant because

A. You don't realize that cameras are normally intended to collect data about perpetrators after the fact.

B. This is how they were used in London.

C. They worked. They identified all the perpetrators in the first attack, and in the second failed attack, led to their arrests.

Massive invasions of privacy and surveillance don't stop terrorist attacks.

What privacy do you have on a subway? Just curious. Your subway must be different than mine.

Re:Guise? (5, Informative)

TheNationalist (908193) | more than 8 years ago | (#13386016)

To correct some of your information:

C. They worked. They identified all the perpetrators in the first attack, and in the second failed attack, led to their arrests.

Photo identification left at the scene of the crime identified the bombers. The photos from the cameras merely acted as auxiliary information. You can read the whole chain of events here [bbc.co.uk] .

Re:Guise? (2, Interesting)

timeOday (582209) | more than 8 years ago | (#13386021)

What privacy do you have on a subway? Just curious.
One minimum standard of privacy (perhaps not relevant to the cameras) is the freedom from being patted down or searched, unless there is some particular reason and a warrant:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
However, the majority [newsday.com] do not care for this particular provision any more. We also have random car searches, which are in flagrant violation of the same ammendment, but you can't tell the Supreme Court that.

Re:Guise? (1)

IO ERROR (128968) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385883)

These plans seem to have it backwards, the problem isn't that the information doesn't exist, it's that people don't know what to do with it.

In this case, it really is that the information doesn't exist. The MTA has doesn't have that many cameras in the subway system.

In addition, the proposed system is supposed to have computer software which will detect suspicious packages, though how it does that I have no idea. Consider:

Lockheed Martin will lead a team of contractors in creating an "integrated electronic security system" that will include closed-circuit television cameras, motion detectors and "intelligent video" software that can automatically determine if a package has been left on a train or if a person is in a restricted area.

Sounds interesting. Anyone have more info on how this system works?

Re:Guise? (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385812)

AT WHAT COST

You can't even travel on the subway in NYC without getting your bags checked by police. If it wasn't for the terrorist threat that kind of shit would never be accepted. So what's next? They'll ask everyone for ID. No doubt. They probably already do this and note down the name of anyone who "looks suspicious" but you can guarentee that before the end of the year they will be asking everyone for ID and a pat down with a metal detector. So now we've got cameras and motion detectors as well. Great.

All this means that anyone who can afford to avoid the subway will do so (even more than people already do in NYC). Which means it's the poor who are going to receive most of the scrutiny from the police. A false arrest will not result in a speedy dismissal, so what have we got? A new and improved way for NYC cops to round up the poor.

Constant police presence in public places with the power to search and harrass people who have broken no laws is how totalitarian states are born.

Re:Guise? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13385864)

You can't travel the subway in NYC without contracting a venereal disease either. So what?

Re:Guise? (1)

jemfinch (94833) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385961)

More probably, the story submitter is just a standard illiterate slashbot who doesn't know that "guise" implies an ulterior motive.

Jeremy

X10 (5, Funny)

blueadept1 (844312) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385717)

BUY X10 SUBWAY CAMS NOW ONLY $249.95

Protect your subway, underground, or sewage pipes with these 180 full degree motion cams! BONUS!!11 Purchase X10 ULTRA MONITORING SOFTWARE and get a FREE Voyeurcam! Great for putting under street drains!

With X10, privacy is obselete! (TM)

Re:X10 (3, Funny)

cagle_.25 (715952) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385996)

Da*n, I thought I could only get spam through my e-mail. Now's it's on Slashdot, too?!

Re:X10 (1)

glitch23 (557124) | more than 8 years ago | (#13386067)

With X10, privacy is obselete! (TM)

So is proper spelling.

Under the GUISE of anti-terrorism (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13385718)

But we all know this is just an excuse to stop the rampant urination. But without the urine, it won't be the NYC subway any more and the terrorists will have won.

Re:Under the GUISE of anti-terrorism (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13386063)

mod parent up!

Well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13385734)

...I think I'm going to change my major to something "anti-terroristic" like. Seems like thats where the money is gonna be!

(Wow - funny, my non-script confirmation is "terrors." I guess someone already graduated in this field...)

Hey... (4, Funny)

Psionicist (561330) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385745)

At least they are not homemade endoscopes.

Re:Hey... (1)

WAG24601G (719991) | more than 8 years ago | (#13386005)

At least they are not homemade endoscopes.

No, no... those will be used at the ticketing gates.

Pesky Metric System (2, Interesting)

MooseByte (751829) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385746)


Fortunately transit security cameras are free from such pesky issues as the fatal mixing of metric and English units of measure.

The guise of anti-terrorism? (0, Flamebait)

bhirsch (785803) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385756)

I would love to hear what the "real" reason is for cameras in subways. Maybe if I put on my tin foil hat it will come to me.
  1. Cameras in subways
  2. ...
  3. Profit!

Re:The guise of anti-terrorism? (1)

Gruneun (261463) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385997)


1. Cameras in subways
2. ...
3. Profit!


It's government contracting, so there is no second step. In fact, if Lockheed does it right, the first step really isn't required, either.

I kid, but I say this as one of those "slimy government contractors" working for a competitor in another sector. In reality, I don't think they're installing the cameras under the guise of anti-terrorism action with some nefarious intention, nor do I think that Lockheed is invading a passenger's privacy (on a subway platform? what privacy?).

Is Lockheed taking advantage of the situation, meaning a plump contract that was created out of equal shares necessity and fear? Sure. Why wouldn't they?

Motion Sensors (2, Interesting)

Malyven (774978) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385762)

How sensitive are these sensors going to be? I am assuming they will only been in low traffic areas (because putting a motion sensor in a high traffic area is a little silly) which doesn't really seem to be MO of any attacks that I know of. Also in those areas could they not be set off by some of those larger than normal NYC Rats?

Re:Motion Sensors (1)

YrWrstNtmr (564987) | more than 8 years ago | (#13386062)

So in high traffic areas, they are going all the time. Sounds good to me. And high traffic areas aren't necassarily high traffic 24/7.
In low traffic areas, they are going only when motion is detected. Again, sounds good to me.

As far as the giant NYC rats...even a cheapo Logitech cam allows a sensitivity adjustment before it triggers.

Video surveilance sure worked well in London (2, Insightful)

nihilistcanada (698105) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385778)

Well, other than providing the executives of Lockheed-Martin with yet another banner bonus year this will do zero to prevent terrorism. The UK has more video surveillance than anywhere on the earth. Yet amazingly enough terrorists found their way onto the subways and busses and killed scores of people. When people are willing to kill themselves in an attack video surveillance means nothing. All it provides is a good set of pictures for Islamist websites to make an online martyrs shrine with.

Re:Video surveilance sure worked well in London (2, Insightful)

twb010 (822875) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385828)

true, cameras do little to prevent terrorism. they are there to catch the people that did it.

Re:Video surveilance sure worked well in London (4, Insightful)

Mazem (789015) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385969)

As if fear of punishment is going to deter a suicide bomber...

Re:Video surveilance sure worked well in London (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13386157)

Right so instead of spending millions more in cash on something that won't STOP an attack and is moving us further down the road toward a 1984ish society where every thing you do outside of your domicile is videotaped in the name of "security" why don't we put that money and effort towards preventing the terrorists from reaching the subway with their bombs in the first place.

I don't have a problem with cameras in general but when the govt is using my tax money to turn the country into a survelliance state where I can be monitored like some criminal in C-block every time I step out the front door well that is just not what I consider being FREE.

I'm just waiting... (1)

West VA Flamer (638423) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385787)

For when police start to ask "are you a terrorist?" in thier usual barage of questions. Protection and domination merge at somepoint and it seems to me that that point is approaching soon.

Re:I'm just waiting... (1)

snuf23 (182335) | more than 8 years ago | (#13386077)

Reminds me of the brief time after September 11th that you had to check the "no I'm not using the computer for terrorist activities" box when purchasing a new computer.

Re:I'm just waiting... (1)

MavEtJu (241979) | more than 8 years ago | (#13386158)

Are you, or have you ever been, a suicide-bomber?

Yet again idiots win! (5, Insightful)

isotope23 (210590) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385792)

The article even says it can't stop a suicide bomber. But hey, lets burn any semblance of privacy for feel good measures instead of
looking at the root causes.Why does noone EVER mention in the media that by playing global corporate cop around the world we PISS people off? I can tell you right now that if the chinese or russians were over here, inevitably some americans would be suicide bombers against them.

Cause and effect.

It's sad to think we went from men like this:

"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775.

or this :

"They that can give up essential liberty, to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin

or this:

"If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest for freedom, go home and leave us in peace. We seek not your council nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen."

--Samuel Adams

To the SHEEPLE we have today.

I guess Franklin was right,

The deliberations of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 were held in strict secrecy. Consequently, anxious citizens gathered outside Independence Hall when the proceedings ended in order to learn what had been produced behind closed doors. The answer was provided immediately. A Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin, "Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?" With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, "A republic, if you can keep it."

Re:Yet again idiots win! (1)

william_w_bush (817571) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385842)

Yeah, while I agree with you on our side, don't forget we're just afraid of the sheeple lined up on the other side of the field hearing "So you have these 50 virgins and they are completely submissive to your will...".

In a battle of wits both sides have been disarmed by their leaders. Just be glad nobody is actually fighting in this semi-standoff, when the buildup phase of the defense budget hits saturation a war will break out because they have nothing better to do with themselves.

Re:Yet again idiots win! (1)

isotope23 (210590) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385947)

You understand they are over here because WE ARE OVER THERE, and have been since the Cold War?
What would your natural reaction be if an Iraqi army was occupying Washington D.C.?

We toppled a democratic government in Iran, and put the Shah in power. Then we act shocked when the people over there revolt and are pissed at us? We have troops around Mecca, and the holy sites in Iraq and yet "they hate us for our freedom"? We are playing at empire, and terrorism is its natural consequence.

You know the best part? The asshats in power let us deal with the fallout while they have their praetorian guards and run for a "secure and undisclosed location" whenever the shit hits the fan. I bet we could fix all this with a simple constitutional amendment :

"All elected officals must solely use PUBLIC transportaion during the course of their term."

If you want a government of the people, by the people and for the people, you can't be afraid of mingling with them can you?

Re:Yet again idiots win! (1)

cagle_.25 (715952) | more than 8 years ago | (#13386100)

You make a good point, but it's not enough.

Why is Iraq in 2005 so different from Japan in 1945? We did far more and far worse to the Japanese people and to their egos, than we ever did to the Iraqis. Yet Japan went almost immediately on a trajectory to having good relations with the U.S.

Or consider this: if the Iraqis just want us out of there, then why do some of them continue to carry out actions that will prolong our stay? It's not too difficult to see that if the insurgents took a break for a couple of years, then public pressure would bring the U.S. troops home and ... bada bing, bada boom ... the insurgents would have no competition anymore. Yet they don't take that approach. It's inexplicable on a simple "imperialist oppressor" model.

Or this: why did Afghanistan become the breeding ground for terrorists? We'd never been there.

I think the "imperialist" analysis is over-simplified. Factors like oil, Israel, Islam v. Christianity going back to the Battle of Tours [wikipedia.org] in AD732, and the perception of the U.S. as a "Christian nation" all play a non-negligible role.

And yes, even hatred of some of our freedoms -- the rights of women, the right to free speech including porn, and the right to worship (or not) without molestation -- plays a role.

Re:Yet again idiots win! (1)

Zorque (894011) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385936)

I, myself, am sick of the "terrorist" label being thrown around as often as it is. If I never hear the word again, it will be too soon. However, how does having security cameras and motion sensors violate basic rights? Oh, no. They're watching me walk and get on and off the train. It's not like you're doing anything in a subway that the Government really wants to know about (provided you're not a terrorist yourself, of course).

Re:Yet again idiots win! (1)

isotope23 (210590) | more than 8 years ago | (#13386030)

However, how does having security cameras and motion sensors violate basic rights?

Hmmm lets try this :

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. "

I'd say if I pay taxes to build the damn subway, then I've got a right to privacy when I use it.

Don't forget the random searches of bags etc. ant to bet if they find drugs or whatever during said search they'll arrest the poor slob?

I was under the impression that we are presumed INNOCENT until proven guilty. (Quaint I know) I guess I was one of the few who actually paid attention in Civics.....

Re:Yet again idiots win! (1)

iceanfire (900753) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385964)

What exactly are you trying to protect? Your right to privacy in a public place? That sounds kinda stupid seeing as how other passengers are constantly violating that 'right' anyways. I agree that if they started installing cams in your house/other private property, then you'd have something to rant about. But it seems kinda silly to do so otherwise.

Example : Walmart is allowed to have cameras in it's property for security, why doesn't anyone wail about their right to privacy there? In the same way I think the subway is owned by someone (most likely the govt) and the fact that they want to install cams on it, seems fine to me.

Also while it may not prevent suicide bombings, at the very least it can help us find those who plant bombs and leave the spot (also may act as a detterrent to those who are less faithfull to their cause).

I agree that privacy is important, but that doesn't mean its the only thing that is important.

Re:Yet again idiots win! (1)

Geoffreyerffoeg (729040) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385976)

To the SHEEPLE we have today.

Woo, I'm going to oppose conformism, so I'm going to join everyone who uses the term "sheeple" -- without even defending the usage! We're all different! We're all individuals, just like everyone else!

Why does noone EVER mention in the media that by playing global corporate cop around the world we PISS people off?

Of course we do. But then what do you do now? Suppose...right now...you become president/dictator/whatever of the US. How do you...un-piss-off the world? Withdraw the troops? You're going to have a few people in some locations (areas of Africa and Eastern Europe come to mind) mad at you for taking away the peacekeeping forces. And then you're going to have the people who're already pissed off, take advantage of the opportunity and attack.

There ain't much you can do. To use another analogy...even if you have an abortion, you've still lost your virginity. The US has been acting like world police for long enough that you can't expect anyone to be nice if we just stop it today.

Oh, and I don't think security cameras are quite "chains and slavery". If you like quotes, how about this:

"Now I make it my earnest prayer that God would...incline the hearts of the citizens to cultivate a spirit of subordination and obedience to government...." -George Washington (the original version, actually, not the modified misquote.)

And do you even know what a republic is? It's a system of government that isn't a monarchy and rules by the right of the people to form a government (as opposed to, say, the divine right of kings and such nonsense). It does not have to be a democracy. Even Iran is a republic - a theocratic one, granted, but definitely a republic and not a monarchy.

You live in an ivory tower (2, Interesting)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 8 years ago | (#13386041)

I live in Times Square New York City.

Until September 11, 2001, I worked at the World Trade Center.

I just watched the same religious militants bomb the London Underground.

I have ancestors who fought and died in the Revolutionary War.

So you know what I think?

I say put the cameras on the subway already.

Am I scared? Am I giving up freedom for safety? Am I giving up rights hard fought for by my ancestors for a little sense of security?

No, I'm simply being prudent about the world we live in.

This is not Orwellian Big Brother going on, really. No one is burning any books and telling you what to think. I'm not giving up any rights. There's no fascism going on. There's no fundamentalism going on. Really. This is simply prudent deterrance going on here. REALLY. There are no jackbooted thugs. There are no secret police. There is no slippery slope. This is not a paranoid schizophrenic scifi fantasy world. This is not a Hollywood dystopian B-grade plot. There is no Sith Lord. There is no Agent Smith.

R-E-A-L-L-Y.

Welcome to reality, leave your histrionic idealism at the door. You're not being helpful, you're just being a loud angry child who can only keep track of one simplistic concept in your mind: idealistic appeals to Revolutionary War era sloganeering.

It doesn't have one damn thing to do with cameras in the subway.

Not one. Grow up and develop an appreciation for the complexity of real life. Hopeless hysterical idealism doesn't help at all.

Give me a break. Loud children without any appreciation for nuance in this world. You know how to thump your chest and act indignant when someone waves propaganda about all of our rights going down the toilet.

The only thing going on here is just a whole hell of a lot of hysterical simplistic children.

Very loud, very pathetic. Of no help to the problems facing us at all.

Re:You live in an ivory tower (0, Troll)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 8 years ago | (#13386080)

Go back to Kuro5hin.

Not for you! (3, Insightful)

dj245 (732906) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385809)

The entire program is being conducted under the guise of anti-terrorism and includes plans for a possible wireless network which would allow cellular phones to be used in case of emergency.

Any wireless network underground, while helpful, would probably collapse under the traffic of a few hundred people in a packed train (assuming an incident occured during rush hour). Since you cannot predict an attack, it is likely that these circuits would be dedicated to emergency services from the start or switched over to emergency services should an incident occur, just like many main wireless traffic circuits were in London. The security of calling home to tell people you're ok should something happen from inside a tube just isn't there and never will be.

$212 Million (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13385810)

State of the art security system: $212 Million
Having to take a shit in a NYC subway station bathroom and contracting 10 STDs: Priceless

Bullshit - Penn & Teller say so... (2, Funny)

NotQuiteReal (608241) | more than 8 years ago | (#13386146)

STDs from a toilet? Bullshit!

See Penn & Teller, Season 2, episode 2? Maybe... I forget which it was exactly, but I can say from personal experience that I have never contracted an STD from a NYC subway toilet!

"Cameras" at JFK airport in NYC (3, Interesting)

EMIce (30092) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385835)

I was there yesterday and quite a few devices were sitting above the sliding doors and in a row along the ceiling as you came into the terminal, and they were oval shaped. They rotated on a platform and spun on a spindle, giving them 360 degrees of freedom. Each white oval was maybe 1.5 feet by 1 foot in diameter and they seemed to follow and track things, mobilizing suddenly at times, but remaining in default position most of the time.

The thing is the each egg shaped "camera" seemed to point with either a lens on one end the oval or a square shaped opening on the opposite side. The square shaped side I imagine has some other sort of detection ability. They looked big and expensive, and I was kind of curious what sort of tech goes into these.

Is anyone on slashdot working on these sorts of applications? Maybe someone could shed some light on what sort of sensory abilities these things have?

Re:"Cameras" at JFK airport in NYC (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13385871)

Same poster as above here. Another thing of note were what looked like fins along the ovals, so it appeared like they needed considerable cooling.

Sounds like Google (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13386075)

Sounds like Google IM isn't the only big news of the day... maybe they're monitoring your movements, behavior, etc. to put adsense on the trains.

Good for NYC (5, Interesting)

malchus6 (870609) | more than 8 years ago | (#13385851)

Lockheed is a quality defense contractor, and they Already [lockheedmartin.com] do good work in NYC with the NY/NJ Port Authority (bridges and tunnels). So alot of the work probably overlaps in the homeland security realm. Nothing wrong with a keeping things under one umbrella. One less layer of problems to deal with...

But they should also.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13385866)

improve the standard of smelly subways and stations. No proper air ventilation adds to this problem. That would prolly *kill* more people than some lunatic terrorist.

And the war on terror (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13385873)

rings in another sale!

not for security (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13385874)

the article states two scenarios: In the first, a person tries to enter a secure facility using an expired electronic access card; a computer detects and signals the security breach on an aerial photograph of the area. Officials would pinpoint the site, watch the attempted entry on a video monitor and send a security officer to check out the situation. this is the first reason they give, that if someone tries to "enter a secure facility", the subway, the cops will pick them up. THERE IS NO CHANCE A TERRORIST WONT PAY $2 TO BLOW UP A SUBWAY CAR, this is only to catch poor people, teens, and other minorities. the second reason stated in the article is if a bag is left in an area, they will see it and then evacuate the area. How is this worth 220 million.

Yet anothe PR bullshitter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13385904)

Lockheed Martin is not protecting ANYBODY

All Lockheed Martin is doing is sitting back and getting rich on goverment contracts and laughing to the bank. Just take a look at the war in iraq and other lucrative contracts that they get.

The only ones protecting anybody is the New York Police Department, and the Soldiers in Iraq.

Re:Yet anothe PR bullshitter (2, Insightful)

netrangerrr (455862) | more than 8 years ago | (#13386052)

"The only ones protecting anybody is the New York Police Department, and the Soldiers in Iraq."
How about the Soldiers in Afganistan and the Special Ops guys in Pakistan trying to find and kill the Al Qaeda leadership? Oops, we got distracted and forgot about Bin Laden!

Boots on the Ground Security (1)

netrangerrr (455862) | more than 8 years ago | (#13386017)

$212 million could put an armed & trained police officer on every train and loading platform in NYC for about 2 years. Train them on the profile and MO of terrorists and have them question people who match the profile (no random search crap) that would be real "boots on the ground" security. You might actually PREVENT an attack.

if only London had this... (1)

weighn (578357) | more than 8 years ago | (#13386020)

Then we would have fantastic footage of the execution-style murder of Jean Charles de Menezes...

What problem does this solve? (0, Troll)

SuperBanana (662181) | more than 8 years ago | (#13386032)

In the first, a person tries to enter a secure facility using an expired electronic access card; a computer detects and signals the security breach on an aerial photograph of the area.

And this is needed because a piece of paper with "where each card reader is physically located" isn't sexy enough?

Officials would pinpoint the site, watch the attempted entry on a video monitor and send a security officer to check out the situation.

...because you can't just send a "security officer" in the first place? And do we really think that our intrepit Bad Dude will stick around to have a chat with the "security officer"?

In the second, a briefcase is left on a busy Midtown subway platform. As a camera beams live images, software can differentiate the moving people from the motionless package, sending off an alert about an unattended, suspicious object. Police officers with bomb-sniffing dogs would be sent to the platform.

...and if it actually is a bomb, by the time they've figured out "hey, we should go down there and check it out", it blows up. If it doesn't, it's just some guy's briefcase he absent-mindedly forgot on the platform.

Plus thanks to cell phone coverage, terrorists can now leave IED's with cell phones for activators on a train...

I'd rather they spend it on air conditioning (1)

tinrobot (314936) | more than 8 years ago | (#13386036)

Seriously, have you ever been in a New York Subway in August?

Talk about toxic.

But you still get mugged. (1)

tekrat (242117) | more than 8 years ago | (#13386047)

Why is it that even with all this increased security in the the name of 'protecting the American public', you still have as much crime as ever in the subway?

How can homeland security ever hope to thwart a terrorist, if they can't thwart a 15-year-old with a glock?

I don't think anybody feels safer in the subway, just try riding the 'F' train at midnight and you'll notice that it still has the same level of crime as pre-9/11.

Laughing Man (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13386083)

"Lockheed Martin has been awarded a $212 million contract to provide cameras and sensors for New York City subways, bridges and tunnels." Geez. Didn't anyone learn anything from the Laughing Man inccident six years ago as he escaped on the Neo-Tokyo subway. Security camera systems couldn't even prevent them from putting that logo over his face on all the Subway security systems... Oh wait... Wrong movie.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...