Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Security cameras ... interpret the world

Discussion in 'Legal' started by ceetee, Feb 25, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ceetee

    ceetee Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2003
    Messages:
    1,998
    I've never actually seen the desire to intrude on a person's privacy espoused to thoroughly, directly. and with such an utter lack of shame...

    I find this part the scariest of all:

    The "eventual goal" is to have a society where there are no secrets. There is no privacy. Computers will have access to your every movement, and they'll even be able to see through your clothing. And anything the computer sees will be available for sale on the internet... Almost makes me want to go live in a cave somewhere...

    Link to story
     
  2. Ned Flangers

    Ned Flangers Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2006
    Messages:
    69
    My guess is we'll all be relegated to walking and driving while looking like the una-bomber?:barf:
     
  3. mbt2001

    mbt2001 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,902
    Location:
    Texas
    Uhhh... Cameras cannot stop any threats... What kind of idiotic statement is that? People believe that crap... That somehow having a red light cam or something will stop accidents. How? Do cameras have some kind of special power? Obviously not.
     
  4. Zero_DgZ

    Zero_DgZ Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,286
    Pfft. Every single one of these problems can be solved by a teenaged punk and a 20 dollar HERF gun made from a busted microwave and a motorcycle battery.
     
  5. sheep

    sheep Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2006
    Messages:
    20
    Location:
    Raleigh, North Carolina
    scary

    I am suprised that there are not more respones to this post. I have seen this technology in action and watching the program on Discovery made the future sound like a mix between heaven and hell. Heaven for those who do not want any freedom and hell for those of us willing to accept responsibility for our choices.
    With a camera that can see anything you are concealing under clothing there would be no "concealed is concealed" attitude. Officers would be sent out to pedestrians carrying the weapons and asked for identification, permits, intent.. etc. There is a lot to fear here and in public areas there is not much that can be done. This would go far past "protection" from bombs and weapons into flagging people based on behavior which should be done only by the citizens and police on foot. Hell if the program becomes relitively accurate would it be okay for a federal police officer to shoot first and ask questions later? I bet that the company selling this crap will say so along with many Americans.

    Just for fun if you imagine a society run by and governed entirely by the rules of the Bible - that camera might catch you (identified from the RFID in your future ID card) looking down someone's blouse - and then you get a nice little fine deducted from your federally processed pay check, a referal to one of those human resource sell outs etc.

    A majority would be in favor of crap like this in public because it will be easy to sell to worried parents to "prevent" abductions and when it comes to fear mongering - the feds in bed with the companies producing these products won't hold back.
     
  6. carlrodd

    carlrodd Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2005
    Messages:
    849
    Location:
    Delaware
    Just for fun if you imagine a society run by and governed entirely by the rules of the Bible - that camera might catch you (identified from the RFID in your future ID card) looking down someone's blouse - and then you get a nice little fine deducted from your federally processed pay check, a referal to one of those human resource sell outs etc. -sheep

    uh...i don't think any of our rules will be drawn from the bible. i don't see a theocratic authoritarian state on the rise; i see clinically amoral police state, where the regular joes are have ready to access to crap tv, chemicals and porn, but are almost happy to have every other aspect of thought and movement dictated by the government. meanwhile, for the criminal element, it will be business as usual. you don't keep the masses in check by taking away their fun and base distractions; you give those to them in abundance and snatch away the important things...like the freedom to think freely, express themselves, question, dissent, defend etc.
     
  7. Numinous

    Numinous Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2005
    Messages:
    28
    The notion of being able to tell when someone is concealing something is science fiction right now and is a hell of a long way off from being a reality. When you factor in that people are carrying more things on their belts like ipods and cell phones it makes it impossible to determine what is a gun and what is an ipod.

    The idea behind intelligent video is to provide actionable intelligence for personal who are responsible for security. An airport can easily be acres of area and when you factor in the studies that have shown a person watching video stops noticing things in as little as 20 minutes it becomes reasonable to utilize technology to help with things like perimeter security. There is always a human factor. It's not like the camera is flagging someone and it sends the swat team after them automatically. There is always a human involved to review camera footage and make the call if further action needs to happen.

    Why should flagging happen only by people on foot? How is that a good use of resources?
     
  8. ceetee

    ceetee Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2003
    Messages:
    1,998
    Personally, I don't want my height, weight, facial map, and gait to be data in a government database somewhere. I don't want to be identified everytime I walk through a door, or pass a red light. I'm already ID'd every time I run my card through the gas pump. Even though it's distasteful, I put up with it for the convenience of being able to get on my way a tad quicker. If I ever feel that being ID'd that way is too onerous, I have the choice to pay with cash. It's MY choice. If I'm identified via electronic surveillance every time I pass a red light, then what choice do I have? I can't even stop driving, because no matter what, I still have to pass that light.

    Any freedom lost is a freedom that will never be regained.
     
  9. Dorryn

    Dorryn Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2006
    Messages:
    583
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    If this sort of camera information cataloging ever became widespread, I would consider that a SHTF scenario and react accordingly... I do not need nor want to be continuously watched.

    Its a high-tech Nazi-government style authoritarianism, and no way for America to move to.
     
  10. Professor K

    Professor K Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2005
    Messages:
    358
    Location:
    The Streetz of Compton
    I will be an hero for our generation, woot.
     
  11. Zero_DgZ

    Zero_DgZ Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,286
    You and me both, brother.
     
  12. Stretchman

    Stretchman member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Messages:
    387
    Location:
    Dania Beach, Florida
    Eventually it will become cost prohibitive.

    Would be nice to be able to do all of that. But what meakes you think that even with computers the way they are, and technology at this new level, that anyone really cares? By that time, there'll be millions more people. Imagine having a job somewhere in that, and never doing a thing. Not prodcutive at all. It's a nice what if fantasy.

    As it stands right now anything you do on your computer is a traceable event. It just depends solely on whether or not tracing your actions is worth the millions of man hours and time to do it. A lot of things are perceptible. But what size of reactionary force would you need, amd what would they do if everyone was a law abiding citizen? Too may what if questions.

    Personally, I think Big Brother is a voyeur and a perve. And not a lot else. Sure, society may work better. But I am kind of betting it won't. And if it does take that general direction, it won't be long until everyone ends up working to support it, and not showing anything in the way of gains. Beaurocracy is mostly dead weight. If it ever comes down to that? Simple. Play dumb.
     
  13. kludge

    kludge Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2006
    Messages:
    2,634
    Location:
    Indiana
    The current crop of "reality" shows and the level of voyeurism we are comfortable with really astounds me. I've been telling my wife this for a few years now.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page