5 ms·
You would be right if most regular surveillance cameras were continuously running face-recognition software and had access to a vast database linking faces to i
by slavak 13y ago
You would be right if most regular surveillance cameras were continuously running face-recognition software and had access to a vast database linking faces to identities. And the day this happens might not be that far off.
As it stands for now, the privacy implications of regular surveillance cameras are limited by storage and the computing & manpower needed to analyze every frame. It's pretty certain your local police department isn't storing every frame recorded by area highway cameras for several years back; they are doing that for license plate readers, though.
- Houshalter 13y agoTrue but that's just a matter of technology to search the data. The data itself is fine. So if you forced police to manually go through the list of license plates every camera recorded, and find the one they want, that would be ok? But if they made a script to do the exact same thing automatically, it's illegal?
- StavrosK 13y agoYes.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- UweSchmidt 13y agoAutomation is the game changer. Long term data storage, new algorithms, combining databases, new algorithms that find out stuff etc. lead to huge changes that must be taken into account when designing systems. Leave the house with the zipper down on Monday. Have a silly argument with a neighbor on Friday. Isolated incidents that will end up in the "Worst of Houshalter" - file, either available for everyone, or just a group of decisionmakers. Am I seeing this right, or am I exaggerating?
- Houshalter 13y agoMy point is it's the same thing, just faster/cheaper. Perhaps it should be banned or controlled. But calling it unconstitutional is a stretch I think. If that's the case, regular "dumb" surveillance cameras should be too.
- UweSchmidt 13y agoGood point, but what's a regular, "dumb" surveillance camera? Does such a thing even exist any more? I imagine that as old systems are replaced by newer ones, they automatically get more digital, intelligent, connected and store data in a more compatible and accessible format. I see warning signs all over the place, that this train/building/place etc. is under video surveillance. Cool story bro. Details? Who's looking at the data? How long will it be stored? How is that data protected? I tried out SimpleCV recently, and was fascinated how much already works out of the box. Face recognition from a video is basically the "Hello World" program. The phrase "Wake up sheeple" has been discredited as wannabe-enlightened, but in this case I feel like opening my window and shouting it out loud. Sigh.
- Houshalter 13y agoOn the other hand there is tremendous potential for such technology. Stores will be able to significantly reduce their losses to shoplifting. A ton of jobs will be open to automation - including things that were previously too expensive to do with humans. Robotics will significantly advance. And we can virtually eliminate crime. These privacy laws could be really damaging to progress. In some cases it basically makes it illegal to make a machine do the same thing as a human.
- aidenn0 13y ago> we can virtually eliminate crime No, we virtually eliminate crime of anyone that isn't friends with the bureau that manages the cameras
- Houshalter 13y ago
- jacobolus 13y agoAt the point they have such a script, that’s right, it becomes no longer okay. They should need to get a warrant before they can do anything with the data, and we should have an open public debate about exactly what data they should be allowed to store, for how long.