5 ms·
Good 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, t
by UweSchmidt 13y ago
Good 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 agoWe already have surveillance cameras everywhere and this doesn't seem to be happening.
- waterlesscloud 13y agoCrime doesn't seem to be eliminated either.
- jessaustin 13y agoHow would you know if it were happening? Quis custodiet...
- jodrellblank 13y agoThese 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. I don't automatically have a problem with that. Progress at any cost isn't something I take as "obviously good" and machines don't have rights to employment. That's ignoring the fact that you want the machine to do it because it's not doing "the same thing", it's doing something slightly different.
- Houshalter 13y agoI take objection to that. Far more harm is done by being conservative and resisting new technologies, than is caused by just embracing them. Every generation thinks the present is just fine and that the future is scary.
- Crito 13y ago> And we can virtually eliminate crime. If you make a comb with teeth too fine, it will rip out your hair.
- Houshalter 13y agoUseless analogy.
- Crito 13y agoWho is innocent of all crimes? You don't want omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient mechanical enforcement of the law. You may think you do, but you really don't.
- Houshalter 13y agoThat's not really what this is. You can see people committing violent crimes in public. You can track the path robbers and terrorists with security cameras. But victimless crimes take place behind closed doors and are never reported.
- Crito 13y agoIf you think that use of such tools would be restricted to robbers or terrorists, you are incredibly delusional. If you think that all victimless crimes necessarily take place in the privacy of homes, you are so naive it seems like you are trolling.
- Houshalter 13y agoYou clearly have some strong biases against this that I can't help. But this is the future whether we like it or not. Name calling doesn't change anything.