Stabilized Cameras for Long-Distance Surveillance

DrBlake writes "New York Times has an article about new systems used to stabilize cameras hung from aircraft. Apparently they make it possible to see many details at 500 meters or higher. The systems are interesting in themselves and the article raises interesting concerns about what implications the systems have on privacy."

Comments

Privacy is a myth

[laetus]

From an American perspective:

1) Employers, insurers and financial institutions have access to your credit records
2) Employers and financial institutions have or are fighting for access to your medical records (why employ or make a loan to a dying man)
3) Marketing companies are tracking your shopping, spending, web viewing, etc. habits on a daily basis
4) In its fight against terrorism, the federal government is putting in place systems to find out anything about you at anytime (scan the headlines if you don't believe it).

I'm not paranoid. Just realistic and a bit fatalistic. Privacy in modern America is a myth. Watch what you say or do, because others certainly are.

Re:Privacy is a myth

[lrichardson]

"The reality check for today is that no one cares about 99.99999% of the people in this world. "

Two things wrong with this:

First, there are huge industries which keep and use all sorts of personal information. Banks use credit history, insurers use health history, and, in something which everyone in the US and most of Europe is familiar with, marketers use purchase history (and anything else they can get their paws on). It's really not accurate to say most people don't care when there are huge numbers of people employed in industries that do care.

Second, and more insidious, is the effect it has on society. When you have to curtail your own actions, for fear of what might happen - despite the fact your actions would be legal - then we've entered into the "Enemy of the State" scenario. How many people write scathing articles about scientology? Or, with reference to this article, have sex in their enclosed back yard? Both are legal, and both could lead to years of harassment.

On to the technical side of this ... I find it damn funny they're talking about removing the vibrations from helicopters to stabilize the picture. Think balloon. Think fixed-wing drone. Heck, I saw a prototype of the latter, with an electric drive, solar cells, and a simple vibration dampened camera (no gyros, no electronic compensation), and around a 30 ft wingspan that gave pictures better than those in the article ... back in 1989.

Then, of course, there's the fact that large parts of urban areas are already covered by cameras. How long will it be before the police request 'access', such that they can track a suspect? I've seen demos where they've tracked people from their apartment to their workdesk. And into the stores and restaurants they hit at lunchtime. These demos were put together after the fact, in part to argue for real-time access for the LE world. Yeah, the eye in the sky is nifty, but hardly earth-breaking with respect to the total lack of privacy we currently exist under.

There's a growing concern about 'Privatization of public space'. This applies to cell phone users, public demonstations, street vendors, and really ought to apply to the LE agencies.

Old hat

[drunkmonk]

This kind of stuff has been around for years in the military. Sure, it's a nice compact little civilian package now, but it's not exactly revolutionary.

If you're a privacy zealot, I don't see this as nearly as concerning as tracking through credit card transactions, etc. And honestly, I don't have any problem with my picture being taken when I'm walking around outside. I'm not doing anything illegal, I'm not going anywhere shameful, and if someone wants to spend thousands of dollars on technology to enable them to watch my fat ass stroll from place to place then more power to them. And hey, they might even catch a criminal or two.

Neeto

[ins0m]

This seems fine and dandy and will help the authorities do what they are supposed to do in chase situations. However, I'm a bit surprised that even though it's claimed that recent Hollywood efforts are getting their hands on this, that it's similar to "the original Wescam developed in the early 1960's by a Canadian subsidiary of Westinghouse as a battlefield surveillance tool for the Canadian military".

That said, I wonder why it never made its way down to police sooner? Cost of maintenance, perhaps?

I do understand where the ACLU is coming from as regards the invasions of privacy. I believed we recently rehashed this over the debate on metal-detector technology in airports that would let clothing be seen through, or other such nonsense. Yet, I'm surprised no one has made that big a deal over Terra Server. Going on the resolutions they can get down to, you'd be hard pressed to hide much more than a naked sunbather in your backyard, and it's only a matter of time before satellite imaging will make even that impossible. Why the fuss over one and not the other?

Not entirely groundbreaking but..

[q-soe]

Amongst all the comments that will flow about big brother etc it is interesting to note that there have been satellite systems in existance that can see small details from space since the late 1980's.

What we are talking about here is a gyroscopic stabilised mount which enables cameras on Police helicopters to get a clearer picture at long range. Some of the uses pointed out here are surveilance of suspects, search parties etc. The camera systems have existed on law enforcement helicopters for about 10 years that i can recall and have been getting more advanced every year - its hardly a violation of your rights in a new form unless of course you are worrying about the cops reading the paper over your shoulder.

At $650,000 US its a bit more than a toy and i dont see it being something used by a peeping tom - it raises a few issues on privacy but the fact is Police around the world have had the ability for years its just been an issue with vibration which is amplified the more you zoom making things like license plates harder to read etc.

Interesting but not a massive breakthrough and not something id lose sleep worrying about - the only people who would need worry would be people who were hiding from the police in the first place and it might even save some lives when used on searches.

PS some cooler uses of gyrostablised systems like this (if you like that sort of thing) can be found in new generation FLIR and Laser targeting systems on military aircraft (think the article mentions it)

More comments

[ch-chuck]

1st Office: Nothing happening on the hillside, sir.

Sgt Sheer: OK, well lets head back over to that nudist colony with the hot chicks.

---------------

So when are they going to develope a countertechnology: the cloak of invisibility! We have airplanes with low radar profiles, (stealth) so what will it take for low visible / infrared / UV profiles? A kind of flexible mirror suit that reflects the surrounding environment?

Re:More comments

[Zathrus]

We have airplanes with low radar profiles, (stealth) so what will it take for low visible / infrared / UV profiles?

For the record, stealth planes like the B1, the F-117A, and the F-22 have low radar, IR, and sound profiles. It's not of much use to be near invisible on radar if you show up like a torch on IR, or if the guy in the AAA can track where you're going to be by sound. All of the stealth planes disperse their output through large areas, generally directed upwards (I'd guess that the F-22 does the worst job of this, but that's just a WAG). The sound is similarly baffled, with efforts made toward minimizing disruptive air flow and contrails.

If you want a low IR profile, just cover yourself in a heat reflective blanket. They've been on the market for years. If it's warm out then you'll need to figure out some way of dumping heat elsewhere though, or else you'll suffocate in your own reflected heat.

If you want a true camo suit with chameleon like abilities, well, the US Army is researching those. There have been several stories on here about them and powered armor.

Re:More comments

[BoBaBrain]

So when are they going to develope a countertechnology


You mean like an umbrella, or large hat?

x10.com

[Brightest Light]

i swear to god, if i see any new pop-ups for the "BESTSELLING Wireless Color Stabilized Video Camera!"; somebody is going to die...

More information

[q-soe]

For those wanting to find out more about this stuff some links.

Wescam page on their camere systems

The MX 20 is i believe the system they are talking about - has been widely fitted on naval and coast guard aircraft for a number of years

The company makes systems for space, marine and air and sells to the military and private enterprise. They make some very interesting systems and anyone interested in this sort of stuff or wanting to know just how non new this technology is head over and have a read. There are also sample images to show resolution etc of the systems.

2000 cameras a day

[peter303]

Last week ABC news followed a worker in downtown Atlanta through her work day and counted the cameras- nearly 2000. A large fraction were along the roads observing traffic and in stores.

I'm not paranoid

[MrFredBloggs]

Yeah,right.

Just in case, you might want to get one of these:

http://zapatopi.net/afdb.html