Slashdot Mirror
Sensor Networks For Surveillance And Security
gpmap writes "Small Times has an article on the coming age of all-pervasive sensor networks that will feed information of all sorts to monitoring networks. Technology advances have generated intense interest in sensor networks: 'the magic words are surveillance and security.' The Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) hosted the second Information Processing in Sensor Networks workshop this week amid anticipation of significant funding grants from the National Science Foundation. Most believe miniaturization, whether through conventional methods, MEMS or nanotech, will drive the spread of sensor networks. But plenty of issues need working through, on the hardware, software and social fronts."
Just read "Diamond Age" by Neal Stephenson, it features a nice version of nanotech-sensornetworks. It's a good book, too.
In two words: Information leaks.
It's been demonstrated that you can predict, to a high degree of likelyhood, when a military strike is about to happen by counting how many pizzas are delivered to the Pentagon.
It's somewhat like the before-mentioned leaky abstraction concept, but applied to information.
It's going to get alot worse long before it gets better. Those who believe that true privacy is possible in the future are delusional.
For a well though-out article on the subject, try reading this Wired article that
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
Other unanswered questions involve how companies will filter the data generated by large networks of sensors...
Leaving aside the other interesting bits of the article ("Videocams 1 sq.mm large? I'll crush them under my sandaled feet!"), this unanswered question is actually very, very important. For far too long both military* and non-military intelligence has focused far to much on gathering information and far to little on actually going thru it and learning from it. During WWII and the early part of the cold war each and every bit of gathered intelligence was a treasure, troughtly analysed and carfully matched with what other bits of intelligence that was gathered before, letting the analysers build up a pretty complete picture (so good in fact, that towards the end of that war the allies often knew better than the germans where the german troops were). But as we got better at collecting information, through ELINT, satelites and such, we 'drowned' in the sheer amount of information... succumbing to the idea that seeing something was as good as knowing what we saw (hint; it isn't). So I sure hope someone out there figures out a way to both filter and interprent the information they may gather with this - otherwise it is useless.
*) Come to think of it, the idea to 'sow' enemy territory with a sensornetwork like this before and during an attack might be quite usefull - if they don't figure out a way to jam it off course.
Everything in the world is controlled by a small, evil group to which, unfortunately, no one you know belongs.
Use of pervasive sensor networks by governmental and corporate organizations is inevitable (it's appearing in increments everyday in the US). The crucial difference between Big Brother and Transparency is who has access to the raw imagery / sensor data and the processed information. See David Brin's site for more information.
Sorry, but you have really displayed complete ignorance of the topic in question. Of course, as soon as anything mildly related to privacy is posted here, immediate paranoia sets in. Sensor networks have a very broad range of applications, from monitoring temperatures in chemical engineering experiments to collecting ecosystem data. Enhanced security services are only one possible use for the technology, and a fairly mundane one at that.
A common argument used here against legal acts such as the DMCA is that they unfairly blame the technology rather than those who misuse it. I don't see how your comment is any different. Personally I believe that sensor networks will provide many research opportunities and genuinely useful applications in the next few years. If organisations misuse one aspect of the technology for surveilance, then obviously those responsible should be held accountable. However, branding an entire field of research as being "unacceptable" is not particularly acceptable either.
We could root out all the criminals, misfits, homeless, and other undesirables.
We could create a new service under the auspices of the Department of Homeland Security.
We'll call it the S.S., and it can use double lightning bolts for its insignia. Wouldn't that be lovely?
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin
Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
Score: -1 100% Flamebait