Slashdot Mirror
Lockheed Martin Hardware to Protect NYC Transit
Gerhardius writes "Lockheed Martin has been awarded a $212 million contract to provide cameras and sensors for New York City subways, bridges and tunnels." The entire program is being conducted under the guise of anti-terrorism and includes plans for a possible wireless network which would allow cellular phones to be used in case of emergency.
I thought they only made airplanes? Tell me Cheney wasn't CEO of them too...
I'm only half joking by the way, karma be damned.
Religion for nerds. Stuff that really matters
Fortunately transit security cameras are free from such pesky issues as the fatal mixing of metric and English units of measure.
How sensitive are these sensors going to be? I am assuming they will only been in low traffic areas (because putting a motion sensor in a high traffic area is a little silly) which doesn't really seem to be MO of any attacks that I know of. Also in those areas could they not be set off by some of those larger than normal NYC Rats?
I was there yesterday and quite a few devices were sitting above the sliding doors and in a row along the ceiling as you came into the terminal, and they were oval shaped. They rotated on a platform and spun on a spindle, giving them 360 degrees of freedom. Each white oval was maybe 1.5 feet by 1 foot in diameter and they seemed to follow and track things, mobilizing suddenly at times, but remaining in default position most of the time.
The thing is the each egg shaped "camera" seemed to point with either a lens on one end the oval or a square shaped opening on the opposite side. The square shaped side I imagine has some other sort of detection ability. They looked big and expensive, and I was kind of curious what sort of tech goes into these.
Is anyone on slashdot working on these sorts of applications? Maybe someone could shed some light on what sort of sensory abilities these things have?
Lockheed is a quality defense contractor, and they Already do good work in NYC with the NY/NJ Port Authority (bridges and tunnels). So alot of the work probably overlaps in the homeland security realm. Nothing wrong with a keeping things under one umbrella. One less layer of problems to deal with...
You can fool some of the people all of the time
I live in Times Square New York City.
Until September 11, 2001, I worked at the World Trade Center.
I just watched the same religious militants bomb the London Underground.
I have ancestors who fought and died in the Revolutionary War.
So you know what I think?
I say put the cameras on the subway already.
Am I scared? Am I giving up freedom for safety? Am I giving up rights hard fought for by my ancestors for a little sense of security?
No, I'm simply being prudent about the world we live in.
This is not Orwellian Big Brother going on, really. No one is burning any books and telling you what to think. I'm not giving up any rights. There's no fascism going on. There's no fundamentalism going on. Really. This is simply prudent deterrance going on here. REALLY. There are no jackbooted thugs. There are no secret police. There is no slippery slope. This is not a paranoid schizophrenic scifi fantasy world. This is not a Hollywood dystopian B-grade plot. There is no Sith Lord. There is no Agent Smith.
R-E-A-L-L-Y.
Welcome to reality, leave your histrionic idealism at the door. You're not being helpful, you're just being a loud angry child who can only keep track of one simplistic concept in your mind: idealistic appeals to Revolutionary War era sloganeering.
It doesn't have one damn thing to do with cameras in the subway.
Not one. Grow up and develop an appreciation for the complexity of real life. Hopeless hysterical idealism doesn't help at all.
Give me a break. Loud children without any appreciation for nuance in this world. You know how to thump your chest and act indignant when someone waves propaganda about all of our rights going down the toilet.
The only thing going on here is just a whole hell of a lot of hysterical simplistic children.
Very loud, very pathetic. Of no help to the problems facing us at all.
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
So great, a bunch of cameras. Catch the guy blowing himself up on camera, really useful.
So, the Brits used their similar camera system to capture images of the four guys that they did catch, and whose support system they immediately started to dismantle - including those that fled the country. If the Spaniards had a similar system, they may not have taken so long to track down the people that left cell-phone triggered backpack bombs on several trains - not suicide bombers. Do you think that every person who wants to damage people and infrastructure in the west also wants to personally die doing it? Hardly. That's for the chumps in their ranks. Video of the smart ones is especially valuable.
I'd rather our government take the whole sum of money they have devoted to 'Homeland Security' and put it towards education
Education of who? The fundamentalist schools that are producing this whole "kill the heretics for Allah" are feeling plenty well funded, and certainly don't want what I'm guessing you'd think of as an education (the sciences, an embrace of reason, a respect for liberty and democracy). You indicate in your post that Israel and western support for it is the problem. But why is it a problem? Because it's a liberal democracy surrounded by backwards, mysoginistic, theocratic thugocracies? Only a younger generation of Palestinians have any chance of growing up thinking that there is a purpose in life beyond removing Israel from the map. Putting money into "education" isn't going to change your average jihaddist's world view. Only an open economy, transparent government, and regular elections and trade throughout the middle east will do that. Pretty much like what's shaping up in Iraq and Afghanistan, though there is a long way to go. You know, sort of like the decade-plus that it took the US to get a ratified constitution after the declaration of our independence?
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
And the private transportation argument is bogus, since we also have checkpoints and random stops on the roadways.
It's a shame what they've done to the 4th ammendment.
Police brutality? No, sorry. That camera was down for maintenance.
I also suspect a police chief, mayor, governor, congressman, senator, or even a strongly connected businessman (just to name a few) can see pretty much whatever feed they wish. But can we as citizens watch the feeds that show use their comings and goings?
Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
Not all terrorist attacks are suicide attacks. Maybe you havn't been paying attention to the news lately, but not too long ago the London subways were bombed and surveillance cameras helped police determine their identities. No, this won't stop every possible type of terrorist attack, but it will help prevent a specific type of attack. If we had a two hundred million solution to all terrorist attacks, I would be pissed off that it hadn't already been implemented.
"Most terrorist plots busted up in the US are hatched by white men. Fact. How would this stop them? Or is this just a war on funny looking brown people, ignoring the crazy white men who are actually arming and plotting?"
Believe it or not, white people aren't like vampires. We will show up on video just as well as Arabs. And the fact that we are busting terrorist plots hatched by white guys is evidence they are not being ignored.
"Amazingly enough, the terrorists from the 9-11 attack were mostly Saudi Arabians -- and we haven't even said boo to the Saudis."
And amazingly people like you think that just because someone is from Saudi Arabia means they are agents of the Saudi government.
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
For your amusement:
http://www.rrojasdatabank.org/agfrank/interview_o
INTERVIEW OF ZBIGNIEW BREZINSKI
National Security Adviser in the Carter Administration
from Le Nouvel Observateur (France), Jan 15-21, 1998
Q: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs ["From the Shadows"], that American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct?
Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise: Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.
Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?
B: It isn't quite that. We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.
Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn't believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don't regret anything today?
B: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter: We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.
Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic [intégrisme], having given arms and advice to future terrorists?
B: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?
Q: Some stirred-up Moslems? But it has been said and repeated: Islamic fundamentalism represents a world menace today.
B: Nonsense! It is said that the West had a global policy in regard to Islam. That is stupid. There isn't a global Islam. Look at Islam in a rational manner and without demagoguery or emotion. It is the leading religion of the world with 1.5 billion followers. But what is there in common among Saudi Arabian fundamentalism, moderate Morocco, Pakistan militarism, Egyptian pro-Western or Central Asian secularism? Nothing more than what unites the Christian countries.
Please read this for more background:
URL:http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Afghanistan
What terrorists?
Perhaps the ones who blew up and tried to blow up the London Underground? Or Madrid? You're pretending that suicide bombers getting on public transport isn't a danger. That's ridiculous. New York is a big target. Blowing up a New York subway would be a massive coup for terrorists.
How would you "find and capture" them?
I'm no genius, but I suspect that if they're caught on camera it might be a lot easier to track them down. In fact CCTV in London caught the suicide bombers there.
Don't invade their countries, don't steal their money, don't torture their people, and pay attention to what your president has done.
Tell that to the Iraqis. They invaded Kuwait for no particular reason, stole who knows what, tortured and killed god-knows how many people, and the Iraqi people didn't even hint at revolt.
And what do you mean THEIR countries? The London bombers were born in Britain, Britain didn't invade itself. You think they were Iraqis out to avenge the invasion? In that case they should have attacked Parliament or some other legitimate political or military target. But no, they've just been listening to hate preachers in the local mosque. They hate Britain and its people but they want to live here. THEY'RE the hypocrites.
Just stop killing innocent people! Apologize for the invasion of Iraq! Let the people in prison go. It's freaking simple!
An odd thing to say, as the WTC was attacked before the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. I think your problem is you're assuming that terrorists have legitimate grievances and reasons for their actions, rather than just using things like Iraq as vague excuses to kill people and be a hero to all the other terrorists. Bear in mind they DELIBERATELY TARGET CIVILIANS.
Another problem is that when you decide policy based on what the terrorists want, is that you make terrorism a legitimate way to force policy. If the American government pulled out of Iraq because of terrorism, then anyone in the world who wanted to force you to do something could get their way just by strapping bombs to themselves and getting onto a train.
Call me a traditionalist, but countries should be run by elected governments, not suicide bombers.
More probably, the story submitter is just a standard illiterate slashbot who doesn't know that "guise" implies an ulterior motive.
Or maybe the sumbitter knows that guise implies an ulterior motive, and believes there is an ulterior motive for implementing this system. If the incidents in London tell us anything, it is that it won't stop bombings, and it won't be used to aid investigations against police misconduct. The BBC has said that there is no footage of the case where police murdered the suspicious-yet-innocent immigrant.