Slashdot Mirror
Wifi Camera Uploads without Computer
* * Beatles-Beatles writes to tell us NewsDay is reporting that Kodak has released the first "computer-free wireless camera." The new widget can connect directly to the Internet wherever there's Wi-Fi available to download and e-mail pictures. Users can even use the camera to view photos stored in Internet photo albums via Kodak's Easyshare Gallery service.
Apple made a product that seemlessly connects users to their online service, and iTunes as I understand it, and I'm guessing as a result, has a 90% marketshare of online music sales. Though the ability to "view photos stored in Internet photo albums via Kodak's Easyshare Gallery service" without a computer involved is an untapped market, you can expect other companies to follow Kodak's lead. But, in addition to having a great brand, Kodak will dominate this new market largely because they got there first. From the article: "Cameras, I believe, are moving from the wired world towards the wireless world," said Lee, director of consumer services at InfoTrends. "It's not going to happen this year but, starting next year, you're going to definitely see some more cameras coming that incorporate wireless-transfer capabilities."
The provided URLs don't say whether it allows FTP upload, so I'd say no.
Ahh, businesses always thinking about the users, by leaving out obvious features so that they can sell services that provide those missing features.
Does it support WPA? WEP? If it doesn't it's not even worth it.
My mobile phone already does this. And I don't need to be near a wifi hotspot to do it.
-- Sorry, I can't think of anything funny to say here.
With a camera that can email or post photos to a website, its just another reason not to get a PC (for some people).
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
The parent poster had already said: infiltrate the cameras and some battery-operated hotspots. The cameras, policeman can see and seize and smash. The hotspots will be connected to the Net (via GPRS for instance) and will be invisible to the Man.... and even if found and seized the damage would have been done already.
It's not "simpler" not "equally effective" to have "runners" getting memory cards. Supposedly a wi-fi camera has the option to upload immediately each foto after taken.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
Let me clarify. A civil society organisation or an NGO or a news gathering organisation could easily put in place combos of wifi hubs with cheap UPS battery backup during conflict situations since the worst violence is often orchestrated and happens a few days after the initial flareup. That would allow it's reporters / photographers / videographers to capture events and constantly keep on uploading them to base camp, from where they could be dumped/mirrored onto the 'net.
And if there were, no doubt you'd have to stand quite still while your pics were uploaded which wouldn't necessarily be convenient at the time.
I'm not sure I understand. I've managed get WiFi net access from a laptop while riding in a cycle-rickshaw. I would assume that the camera, since it's WiFi didn't expect me to remain stock still while the images were uploading.
If that weren't unlikely enough a totalitarian state is likely to have little internet access or extremely restricted access.
The point is not to get the cameras to upload to the Internet - but to upload to someone's laptop back in base camp. from there, an org could burn VCDs, use various (stega/ssh/proxies/tor/freenet) methods to put the material onto the net.
On top of that is Kodak itself. Their site probably pitches itself as "family friendly" so you can bet that any civil disobediance pics would be wiped off their site without a second's thought.
Well, the article talks about how the camera can be used to view pics from Kodak's site..and that it can email (or otherwise transfer) the pics FROM the camera. There're a number of places that are more hospitable to civil disobedience pics than familyroom.kodak.com
I wouldn't diss the idea completely - after all if your camera would connect to an ad-hoc network you could perhaps arrange for someone with a PDA or small laptop to shadow you at some distance and broadcast the pics back to them, but it would still be an awkward arrangement.
Why ? that would be perfect. The camera would only need batteries. F'rex, a minority area is being threatened by a majority area. Place cameras on rooftops/overlooking approach roads, have them constantly take pics and mail them. Even if the cams were found and destroyed in the subsequent violence, they'd have done their jobs.
Perhaps it's simpler and equally effective to use redundancy - multiple photographers, with each passing their filled memory cards to runners.
That's the point. You can block/kill the runners and smash the cameras. Once you do that, no more coverage. Imagine if you could film a policeman trying to smash your camera up, and have the satisfaction of knowing that while he may be able to smash your camera, the images of that act will live on...
cheers,
Aniruddha "Karim" Shankar
Am I the only one that thinks an access point that fakes an Easyshare connection could be fun? It would not only give you the pictures currently uploaded but also access to the rest of the user's Easyshare galleries. Who would have thought sharing would be *that* easy?
On se Internetz nobody noes your German.