Slashdot Mirror
Smart Cameras Detect Crime, Erode Privacy
MattSparkes writes "Smart surveillance systems could identify crimes as they take place, if a computer vision system developed at the University of Texas goes into production. The system is capable of classifying behaviour as friendly or violent. In the past there have been attempts to spot unusual behaviour, but this required subsequent user classification. These new systems may keep us more secure, but is it worth sacrificing our privacy for? And will we see false positives, where police cars screech to a halt beside hugging couples?"
A computer vision system developed in the University of Texas in Austin, US, can already tell the difference between friendly behaviour, such as shaking hands, and aggressive actions like punching or pushing.
Just because someone pushes or punches someone else, doesn't mean it isn't friendly. Would be flicking off a friend be considered an aggressive act?
Let's leave this sort of shit to human judgment instead of relying on cameras all the time. We really don't need to be going down this road.
And will we see false positives, where police cars screech to a halt beside hugging couples?
This is easily solvable by splitting behavior into 3 different types: Normal, dangerous, and HOT!
This could revolutionize the webcam industry.
Do people really have an expecation of privacy while in a public area? Should I expect to be able to walk down the street with my dick hanging out of my pants screaming "FREE SPEECH! FREE SPEECH!" at the top of my lungs and not expect any repercussions?
"He's written a good thing in that manuscript," Verhovensky went on. "He suggests a system of spying. Every member of the society spies on the others, and it's his duty to inform against them. Every one belongs to all and all to every one. All are slaves and equal in their slavery. In extreme cases he advocates slander and murder, but the great thing about it is equality. To begin with, the level of education, science, and talents is lowered. A high level of education and science is only possible for great intellects, and they are not wanted. The great intellects have always seized the power and been despots. Great intellects cannot help being despots and they've always done more harm than good. They will be banished or put to death. Cicero will have his tongue cut out, Copernicus will have his eyes put out, Shakespeare will be stoned--that's Shigalovism. Slaves are bound to be equal. There has never been either freedom or equality without despotism, but in the herd there is bound to be equality, and that's Shigalovism! Ha ha ha! Do you think it strange?
y /d72p/chapter13.html
http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/d/dostoyevsk
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
And what, pray tell, do you think the policeman's brain is executing when he is deciding whether or not to accost you?
At least with a robotic police force, the algorithms can be standardized, QA'd, reviewed, perhaps even open-sourced.
FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
How can it be a free society when there is ubiquitous surveillance and police presence? How can people be free when they are afraid that any abberation in behavior will bring police action upon them?
You don't have arrest and prosecute to squash free speech and free assembly. You just have to have persistent police investigations and police "harassment".
Why would you even want to live in a society like that?
It is not reasonable to expect that your actions in public will be kept private from other private citizens in a public area, as that would be taking away the rights of other citizens in order to provide you with privacy. The government, however, is not a private citizen and has no rights. It exists only to serve the people. In order to spend my tax dollars and intrude on the privacy of the people, they need to show a reasonable cause. Blanket surveillance under the assumption that you might be about to commit a criminal act does not meet those criteria.