Surveillance Cameras Get Smarter

kog777 writes to mention that the IB Times is taking a look at where surveillance camera technology is headed. Soon researchers tell us that cameras will be available that not only record, but are able to interpret what they see. "The advancements have already been put to work. For example, cameras in Chicago and Washington can detect gunshots and alert police. Baltimore installed cameras that can play a recorded message and snap pictures of graffiti sprayers or illegal dumpers. In the commercial market, the gaming industry uses camera systems that can detect facial features, according to Bordes. Casinos use their vast banks of security cameras to hunt cheating gamblers who have been flagged before."

Comments

resistance is futile

[ArsonSmith]

So, how is this going to make life change? Is big brother going to become a huge menace to society as a whole or is it going to make a better standard of living? I know all the scifi authors' opinions so I'd like to find out what are the positive sides of this?

ObjectVideo

[Anonymous Coward]

I used to intern at ObjectVideo. They're a DARPA spin-off. I got to sit in the cubicle with all the PhDs and watch them as they used remote control cars to test their tracking cameras. Their products are really pretty stunning.

The basic idea is that if you have a complex with 100 security cameras, you're going to have half a dozen security guards sitting there looking at a huge bank of video feeds. Studies show that guards tend to just phase out after about twenty minutes anyway. So all those security cameras are really pretty worthless.

Instead, you run all the video feeds through a set of servers, the servers can detect moving objects and track them. It's more sophisticated than basic motion detection. They can differentiate between cars, dogs, trucks, boats, etc. They can even tell if you drop or pick up a bag, or throw something. Some applications of their technology can be used to monitor highways for instance: cars traveling north-to-south produce no alert, while cars traveling south-to-north set off the alarm.

This technology removes the human restriction on scale and overcomes the diminishing returns barrier to deploying huge huge banks of CCTVs all over a chemical plant, or military base, or corporate HQ, or national border.

(And as a side note, their IT guy was a real hard-ass about information security. He gave me a personal, one-on-one, 45 minute lecture about everything I wasn't allowed to do, or even think about doing, when I arrived. Guy had the place locked down tight, and easily out-nerded the dozen or so PhDs who were doing the actual coding and development. Just sat in the server room with the petabyte backup drives and listening to Rush Limbaugh on the radio. Hilarious.)

Re:Doubt it.

[GFree]

Most sound effects / recordings of gunshots aren't accurate representations of the sound (aka, air pressure waves) produced when a gun actually goes off. They're more of an artists' interpretation of what the human mind thinks that a gun sounds like, based on what we remember them sounding like after we've heard one.

I'm reminded of a saying about how sound engineers describe the methods used for obtaining good gun sounds:

If you want a pistol shot, use a rifle.
If you want a rifle shot, use a shotgun.
If you want a shotgun blast, use a Howitzer.

Re:Gunshots

[couchslug]

"Real people" are often dumber than the proverbial box of hammers.
I'd rather have cameras watching me any day so I can potentially use the footage (possibly along with other footage) to prove my innocence should any questions arise.
Ubiquitous private and public cameras mean the death of privacy, so I want as level a playing field as possible.

I live in a quaint little rural town. Given the choice between Bubbas eyewitness testimony or video footage, I'd feel much more comfortable going to court with pictures of truth.