Slashdot Mirror
Life Recorder
Bruce Schneier writes "In 2006, writing about future threats on privacy, I described a life recorder: A 'life recorder' you can wear on your lapel that constantly records is still a few generations off: 200 gigabytes/year for audio and 700 gigabytes/year for video. It'll be sold as a security device, so that no one can attack you without being recorded."
Is there no new story, only Bruce quoting himself from 2006?
A little pricey, but you can already buy such a thing: http://wearcam.org/domewear/
If this is the case then why is storage relevant? It's the bandwidth necessary to get the data out; doing it reliably is necessary too. An attacker could theoretically just jam the frequencies that the recorder/transmitter uses, and then attack you, steal or destroy the device, and no one would be the wiser. As a security measure, this needs to be better thought out.
On top of that, what does Bruce Schneier need with protections from attack? I hear that behind his beard lives an inordinately large prime number of fists.
If this is the case then why is storage relevant?
Because we need a reasonable technical excuse for these impositions not being deployed upon our beings. Either way I'm not worried because I have AT&T, so my 3G coverage will make my life look like a bad version of the Nixon Whitehouse Tapes.
An attacker could theoretically just jam the frequencies that the recorder/transmitter uses, and then attack you
Which attacker? You mean the scab-ridden meth addict who's waiting over by that mailbox while I finish my ATM withdrawl? Or the drunken neanderthal at the bar who thinks I'm staring at his girlfriend and decides he needs to prove some kind of point?
... or did you mean the computer nerd who's going to come up out of his basement and attack me as a way of testing that his latest jamming device actually works?
If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
It's illegal in Illinois to record anyone without their permission, and nothing recorded without someone's permission can be used in court here.
I call it the "liar's law". But this tech won't help any Illinois crime victims.
There is a good reason for such laws. I used to work for a guy who regularly recorded people (n violation of the law) and then egged them to say things that he thought he could use to fire them (he had two business partners, which limited his ability to fire people on a whim). He would delete where he had said inflammatory and demeaning things first. After the HR person told him that he couldn't use those recordings because they were illegal, he engineered a confrontation with her and fired her (she is now suing for wrongful termination).
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
please stop thinking that you can force others to do what you want.
Stop trying to get people to do what you want and instead do what I want!!!
Eaten by a grue (would be too dark to record)...
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.