Slashdot Mirror
To Counter Widespread Surveillance, Stealth Clothing
In Paul Theroux's dystopian novel O-Zone, wearing masks in public is simply a fact of life, because of the network of cameras that covers the inhabited parts of earth. Earthquake Retrofit writes with a story at the New York Times describing a life-imitating-art reaction to the perception (and reality) that cameras are watching more of your life than you might prefer: clothing that obscures your electronic presence. "[Adam Harvey] exhibited a number of his stealth-wear designs and prototypes in an art show this year in London. His work includes a series of hoodies and cloaks that use reflective, metallic fabric — like the kind used in protective gear for firefighters — that he has repurposed to reduce a person’s thermal footprint. In theory, this limits one’s visibility to aerial surveillance vehicles employing heat-imaging cameras to track people on the ground. He also developed a purse with extra-bright LEDs that can be activated when someone is taking unwanted pictures; the effect is to reduce an intrusive photograph to a washed-out blur. In addition, he created a guide for hairstyling and makeup application that might keep a camera from recognizing the person beneath the elaborate get-up. The technique is called CV Dazzle — a riff on 'computer vision' and 'dazzle,' a type of camouflage used during World War II to make it hard to detect the size and shape of warships."
Can't quite see it myself.
In Florida and other states it is illegal to wear masks or otherwise conceal your identity while in public. This may have been a reaction to the KKK during the civil rights period.
That's really going to go over well in August. Heat reflective clothing could be deadly.
Free Martian Whores!
His ideas seem practical - the IR cloaking and paparazzi-blinding ones, at least. But I think CCTV/Face Recognition is a problem that we should find a legislative solution for.
We, as privacy-loving people, should be able to come up with a convincing argument that the cost of deploying such a network is greater than the benefit.
We could then push to prevent the federation of wider networks (one network per police precinct, for example, so that police can still use them to prevent or prosecute crime, but noone could track movement over a whole city or whole country). Or, allow their use for investigation of crime after the fact, but not active monitoring: systems must be designed in a way that only lets them keep recordings for 48 hours and would not include any network connectivity equipment. If a crime occurs, police can go to the relevant camera and pull the tapes; otherwise, the camera dumbly continuously overwrites.
The surveillance implementations of modern computers are a problem that needs to be addressed in as many was as possible. While legal limits are only as good as the will to enforce them, they are an important way to codify the moral problems created by cheap computers.
As it is my pessimistic side thinks that the only way we'll have proper privacy protection is after a widespread systematic official program of surveillance against some group is revealed, and is proven to cause direct harm to that group's other basic rights and physical security. In other words, we'll only work to limit networked spy technology after it is abused, not before.
Draw attention to yourself with the most imaginative draft emails you can for your state, county, regions and wait.
Save them with one of the big brand accounts - the ones that have been in the news.
Suddenly take your cell battery out for hours. Save emails to the press as drafts and connect to at cafes in the CBD.
Local Feature Analysis (LFA) will get your face in a country with the population the size of the USA in a very short time.
If the CCTV cant get your face, you will noted and get to enjoy a nice random stop-and-frisk at an exit or park or street.
Welcome to the new world of gait signature if that fails.
http://rt.com/news/identify-walk-system-britain-668/
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Now made fashionable.
That's not unique to this goal though. Almost anything I see touted as "fashion" looks fucking ridiculous. Maybe that's a sampling error, as someone who ignores fashion intentionally, I maybe only see the weird shit.
As far as job interviews, that's a weird standard. You wear a suit and tie or whatever it is women wear to job interviews. You hand someone a piece of paper with most of your identifying information on it. Stealth is not the goal there. You'd wear this stuff walking down the street to avoid targeted advertising like in minority report, not into a job interview, obviously.
You can see this in the video. The subjects' heads and stomachs start glowing more brightly as the person dons the piece. The really buff guy's heat shifts to his face and arms almost immediately. So you have your program look for a shorter block with a beacon shining above it.
If facial detection programs that clip the hair off first aren't already out there, my guess is they're close at hand so I don't think the greasy twirls will do much for long.
The handbag gadget seemed functional though.
FTFA :- "'dazzle,' a type of camouflage used during World War II to make it hard to detect the size and shape of warships."
It was first used in WW1; pink, black, white, and lime green in jagged stripes and patches, together with rigged canvas jagged shapes between the funnels and masts to try to confuse enemy optical rangefinders. Another trick was to paint the profile of a smaller ship on the side of a larger one.
Nothing gets you more attention than deliberately trying to hide yourself....