Slashdot Mirror
AVG Announces Invisibility Glasses
BrianFagioli writes So what do these glasses from AVG Innovation Labs actually do? The security firm claims it can protect your identity in this new era of cameras everywhere. From the article: "'Through a mixture of technology and specialist materials, privacy wearables such as invisibility glasses can make it difficult for cameras or other facial recognition technologies to get a clear view of your identity', AVG claims. This is still in the prototype phase of testing, though it has been officially announced at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona. There's a lot of science behind this -- a series of infrared lights surrounding the eyes and nose is not visible to other people, but cameras will pick it up making recognition difficult at best. There's also reflective materials involved, which aids in the blocking, or so it's claimed."
Well, expect there to be signs all over banks and other secure locations, from now on, telling people to remove helmets, glasses and all articles of clothing.
Seriously, fucking with security cameras is really a needed thing?
...
Actually, this looks like just the way to get attention and get people manually making the effort to identify you.
Privacy is fundamentally not a technical problem but a social one, and needs to be protected with promotion of a privacy-conscious social contract and ultimately with laws (both to sanction private entities which abuse privacy and to limit the powers of the state to use any information gathered inappropriately).
Assuming your identity isn't given away by the fact that you're the only person wearing infrared emitting glasses. Anyway, for the full effect, you should walk around naked so you can't be identified by the clothes you're wearing.
Who ordered that?
Life gets more like a William Gibson novel by the day.
Also, these aren't actually doing much to conceal the identity of the wearers. This is equivalent to sticking a piece of that reflective tape they put on schoolbuses over your eyes.
Potatoes are friggin' magical. Can you power an alarm clock with a carrot? No, sir!
I recall reading somewhere that a driver in the UK was brought to court over using a device that rendered license plates invisible to cameras and ANPR readers, but not to the naked eye. could anyone here find the link?
Punisher 2099,
The punisher of the late 21st century had some sort of device that he wore so the facial recognition cameras only saw a "Punisher skull" rather than his face, much the same as the stylized skull on the original punisher's costume. As far as the do-ability of this, it seemed like some sort of active, augmented reality hack, or holographic thing, which at this point is pure science fiction, but one thing is clear both in reality and in that comic book, that there was no doubt the person with the skull for a face was the punisher.
Personally I think it might be more useful just to develop an invisibility cloak, but as to how one would be able to use such a thing and avoid being hit by trucks when crossing the street is beyond the scope of this article and technology fortunately or unfortunately as the case may be.
So when someone takes a picture of you wearing these glasses, uploads it to Facebook and tags you...
These glasses may foil current face detection techniques (I'm not even sure about that),
but based on the pictures provided they do not actually conceal from the camera a significant part of your face,
and do not introduce significant variable noise. It should be trivial to adjust face detection and recognition to overcome this
should these ever become popular enough.
This will work for some cameras, but a lot of them will pass this by. In fact, a lot of them will just laugh at you, mock you for looking like a moron, then arrest you.
IR-sensitive CCDs aren't in every camera. Some have filters specifically to get rid of it as well. You know, ever since, hmm, the 90s on my crappy videocamera.
Honestly, if you were some crazy terrorist bank-robbing nazi child rapist, make-up and latex paint will do far more than this, and cheaper.
Or, you know, the old classics, Halloween masks or leggings. (actually, leggings won't work now either, too high a resolution, can peer through them easily as evidenced by photoshop x-raying of semi-transparent and loose clothing of many celebrities)
Hilarious.
Didn't Mythbusters do an episode on that?
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Obey, Consume, Sleep, Conform.
Or any number of other things that can obscure your face. Far cheaper and more effective.
I personally favour a bandana, enabling me to look like I'm about to hold up the stagecoach.
Take a regular TV IR remote control and point it at your smartphone camera. You'll notice on your phone's screen that the LED lights up quite brightly.
You will be walking around a town with several of these things attached to your face, shining away happily. Do you not think anybody will notice?
This is the tech equivalent of Peter Griffin dressing in the clown costume while in the jungle, stating that "they're going to be looking for Army guys."
In the short time lasted series "Almost Human" there was the simple chemical you sprayed at your face, rendering your whole face as white in cameras.
If it would be like spraying a water and would be water-based so you can remove it just by washing face, why not.
I also have developed a type of invisibility glasses, though they're slightly different in terms of technology and function. Instead of making me "invisible" to certain types of camera, it makes all of *you* invisible to *me* when I'm wearing them. Also everything around you. And also it's really a blindfold. But hey, I like it...
Pound! Bang! Bin! Bash! is this a shell script or a Batman comic?
This will end up being considered suspicious behavior and you will be stopped and ID'd, doesn't matter that you haven't done anything wrong. Not only that but now you have made it EASIER for the network of cameras to track your movement because unless significant numbers of people are wearing these you are going to stand out like a full moon, at night, with clear skies, viewed from somewhere at high altitude away from light pollution.
I can just see the memo from the NSA to the engineering team to put in a backdoor so while the blinking lights may confuse run of the mill cameras, it will also be a beacon that broadcast a serial number that they can use to track you.
You can already buy identity concealing glasses. They work by projecting a false set of the facial landmarks used by facial recognition software while obscuring your own.
Best of all, you can get them at the dollar store.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
Knowing a bit about how the likely connection between UV light and cataracts, this doesn't sound like the best trade. Your security for your sight.
Agricultural workers, and those who primarily work outside have a higher incidence of cataract formation, and the leading supposed cause is UV exposure.
Are these the glasses that AVG big-wigs wear when they set up their affiliate toolbar installer program, or the "AVG Secure Seal" badges they use to endorse malware sites as "secure"?
Digital cameras are known to be sensitive to IR light, but analog cameras might not be (like regular analog photographs, or video using video tubes).
I'm guessing a "designer" came up with those hipster glasses?
Why bother with glasses when there are rechargeable button cell batteries that you can fix with double sided tape or a clip, to any pair of glasses?
Cameras come from the sides too. Where one could wear IR LED clip-on earrings.
And why point your week LED at a camera (which can be too far for the light to reach the lens) when you can point it AT THE FACE and "wash it out"?
It will age your skin though so additional facial creme might not be a bad idea.
Also, wearing a hat to minimize both sunlight and camera exposure.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
"...could be engineered to show one number to the naked eye and another to an infared sensitive camera?"
Yeah, because intentionally falsifying your license information instead of just selectively obscuring it is so much less illegal.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Would they be more or less effective than these? It'd be hard to beat that price point.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Unfortunately, they install the AVG toolbar on your forehead when you put them on.
And do they go well with my tin-foil hat?
If the point of the IR lights is to overexpose a camera that's IR sensitive, wouldn't this light them up like a Christmas tree? I wouldn't think that the kind of person who wants to hide their identity would be interested in wearing a big neon sign that says "Look at meee!!!" to any security guards monitoring those cameras....
So, this is an announcement for a product that doesn't actually exist, and which wouldn't even work given the two points made on the site! You need the photo to be taken using a flash, and for the camera to not have an IR filter or decent exposure software. I guess that does take out a lot of the crappy photos of people our partying at least.
Personally, I think a better idea for a time when this might actually be useful, say attending an anti--capitalism rally, would be to cut out a mask using the front packaging of some name brand product. Think of how much the manufacturers would hate to see a sea of faces, hidden behind "Coco Pops", "OMO Washing Powder" (stronger whites, lol!) and other brands they've spent billions enforcing into our psyches. Frosty the Tiger is smashing in that store-front! Captain Crunch just got a face full of mace and clubbed by those cops! Oh the humanity! Is that Princess Elsa walking topless down the street!
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
a $1.00 pair of mirrored lense sunglasses will also do this. Sorry AVG, your best and brightest are way behind the curve.
If you want to make their version, buy retroreflective tape and apply to your face or a set of cheap sunglasses.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
http://goo.gl/gnbG5c
These kind of things I've always wondered about. In our previous, pre-Reagan/Tatcher political world, it was called communist by the politicians that were in favor of the politics of Reagan and Tatcher, camera's, central databases, unregulated big businesses, tax avoidance by the rich/over taxation of the working class, ... all those things were not done. More and more I hear arguments about things in our society like vote with your wallet, you do not have to watch it, you do not have to use it, ...
For example, I hate commercials on television with a passion. People say, but you do not have to watch them. So I don't watch television anymore. 20-25 years ago, when I earned enough money, I opted for decoder cable television and was happy with the high quality programs. No product placement, no commercials, no hidden political agenda.
Yeah there were channels that were tied to a political view. But they were open about it, they did not hide the political ties with a political view. But what I liked about those channels was that they had a critical view on the parties that put their political view in action. Unlike today where you hear only one way dissing of the opposing political views. There were intellectual debates instead of the populism of today. Intellectual debates are no longer profitable, people that are easy to influence by populistic politicians are more easy to influence with product placements and commercials. And best of all, back then you only paid and received the channels you paid for. It was not a package like it is today.
Back then, the cable network was (local) government owned, and open to anyone who wanted to offer a service, as long as there was still room on the cable. When the cable started to become saturated, investments were made to improve the efficiency of the cable. This was done back then by changing the old style analog cable into the modern digital cable of today. Fiber was put into the ground to connect local cable networks, some cables were replaced by fiber and a high speed Internet system emerged from previous investments. The promise of a decade earlier became true: investing in cable is not only investing in one direction mind numbing entertainment, it is investing in the future of an interactive world (although nobody predicted the Internet).
Note that the cable network was not sponsored by the government but by a cooperative of free to enter participants (the only task of the government was to protect the indiviual rights of the participants). Even individuals could participate. The work was not done by a governmental work force, it was done by local, sometimes competing, sometimes collaborating small to mid-sized businesses.
Banks and big businesses were not really interested in giving loans to such a project in the seventies/eighties. They did not believe in the viability of such an expensive network. When pay-for television became increasingly popular and profitable, they started an offensive to buy up small independent broadcasters. Now, you cannot let individual investors and small, local companies earn all the money on smart investments, now can you?
When the population became more and more worried about the gravitational force of these acquisitions, literally all independent broadcasters were merged under the umbrella of the same international company (although through daughter companies), Thatcherism had landed in our political landscape.
Cooperatives were deemed communist and had to be avoided and privatized at all costs. Participants were forced to give up their shares in cooperatives, and as such the collective of cable cooperatives were merged into 3 private companies. 3 companies to give the illusion of competition, even when it was clear that those companies had all a monopoly on their share of the network. This was simply done by a change in the law. The government 'owned' the public good. While the law used to be that this was done to protect the interests of the indivi
More citations:
http://awesci.com/the-astonish...
http://gagne.homedns.org/~tgag...
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
> a series of infrared lights surrounding the eyes and nose is not visible to other people, but cameras will pick it up making recognition difficult at best.
This is active jamming, pure and simple. If you try this trick against a speed trap radar or lidar, you end up in jail (~Europe) or a coffin (~Americas). In the past few years, many people have found out about that painfully.
Can this be used to block license plate readers? I can see that being a useful application for this technology.
"The majority is always wrong; the minority is rarely right." - Henrik Ibsen
Looks very chic!
Once you can convince people to wear bright flashing beacons that label them for extra special attention, you win. Clearly anyone who wants to protect their privacy is either a bank robber or a terrorist.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
If someone in a high-security environment such as a a major sporting event wants to take your picture to run it through a face-matcher program, they are going to spend the money use* a camera which behaves like the human eye, ignoring frequencies outside of the range of human vision.
Basically, if you are still recognizable to a trained cop who has seen a good photo of you, someone can make a camera and computer that will recognize you with about as good an error rate as a trained cop.
*Or design one themselves, or pay someone to design one themselves.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Seeing that AVG is now in the bloatware business they will have to make these from solid lead.
Joking aside, this might be the first AVG product that I have wanted in years. The only problem is that camera people can solve this by putting IR filters on their cameras.
In Australia, when returning to the country at a major international airport one can go through the express lane. This uses facial recognition software to recognise one's face. However, in a passport photo one is not allowed to wear glasses and I'm significantly short sighted and can never actually see well enough to press the relevant buttons, get back in time and take my glasses off.
Ergo, I can only do it with glasses on and the machine's simply cannot recognise me.
Then, I have another problem as well, which is totally irrelevant to this thread but I'm an Asian looking guy (i.e. genetically Asian), in Australia with long hair (it's at least half way down my back). But I refuse to wear it in a pony tail like most other long haired Asian men in Australia and thus am easily mistaken as a woman. It doesn't hurt that I'm completely comfortable with my sexuality and refuse to participate in the sexist, male chauvinistic culture that would also identify me as a man.
So, all it takes is glasses to fool the machines and hair to fool the humans.
Just make some glasses with some cryptic incantation on them, and all the sudden, WE'RE ALL FREE AGAIN!
http://a.fsdn.com/sd/firehose/010/779/180-1.png
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
I always wondered how the heck a pair of glasses could make it impossible for everyone around him to realize that he was Superman...
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
> in gait recognition
I see what you did there...
Many states have laws on the books, rarely enforced, that make it a crime to hide your face by wearing any kind of mask in public. In the past, this has been about masked bandits. In the near future, you will be arrested for wearing these "invisibility" (IR or whatever) glasses in public. There will be sensors to detect when you're wearing them, and a handheld app for tagging you. The result will be a physical intervention (guard or policeman comes over to you) or correlation with your communications device emissions, photo/video stream as you walk around past public cameras, and license plate tracking. And once you've worn the glasses, there will be plenty of evidence to come knocking on your door for the "masking" crime. Whenever they feel like coming to get you, since the statute of limitations will be 6 years or something. I wonder what the catchphrase will be in the advertisements admonishing people not to "mask".
At least to women in any bar or any other social setting in the US.
the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
Who knew that the Unknown Comic was so far ahead of his time? His anti-surveillance head-gear (well, OK, actually a paper bag with eye-holes) is 100% effective and very inexpensive, too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Unknown_Comic
Instead of 'no-pants subway' day, let's have an International Unknown Comic day, in which everyone wears a paper bag on their commute to work. Not only would this be a great protest against intrusion of our privacy by the state, but has the added benefit of being hilarious.
http://www.fandompost.com/wp-c...
wear a mask?
I've think a significant market will develop for partial masks, specialized makeup, realistic prosthetics, etc. that are specifically designed to to defeat/confuse human or machine facial recognition.