Well if "Minority Report" AI type cameras are not progress, I don't know what is.

I'm sure people won't be convicted of "about to commit a crime" but it sure will go a long way to ensure the safety and security of the people.

What wrong with that?

I agree. But only if this suspect behaviour is used as a prevention and not as in minority report to punish somebody due to something they think he was going to do...

I mean, if I call the police because there is a stranger in the street inspecting the cars parked, I hope that they come to disuade the possible thief just with their presence... If the cameras do the automatic report of suspected behaviours it could be good.

The only issue is that this automatic thing can be used to fool the police, you just need a certain number of actors doing suspected things in several monitored places to distract the police from the real crime that you are going to commit with a carefully trained behaviour to not act suspiciously...

---

My understanding is that anything that happens in a public place is well "public". Note the "reality police shows" when someone is being arrested and tries to block the camera, they are told it is a public place and quite within rights to film.

I believe you can set up a web cam pointing to the street and record or broadcast it anywhere.

This is the Abbey Road crossing this morning:



And this is Times Square yesterday from the "archives" (too early there yet!!)



There are hundreds of others all for "amusement" which of course anyone with web access can view.

---

It strikes me as a bit 1984, to be honest.
As a means of crime prevention, for town/city centres, the surveys aren't convincing, as reported in 1,000 CCTV cameras to solve just one crime, Met Police admits.

There is also some evidence that they may just be crime movers. If the criminals know location X is covered then they move to location Y. Which means location Y now needs CCTV and the crime hotspot moves on. There is also the possibility that the "metal theft" crimes could be a means of blacking out the system in a small area.

One place they seem to be effective is car parks. And their use at protecting property, such as a factory or school where they can be used with other sensors to record suspicious behavior they work well.

So I think society needs to be a think a bit more about where and when it installs CCTV systems. And although not CCTV, isn't this School Tracker also a bit 1984'ish. I can see some benefits, but to me I think it is OTT. Or is it schools have got too big and impersonnel and now too hard to control without electronic aids.

My town has a CCTV control room in a secure location, that is manned 24/7. There are about 40 screens all around the walls which monitor all parts of the town, and also some wider local areas. It is there to monitor RTA's, Traffic congestion, local crime, Town management, and general health and safety. It can identify shoplifters, and help keep the town centre and train stations safe at night from drunken and anti-social behaviour. It has direct links to all the emergency services, plus Scotland Yard, and Whitehall.

As you can imagine, it was on full alert the summer before last. It has won many top awards for its operation, and I and some others were given a guided tour recently. I was most impressed and not at all intimidated.

Something else to worry about.....

Minority Report arriving at a camera near you....

wow. And that's exactly where I become clear on my views. That's too far. Like I mentioned earlier, when you use technology to make inferences about what a person has done (or may do), then you are crossing a line. That is a whole step beyond simply surveilling a public area.

---

#resist

Something else to worry about.....

Minority Report arriving at a camera near you....

---

its good streaming.

---

But isn't it realistic to believe that if the window to your home is wide open and a camera in a public place has a view, you're opening up your home to the public?

If you are a woman and take your clothes off if front of a window and a man sees you, he is a peeping tom. If you are a man and take your clothes off in front of a window and a woman sees it you are a flasher.

What if it is the Google street view crew?

---

So what did you do on Black friday, did your wife/girl-friend drag you to the shops because she needed a beast-of-burden. If so were you observed by the Bionic Mannequins.

WP - Bionic mannequins spy on shoppers to aid sales

How is it that whenever National/Local government do things to excess, that the ones complainng about that excess are labelled as "people with something to hide"?

Don't forget that this is all done by taxpayers cash!

---

But isn't it realistic to believe that if the window to your home is wide open and a camera in a public place has a view, you're opening up your home to the public?

If you open a window anybody that pass in front of it can see inside your home. And you can do almost nothing to avoid that (unless you proove that someone in particular is a stalker or something like that).
The difference between passing people and the cammera will be that to avoid beeing constantly watched you will need to keep that window always closed. I guess that in this case you should have the right to request to the entity that holds the cammera to redirect it so it doesnt point to your window... if not then you will need a courtain... (or a better lawyer)

---

And if someone is taking measures to hide something, shouldn't that be enough for a judge to issue a wire tap order and to allow some unmarked vans in the public street to paint the windows with lasers in order to find out what that person is hiding?

Of course it should. Anyone hiding anything is up to no good. That much is obvious.

---

If Ive locked the door and turned on the radio at a high volume ... ;D

But it is easy to subtract a radio from the sound recording as they know exactly what was broadcast. (Was a lot harder before computer signal processing.)

Your right... I'll have to untune it so it produces just noise... LOL

EDIT: Im fried, modern receivers shut off the sound when there is no carrier detected :(

(Time to break out the shortwave and turn the squelch down.)

Horacio, you brought up a great point in your first post. These cameras are in public places, and what right to privacy can anyone expect to have when they are not in their own home? Now, if they start pointing cameras in windows or using future technology to peer into peoples homes, that's a line I never want to see crossed.

Also, Luigi mentioned that the cameras across the pond are well marked.
In the US, only some of them are well marked (like red-light cameras and police cameras) the rest are not marked at all, and who knows what their purpose is...

---

#resist

If Ive locked the door and turned on the radio at a high volume ... ;D

But it is easy to subtract a radio from the sound recording as they know exactly what was broadcast. (Was a lot harder before computer signal processing.)

Your right... I'll have to untune it so it produces just noise... LOL

EDIT: Im fried, modern receivers shut off the sound when there is no carrier detected :(

---

If there was a prohibition on more than one copy existing and a requirement for destruction after 30 days, with some teeth, say life no parole for violation, then perhaps it might be permissible. But the FBI/NSA/CIA would never agree to such a reasonable limit. It is important to them to build multi-decade dossiers on "dissidents" or Nixon style enemy lists.

---

If Ive locked the door and turned on the radio at a high volume ... ;D

But it is easy to subtract a radio from the sound recording as they know exactly what was broadcast. (Was a lot harder before computer signal processing.)

---

I dont know if I like it, but I dont see an invasion of privacy if the cameras are pointing to public places...
If watching someone walking/riding in the street were an invasion to their privacy then you shouldnt be allowed to have windows facing the streets... (or worst, you should use blind glasses when you were outside of your house)

TBH, the only place in which I feel that I have real privacy is my own bathroom, but only If Ive locked the door and turned on the radio at a high volume ... ;D

---

As a law abiding citizen I have no problem with cameras. It seems to me the people who complain about them have something to hide. Motorists seem to be the biggest complainers, usually just after being caught doing something wrong, muttering about extra tax on motoring. Well in here in the UK there are signs telling what the speed limit is, (except for for 30mph limit on lit roads), there signs telling there are cameras, speed cameras are in open and painted yellow so you can see them, there are maps telling you where the permanent cameras are, Sat Nav tells you there are cameras there, so lets call it a tax - a tax on stupidity.

---

.


A person who makes no mistakes, creates nothing.