RSS
Sound Surveillance For The Spots That Cameras Can't Quite Get
from the they're-listening dept
There seems to be tons of innovation these days in the surveillance industry. New technologies are springing up that allow law enforcement to detect the presence of microscopic (but incriminating) objects, like drug residue, and in the future, surveillance cameras may be able to automatically recognize when suspicious activity is going on. But any technology that relies on a line of sight will fail to detect someone lurking behind a building, or in a shadow. That's where ShotSpotter comes in. Using a network of sensors, the technology instantly identifies the exact location of a gunshot and relays it to police. So where it's hard to capture every square foot of an area with cameras, sound can fill the gap. Of course, false positives will probably be a problem, unless it can be certain of the difference between the sound of a gun, and other loud noises that are often heard in a city. Update: Turns out this is fairly old news. We had stories about it nearly four years ago.
9 Comments | Leave a Comment..
- Rep. Doyle Introduces Bill To Provide Public Access To Publicly Funded Research
- Beware Of Those Who Claim They're 'Saving The Culture Business' When They're Really Protecting Those Who Strip Artists Of Rights
- The Rise Of The 'Professional Amateur' And The Fall Of Gated, Exclusionary 'Clubs'
- OK Go Shows, Once Again, How Content Is Advertising... And How There Are Many Revenue Streams For Musicians
- We're Living In the Most Creative Time In History
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
Well...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
two cents worth
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Criminals Invest in boom speakers
'Sounds' like if you was going to do a crime, I would invest in some really loud car stereo speakers and some Gangstas Lyrics. OR I would get some one else to make enough noise to draw them away from the real scene of the crime.
Of course I can be airborne in moments heading towards the new mexican wall that won't stop me :)
ps mouse over my name
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
some surveillance (intelligence) basics
collection is easy. video cameras can run 24/7 and probably catch all sorts of interesting things. you could photograph every car you see on the highway and no one can stop you. you can tape record interviews with hundreds of people rather easily. this is easily automated by machines.
analysis is not easy. you have to go thru the data that you have collected and separate what is useful from what is not useful. THEN you have to see if the useful data generates any connections. often, analysis has to be done by trained professionals to interpret the data, which can be problematic if the data collected requires specific skills are somewhat rare like the ability to speak a certain language or read the output from a sophisticated peice of equipment for example. analysis can take a long time if the data has to be anaylzed in real time, like recorded telephone calls that have to be listened to.
the more data that you collect, the more data and the longer it will take you to anlayze.
so, anyone who is worried about the US becoming a surveilance state, just generate more useless data :-)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
since this crap is old ..
i charge him with faking being fat and stupid.. i have reasons to think this.. for one, no one as fat and stupid as he is could get as far as he has...i think its all an act....or else he just stops taking his anti-fat and anti-stupidity medication before he goes on the air....
what a piece of shit he is.
just when i think ive seen all the sleaze possible he comes up with something new..
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: since this crap is old ..
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
You can challenge the tech in court
I just recall a story where a lawyer for a man in Florida challenged the breathalyzer test machine it self. The County rejected giving the breath machine to the defense attorney so the County lost the DUI case.
After reading some of these pro's opinions and comments about the breath test. Their opinions make a lot of sense.
[google search man challenges DUI breath test]
Like the breath test machine does not know if you’re a male or a female which with the weight there is a big difference between the two and drinking.
I'm not for drinking and driving but I have heard some stories that make you go WTF. Because they have these 'Toys" they F. your life up.
[cnn.com has a story about a flash light breath test also]
So if something new comes along all you have to do if they try to get you into some sort of trouble is challenge their technology. To see if it is really is as perfect a tool to use or not.
Besides that point the idea of just pointing these new toy's at the innocent till proven guilty is just not right in a 'free' society.
Imagine the possibilities they could use this technology to detect. That you’re a smoker of tobacco ban you from a bar. Or that you use KY lotion on your self while your posting things about Rush Limbaugh.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
surveillance
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment