Don't Take My Picture
from the greased-lens dept
Some Georgia Tech researchers have come up with some technology that detects the presence of digital cameras then shoots a targeted beam of light at them to prevent them taking any legible photos. The device works by sensing infrared light reflected back from the coating on camera lenses, then sends the focused beam directed at the camera. But rather than mentioning anything useful for the technology (like, say, putting it in credit cards to foil those pesky cameraphone identity thieves), CNet focuses on how it could be used to stop video piracy — because, clearly, there’s not enough of that technology already. Should it ever be commercialized, this system will be a godsend to those companies that are scared of cameraphones. While it will make them feel safer, it’s pretty difficult to see how the supposed benefits of camera jamming could outweigh its negative effects.
Comments on “Don't Take My Picture”
don't take my picture
this digital camera foiling technilogy, could it be used to prevent traffic cameras from taking the picture of autos that run red lights? That would be useful technology!
Re: don't take my picture
I don’t see why not….. but I’m guessing a mirror would be less obvious and probably more effective 😉
Re: don't take my picture
There are a slew of patents on IR jamming
technology for prevention of movie piracy. I
studied this approach about five years ago. An
idea that was a couple of years too late for me.
Stopping camera's will only hurt us.
What about all the people caught on camera doing things they shouldn’t.. What if police put it in their cars so people can’t record them beating someone else. On the other side, what’s to say someone putting something like this in their car, so police recorders can’t record them drive off. I’ll take this out of cars, what’s to say drug a house puts this on the outside of their house so police can’t record their actions. What are these people thinking. Some technology is just bad!
Re: Stopping camera's will only hurt us.
Most police surveillance is done from a much further range than 33 feet. Also, they would need to set up these all around the perimeter of the house for it to be a “shield.”
This CRE technology seems like it’d be best for an environment where disabling it would arouse suspicion. If a drug dealer sets one up to block police surveillance, all the police need is a sharpshooter to disable it. After all, what is the drugdealer going to do? Call the police?
Re: Re: Stopping camera's will only hurt us.
Seems like this would be foiled pretty easily anyway. How hard could it be to overwhelm such a system with false postives?
Re: Re: Stopping camera's will only hurt us.
So… You are suggesting that teh police start to destroy private propperty without even so much as a warrent now?
No Subject Given
This only effects digital cameras.
No Subject Given
celebs can use them to get the damn papprazzi off their back
Camera Phone Jamming
This technology, if cost-effective coould prove to be a real use in lockerrooms, bathrooms, and other areas where privacy is expected.
All those weirdo porn sites will have to find something better to do.
No Subject Given
this would be useful in Saudi Arabia where, until only a year ago, camera phones were still technically illegal. Camera phones are still frowned upon many there as being “too easily abused” — I’m sure every father is now happy that there is technology to prevent his family’s honor from being tarnished by hooligans snapping photos of his daughter’s uncovered face.