by Mike Masnick
Tue, Jan 29th 2008 8:50pm
There's plenty of reasonable concern over the increasing use of surveillance cameras -- but if you're going to install them, you'd think that you'd want cameras that were actually useful. Not so in San Francisco. As Engadget points out, the cameras in San Francisco have ridiculously bad frame rates, making them more like still cameras than video cameras. In some cases, there are 10 seconds between frames, meaning that the "footage" is often not particularly useful in solving crimes. San Francisco still insists that the cameras are useful for deterrent purposes. Somehow we doubt that it's a "feature" of these cameras to protect privacy by being horrifically bad. It does make you wonder, though, who makes security cameras that only take a photo every 10 seconds -- and, even more importantly, why would anyone buy such a security camera?
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- San Francisco Ponders The Largest Community Broadband Network Ever Built
- Rep. Devin Nunes' Hypocrisy On Display In 'Concerns' Over NSA Surveillance
- Court Says FBI Doesn't Have To Hand Over Its Rules For Surveilling Domestic Journalists
- Civil Liberties Groups Point Out More Reasons Why The 'Privacy Shield' Framework For Transatlantic Data Flows Is At Risk
- Despite Stream Of Leaks Exposing Tremendous Gov't Surveillance Capabilities, James Comey Still Complaining About 'Going Dark'