hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: CCTV - Or how we Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the...

  1. #1
    Donor Pattern's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    6,522

    CCTV - Or how we Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the...


    After the 7/7 bombings in London, I had no doubt we'd have CCTV TV pictures of the bombers, identities and movements prior to there actions. As a culture, we've grown accustomed to the 1.85 million cameras recording a quantity of footage so vast that the overwhelming majority of it will fall into the unwatched oblivion of public archive bins even though people have the right to obtain such footage of themselves on request.


    The Chelyabinsk Meteor also illuminated something few outside Russia new about their attitudes to surveillance... Instead of this freedom destroying, privicy invading totalitarian hell, dash board cams are seen pretty much seen as an insurance, (or part of an actual insurance policy in some cases) And thank god, those videos where complete astronomy porn and provided scientists with lots of useful data I suspect would have been greatly reduced if it happened in any other city outside of Rusia.



    After the Boston bombings, I was rather sceptical of the likelihood that any pictures or recordings of the people involved would be recovered. But, low and behold, the low res, grainy, over-processed, innocuos clips of people behaving, mostly like people - with the TERRORISTS highlighted, for all to see. Given the freedom loving nature of the US, I suppose I found it surprising that CCTV was as in use and as prevalent in cities not named New York.


    As CCTV, surveillance and the capturing of everything everywhere seems set to explode. Were all our Orwellian fears unfounded? Are we starting to love the CCTV?

  2. #2
    Super Moderator DonorGlobal Moderator
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    3,701
    What does the term closed circuit TV really entail? Is the term maybe outdated?

    Closed-circuit television (CCTV) is the use of video cameras to transmit a signal to a specific place, on a limited set of monitors. It differs from broadcast television in that the signal is not openly transmitted, though it may employ point to point (P2P), point to multipoint, or mesh wireless links. Though almost all video cameras fit this definition, the term is most often applied to those used for surveillance in areas that may need monitoring such as banks, casinos, airports, military installations, and convenience stores. Videotelephony is seldom called "CCTV" but the use of video in distance education, where it is an important tool, is often so called.[1][2]

    Because in honesty it does not seem very closed circuit anymore.

    Just an observation of course.

  3. #3
    Donor Mynxee's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    EvE-Scout Enclave
    Posts
    1,303
    Perhaps our addiction to information has overcome our fears, especially when situations like the Boston bombing demonstrate how useful cctv and other surveillance can be in identifying wrongdoers. There are cameras all over everywhere in cities and retail establishments. People here just don't seem to pay any attention even though they may have opinions on the matter in public debates. Probably goes hand in hand with the tendency of humans to focus on their agenda and not really be that observant of the environment around them most of the time...unless they're doing something wrong and are savvy enough to know that the probability of being filmed in a city setting is fairly high. In fact, most comments I hear people make about such cameras (besides the ones that snap a photo of your license plate and result in a by-mail traffic ticket) are more along the lines of, "Well, if someone breaks into my car at this shopping center, the cameras will catch it."

  4. #4
    Keorythe's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 11, 2011
    Posts
    2,369
    It's a bit of a gray area here in the US. In the old days the images weren't very good and sound pickup used up too much bandwidth. Now, you zoom in with enough detail to read what someone is reading or typing. Conversations thought to be private can be picked up and bandwidth isn't an issue with HD quality imaging and sound. Use of devices like this used by government agencies (State or fed) to watch or track a person requires a warrant. Now, the lines are blurred. Officially it's still legal. But it's only a matter of time before this gets revisited in a pretty hard way.

    That last picture also brings up something. The difference between civilian use and government use is a pretty big step. One is for private purposes, the other is used to incriminate a person.

    Given the freedom loving nature of the US, I suppose I found it surprising that CCTV was as in use and as prevalent in cities not named New York.
    Place like Boston and NYC are special locations and not really representative of the US as a while. They tend to enact procedures and municipal laws that just don't fly anywhere else while barely skirting constitutional legality. They also have a very liberal interpretation (not politics) of "reasonable suspicion".

  5. #5
    Ophichius's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 15, 2011
    Location
    Hedonistic Imperative
    Posts
    5,250
    Quote Originally Posted by Pattern View Post
    As CCTV, surveillance and the capturing of everything everywhere seems set to explode. Were all our Orwellian fears unfounded? Are we starting to love the CCTV?
    Disclaimer, this post is going to be very US-centric. I can't speak for the rest of the world, as I've not lived anywhere else, and visiting for a few weeks doesn't give enough data to make a judgement by. Also, I'm going to use CCTV as shorthand for 'pervasive video surveillance', because I'm not typing that more than once.

    I think it's less that we love CCTV and more that most of us see the inevitability of it. We fought the march of pervasive surveillance. And surveillance won. It wasn't some fiery battle, rioters and placards and clashes with police in the streets. No it was one of simple awareness, inertia, and a changing set of values. We're more willing than ever to give up liberties for promises of security, less willing to stand up for the philosophy on which this country was founded. And nowhere is there a real discussion of the cost of our choices. This country was founded on the principle that with any freedom, any liberty, comes a price. It was founded by men who understood the price they were willing to pay for the freedoms they considered essential.

    In two hundred years the world has undergone immense change, and we as a nation have never sat down to have another talk about what freedoms we consider essential, and what price we're willing to pay for them. Instead we've scrabbled for 'security' in the wake of national tragedy, and we grasp the easy, obvious solutions offered to us without ever analyzing them, without ever stopping to think if they work, if we need them. CCTV is one of those things. It seems so obvious, 'if you have nothing to hide, than why worry?' say the proponents, neatly sweeping aside any thought that privacy itself could be a valued right to some people. And once CCTV is sold to us as 'security'? Why then anyone who questions it is 'against security', which means they must be against America, and thus with the terrorists. Such a clean, bright, easy to follow line.

    So a few outspoken activists speak up, a greater number of people with doubts grumble quietly, or stay silent. And we never have a dialogue on the subject. And privacy dies a slow, quiet death.

    -O
    Last edited by Ophichius; April 20 2013 at 01:19:09 PM.
    I thought what I'd do was, I'd pretend I was one of those Thukkers, that way I wouldn't have to have any goddamn stupid useless conversations with anybody.
    Failing the Voight-Kampff test, one tortoise at a time.

  6. #6
    Donor TheManFromDelmonte's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    5,021
    Quote Originally Posted by Keorythe View Post
    One is for private purposes, the other is used to incriminate a person.
    A better way to think of it is one can be held to account, the other can't. As all privately recorded footage is usable by the government anyway, and they wouldn't need a search warrant to see what you've said and done in public. And it's alot easier, in the UK and USA, to prevent the government storing this stuff in the first place.

    Once everyone is wearing glass, or similar, and every image is being beamed back to HQ to do a facebook face match, whoever owns that tech will know nearly everything. Where people are, who they talk to, what they say (voice recognition) Far, far, more than we do today from CCTV.

    I'm not going to flee for the woods and shoot strangers just yet but it's really something that society needs to agree on.

  7. #7
    Sacul's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 11, 2011
    Location
    Hollandistan
    Posts
    6,924
    The rise of CCTV in Holland does fuckall to prevent crime. Every big city is absolutely filled with camera's at a rate of a few thousand to one observer. The only thing its good for is convicting somebody with the footage.
    What you see over here is a rise in crime to non observed areas, better masking of identity features (hats, scarfs etc) by criminals and a false sense of security. But ofcourse there are just adding more camera's to a larger area.
    Everybody is used to it and no dissenting voices remain after a fierce debate in the early '00s.
    What i am more worried about is our very stringent laws concerning phone taps and internet monitoring. We are the worlds leader regarding people who are monitored. Far more than in the USA, it seems that if you fart in public thats enough grounds to check your phone/computer with help of the Telco/ISP. Absolutely retarded but the usual 'if you dont have anything to hide whats the problem?' rhetoric is allways spouted closely followed by 'terrorism' and the big hitter 'child porn'. You dont agree with the phone tapping??? z0mg he must be a kiddie raper.
    Schopenhauer:

    All truth passes through three stages.
    First, it is ridiculed.
    Second, it is violently opposed.
    Third, it is accepted as being self-evident..

  8. #8
    Donor Pattern's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    6,522
    So the rates of crime is rising? I heard it was the opposite.

  9. #9
    Super Moderator DonorGlobal Moderator whispous's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Mails Tegg > пошел ты на хуй
    Posts
    4,734
    Quote Originally Posted by Pattern View Post
    So the rates of crime is rising? I heard it was the opposite.
    rising crime headlines is just tabloid scaremongering.

  10. #10
    Tiny's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 19, 2011
    Location
    Womble is spy!
    Posts
    741
    Can we always trust every one who get hold of this power...forever.

    In europe, back a little way, we've seen what can happen when an elected government gets too much power. If the BNPs vote keeps rising I wouldn't want too many cameras pointed my way.

  11. #11
    Marlona Sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    7,391
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophichius View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Pattern View Post
    As CCTV, surveillance and the capturing of everything everywhere seems set to explode. Were all our Orwellian fears unfounded? Are we starting to love the CCTV?
    Disclaimer, this post is going to be very US-centric. I can't speak for the rest of the world, as I've not lived anywhere else, and visiting for a few weeks doesn't give enough data to make a judgement by. Also, I'm going to use CCTV as shorthand for 'pervasive video surveillance', because I'm not typing that more than once.

    I think it's less that we love CCTV and more that most of us see the inevitability of it. We fought the march of pervasive surveillance. And surveillance won. It wasn't some fiery battle, rioters and placards and clashes with police in the streets. No it was one of simple awareness, inertia, and a changing set of values. We're more willing than ever to give up liberties for promises of security, less willing to stand up for the philosophy on which this country was founded. And nowhere is there a real discussion of the cost of our choices. This country was founded on the principle that with any freedom, any liberty, comes a price. It was founded by men who understood the price they were willing to pay for the freedoms they considered essential.

    In two hundred years the world has undergone immense change, and we as a nation have never sat down to have another talk about what freedoms we consider essential, and what price we're willing to pay for them. Instead we've scrabbled for 'security' in the wake of national tragedy, and we grasp the easy, obvious solutions offered to us without ever analyzing them, without ever stopping to think if they work, if we need them. CCTV is one of those things. It seems so obvious, 'if you have nothing to hide, than why worry?' say the proponents, neatly sweeping aside any thought that privacy itself could be a valued right to some people. And once CCTV is sold to us as 'security'? Why then anyone who questions it is 'against security', which means they must be against America, and thus with the terrorists. Such a clean, bright, easy to follow line.

    So a few outspoken activists speak up, a greater number of people with doubts grumble quietly, or stay silent. And we never have a dialogue on the subject. And privacy dies a slow, quiet death.

    -O
    If it wasn't for those big bad CCTV setups, those psychotic brothers would have made it to New York to kill more people. If it means there is video footage of me having a bad hair day and bad guys being caught faster than they would be without the cameras; I choose the cameras.

  12. #12
    Synapse's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    3,111
    Quote Originally Posted by Marlona Sky View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophichius View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Pattern View Post
    As CCTV, surveillance and the capturing of everything everywhere seems set to explode. Were all our Orwellian fears unfounded? Are we starting to love the CCTV?
    Disclaimer, this post is going to be very US-centric. I can't speak for the rest of the world, as I've not lived anywhere else, and visiting for a few weeks doesn't give enough data to make a judgement by. Also, I'm going to use CCTV as shorthand for 'pervasive video surveillance', because I'm not typing that more than once.

    I think it's less that we love CCTV and more that most of us see the inevitability of it. We fought the march of pervasive surveillance. And surveillance won. It wasn't some fiery battle, rioters and placards and clashes with police in the streets. No it was one of simple awareness, inertia, and a changing set of values. We're more willing than ever to give up liberties for promises of security, less willing to stand up for the philosophy on which this country was founded. And nowhere is there a real discussion of the cost of our choices. This country was founded on the principle that with any freedom, any liberty, comes a price. It was founded by men who understood the price they were willing to pay for the freedoms they considered essential.

    In two hundred years the world has undergone immense change, and we as a nation have never sat down to have another talk about what freedoms we consider essential, and what price we're willing to pay for them. Instead we've scrabbled for 'security' in the wake of national tragedy, and we grasp the easy, obvious solutions offered to us without ever analyzing them, without ever stopping to think if they work, if we need them. CCTV is one of those things. It seems so obvious, 'if you have nothing to hide, than why worry?' say the proponents, neatly sweeping aside any thought that privacy itself could be a valued right to some people. And once CCTV is sold to us as 'security'? Why then anyone who questions it is 'against security', which means they must be against America, and thus with the terrorists. Such a clean, bright, easy to follow line.

    So a few outspoken activists speak up, a greater number of people with doubts grumble quietly, or stay silent. And we never have a dialogue on the subject. And privacy dies a slow, quiet death.

    -O
    If it wasn't for those big bad CCTV setups, those psychotic brothers would have made it to New York to kill more people. If it means there is video footage of me having a bad hair day and bad guys being caught faster than they would be without the cameras; I choose the cameras.
    You can't seriously be saying that a bad hair day is the worst case scenario for government public surveillance?

    I'd make a list of worse things but this Orwell guy already made a better list and even published it in handy book format.

  13. #13
    Ophichius's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 15, 2011
    Location
    Hedonistic Imperative
    Posts
    5,250
    Quote Originally Posted by Marlona Sky View Post
    If it wasn't for those big bad CCTV setups, those psychotic brothers would have made it to New York to kill more people. If it means there is video footage of me having a bad hair day and bad guys being caught faster than they would be without the cameras; I choose the cameras.
    Nope. They got caught because they started a shootout with a campus cop. CCTV footage has so far done nothing but get several innocent people harassed by rabid mobs. One of whom was hounded to their death.

    -O
    I thought what I'd do was, I'd pretend I was one of those Thukkers, that way I wouldn't have to have any goddamn stupid useless conversations with anybody.
    Failing the Voight-Kampff test, one tortoise at a time.

  14. #14
    מלך יהודים Zeekar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    14,959
    I still have to see a claim where CCTV footage actually decreases crime in a section of a city. Heck I've seen research showing decent night lighting is far more effective.


    

  15. #15
    Movember '12 Best Facial Hair Movember 2012Donor Lallante's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 13, 2011
    Posts
    17,655
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophichius View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Marlona Sky View Post
    If it wasn't for those big bad CCTV setups, those psychotic brothers would have made it to New York to kill more people. If it means there is video footage of me having a bad hair day and bad guys being caught faster than they would be without the cameras; I choose the cameras.
    Nope. They got caught because they started a shootout with a campus cop. CCTV footage has so far done nothing but get several innocent people harassed by rabid mobs. One of whom was hounded to their death.

    -O
    To be fair, its pretty clear that they only got desperate and did that shooting because their faces were plastered all over the news due to CCTV.

  16. #16
    Marlona Sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    7,391
    Jesus Christ you guys can't be serious? Do you live in a cave or something?

    The poor guy who had his legs blown off, the one in the wheel chair being pushed by the guy with the cowboy hat, gave the FBI a description of the two bombers because one sat one of the backpacks right at his feet and looked at him. So from the description, the FBI was able to comb through the video footage and find the exact guys fast. Once that happened, they released the images to the public. So instead of some sketch artist coming up with something that looks like thousands of people, we get images that narrow it down to the exact guys.

    Do you know why they started a shootout with a campus cop? Because the cop recognized them from the video footage that was released to the public!!! But you guys go on with your 'Big Brother is out to get me!!' tinfoil hats. When you are done, you are welcome back to reality with the rest of us. Or stick your head in the sand again like an ostrich hiding from the real world.

  17. #17
    Movember '12 Best Facial Hair Movember 2012Donor Lallante's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 13, 2011
    Posts
    17,655
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeekar View Post
    I still have to see a claim where CCTV footage actually decreases crime in a section of a city. Heck I've seen research showing decent night lighting is far more effective.
    CCTV is consistently effective against shoplifting and vehicle theft but not against violent crime and disorderley conduct. This is pretty common sense as the first two involve pre-meditation and rely on stealth while the later two are often not pre-meditated and done regardless of the witnesses etc.
    http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publicati.../12/03151641/4

  18. #18
    Movember '12 Best Facial Hair Movember 2012Donor Lallante's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 13, 2011
    Posts
    17,655
    Quote Originally Posted by Marlona Sky View Post
    Jesus Christ you guys can't be serious? Do you live in a cave or something?

    The poor guy who had his legs blown off, the one in the wheel chair being pushed by the guy with the cowboy hat, gave the FBI a description of the two bombers because one sat one of the backpacks right at his feet and looked at him. So from the description, the FBI was able to comb through the video footage and find the exact guys fast. Once that happened, they released the images to the public. So instead of some sketch artist coming up with something that looks like thousands of people, we get images that narrow it down to the exact guys.

    Do you know why they started a shootout with a campus cop? Because the cop recognized them from the video footage that was released to the public!!! But you guys go on with your 'Big Brother is out to get me!!' tinfoil hats. When you are done, you are welcome back to reality with the rest of us. Or stick your head in the sand again like an ostrich hiding from the real world.
    2 of the last 5 posters wholeheartedly agree with you

  19. #19
    Phrixus Zephyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    Queenstown, NZ
    Posts
    3,418
    Quote Originally Posted by Synapse View Post
    You can't seriously be saying that a bad hair day is the worst case scenario for government public surveillance?

    I'd make a list of worse things but this Orwell guy already made a better list and even published it in handy book format.
    Except that relies on a totalitarian government before anyone even has the slightest incentive to actively watch a populace and i don't know about you, but i'd be more worried about the military arsenal said government has at it's fingertips before i start worrying about them watching me buy bog roll at Tesco.

  20. #20
    Lowa [NSN]'s Avatar
    Join Date
    April 14, 2011
    Posts
    2,895
    Boston guy was picked up by a privately owned camera in a store, not city CCTV. Once that was done they could match it with the rest (sketch from witnesses ofc helped first ID).
    CCTV doesnt prevent this type of shit. Hell, it doesnt prevent street fights etc where people know they are being watched (crimes of passion if you like) as its a heat of the moment thing.
    CCTV is only good after the fact, which I will say is a good thing but I always feel thats starting in the wrong end, pre-crime intervention or procedures to stop it happening in the first place should be the starting point.

    Terrorists dont care at all so they are no use for preventing bombings and shit like that. At least in the way CCTV is used now and with the current quality of the majority of installations.
    However, the new HD/Megapixel cameras and video software's have analytic capabilities. Face recognition, motion recognition, heat maps, pattern/movement analysis etc.
    This is starting to pick up heavily in the consumer spaces, shopping malls, grocery stores etc to analyze buyer behavior, who looks at what, for how long and how people move through the store - which isles are more popular, which shelves gets more attention (so that the storage can charge back to its suppliers - you want to be in the spotlight? Well, thats another 5% off our cost when buying your shitty cheese).

    Ofc they cant/allowed match that with an ID but there is no problem what so ever to follow a person(s) around the store based on the first images taken when you walked through the door; you can match against face, cloths/color and most recently by how you walk/move.
    Apparently that is as accurate as fingerprints, go figure.

    Talking to the camera and software vendors this is the #1 growth area and it will explode over the coming years becoming much larger than city CCTV.
    This is not only used on people, quite a few of the large logistics centers use it to to analyze how things move around the compound and find more efficient ways to load/unload trucks, ships etc.

    But, overall, I think its cool but damned if I want it. Not that it will matter, unless there is a absolutely colossal fuck up by someone and 100m people get their privacy violated in public this is here to stay and it will just keep on growing.
    That said, the electronic surveillance is much, much more concerning and how teh fuck we allowed that shit to pass is beyond me.


    Also, for our Russian friends - Moscow is currently building the worlds largest city surveillance network. 640,000 cameras in Moscow city. About 200,000 are operational right now.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarminic View Post
    I would create a dragon made out of vaginas. Then I would create a dragon made out of dicks. Then I would have them fight to the death.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •