Facial recognitian CCTV developed that can scan 36 million frames per second

Run_to_da_hills · 26-03-2012 01:01PM #1

36 million images per second would be the equivalent of scanning the entire population of the USA in 8.3 seconds or Europe in 20.2 seconds

"A new camera technology from Hitachi Hokusai Electric can scan days of camera footage instantly, and find any face which has EVER walked past it.

The ‘trick’ is that the camera ‘processes’ faces as it records, so that all faces which pass in front of it are recorded and stored instantly. Faces are stored as a searchable ‘biometric’ record, storing the unique.

* camera stores details of everyone who walks past it
* Stores ‘library’ of face info
* Can scan through 36 million faces per second searching for people
* Will be on sale to governments within next year".

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2119386/Could-governments-recognise-ANYONE-instantly-CCTV-Japanese-camera-scan-36-million-faces-second.html

Jonny7 · 26-03-2012 06:02PM

Bad news for shoplifters and criminals.

Daithi 1 · 26-03-2012 08:04PM

Great news for gullibles..

My name is URL · 26-03-2012 08:39PM

Jonny7 wrote: »

Bad news for shoplifters and criminals.

People willing to trade their freedoms for some temporary security; deserve neither, and will lose both.

Jonny7 · 26-03-2012 08:47PM

My name is URL wrote: »

People willing to trade their freedoms for some temporary security; deserve neither, and will lose both.

Which freedoms will people lose from this?

26-03-2012 08:49PM

My name is URL wrote: »

People willing to trade their freedoms for some temporary security; deserve neither, and will lose both.

What freedoms are being given up exactly? How precisely is this a bad thing?

Cause it seems to be exactly the same as all the things Rtdh tells you to be afraid of. Some new technology and vague nebulous warnings about stuff that never comes true.

My name is URL · 26-03-2012 08:50PM

Jonny7 wrote: »

Which freedoms will people lose from this?

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID1098449_code249137.pdf?abstractid=998565&mirid=3 (PDF)

Have a proper read of that.. it's worth it.

The argument of 'only the guilty need be worried' is one of the silliest made in topics such as this.

TaosHum · 26-03-2012 08:52PM

When I worked in a casino they had a type of system like this (obviously on a lower scale).

Worked very well, the door would not open until it got full facial recognition (which means no hats, etc).

Think banks and the like would jump all over that type of equipment.

Jonny7 · 26-03-2012 09:02PM

My name is URL wrote: »

The argument of 'only the guilty need be worried' is one of the silliest made in topics such as this.

You answer the question with a 28 page PDF file?

How in Ireland would this new CCTV technology affect my freedoms?

I am struggling to think of any situation.

Daithi 1 · 26-03-2012 10:55PM

Jonny7 wrote: »

You answer the question with a 28 page PDF file?

How in Ireland would this new CCTV technology affect my freedoms?

I am struggling to think of any situation.

Me : "I don't want to be on a database".

Government : "Tough sh!t".

Jonny7 · 26-03-2012 11:05PM

Daithi 1 wrote: »

Me : "I don't want to be on a database".

Government : "Tough sh!t".

Bank/school/university/social services/doctor/credit card company/etc : "you're already on a database, deal with it"

My name is URL · 27-03-2012 12:20AM

Jonny7 wrote: »

You answer the question with a 28 page PDF file?

How in Ireland would this new CCTV technology affect my freedoms?

I am struggling to think of any situation.

What's your real name? You've nothing to hide, right?

Jonny7 · 27-03-2012 01:54AM

My name is URL wrote: »

What's your real name? You've nothing to hide, right?

More slippery than a politician

I'll try again, how does this new CCTV affect my "freedoms"?

Its a genuine question. Your own details ranging from mildly personal to deeply private/personal are already stored on in a myriad of databases already. You are captured dozens, if not hundreds of times on CCTV every time you take a trip into any populated area.

If that's the case, then why would this new tech be alarming?

Here's a quote from the article - "We think this system is suitable for customers that have a relatively large-scale surveillance system, such as railways, power companies, law enforcement, and large stores,' says the company.".

Little Alex · 27-03-2012 02:11AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iu-NJA4Y1RI

But sure if you've done nothing and have nothing to hide then you've nothing to be afraid of.

humanji · 27-03-2012 08:54AM

The assumption that this technology can only be used to suppress the masses is as moronic as the assumption that it's completely harmless.

There's a possibility that it could be abused. I can see plenty of advantages for the system, with the only disadvantage being that I don't like being on a database that I know nothing about. But considering we're all already on thousands of databases we know nothing about, there's nothing new there. I'm not keen on the idea, but this is the way humanity is moving.

Also, the funny thing about the article is that it doesn't do anything new. It just does it faster.

Run_to_da_hills · 27-03-2012 12:20PM

humanji wrote: »

Also, the funny thing about the article is that it doesn't do anything new. It just does it faster.

That's the scary part. A person who had a simple class A or C possession charge could get red flagged and hauled in on the spot and grilled at any random checkpoint using this technology. There is also the prospect of someone being found guilty by association if he is unknowingly redflagged along with someone who has / had a record of subversive activity.

humanji · 27-03-2012 01:07PM

Sadly, that's been happening since before CCTV was invented. Ironically now, the difference is that there's a higher chance of the right suspect being caught, but that's not much comfort.

Daithi 1 · 27-03-2012 03:46PM

Jonny7 wrote: »

Bank/school/university/social services/doctor/credit card company/etc : "you're already on a database, deal with it"

You asked how it affects ones freedoms and I told you. What's your problem ?

Daithi 1 · 27-03-2012 09:06PM

Jonny7 wrote: »

How in Ireland would this new CCTV technology affect my freedoms?
I am struggling to think of any situation.

I wonder if anyone thinks this kind of technology will affect their freedoms..

I mean, by the time this comes into practice, we'll already be in a gazillion databases already, right ?

So who gives a funk....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vO5_Yv3vKVs

Jonny7 · 27-03-2012 10:08PM

Daithi 1 wrote: »

You asked how it affects ones freedoms and I told you. What's your problem ?

All CCTV does in 99.99% of situations is catch shoplifters, criminals, etc and aids in security.

I'm trying to understand how the Spar down the road getting this new tech will suddenly affect my freedom?

I'll be on CCTV slightly more than I am already?

As much as people want to fantasize about it, Ireland is not East Germany in the 80's

Daithi 1 · 27-03-2012 10:20PM

Jonny7 wrote: »

As much as people want to fantasize about it, Ireland is not East Germany in the 80's

And that's the way we'd like to keep it.

It creeps in, bit by bit, through peoples acquiescence.

edit:

And it gets pushed in by people who think it's no harm. Such as yourself.

Run_to_da_hills · 27-03-2012 10:30PM

Jonny7 wrote: »

All CCTV does in 99.99% of situations is catch shoplifters, criminals, etc and aids in security.

I'm trying to understand how the Spar down the road getting this new tech will suddenly affect my freedom?

I'll be on CCTV slightly more than I am already?

As much as people want to fantasize about it, Ireland is not East Germany in the 80's

The customers for this technology will be government agencies using both fixed and mobile surveylance systems and not supermarkets or shopping malls.

The system could be set up on main thoroughfares, ports of entry, at demonstrations and football matches to pinpoint immediately, identify and log all those that are present or passing through .

We will more than likely get legislation in the near banning the use of head gear such as hoodies, facial scarfs, motorcycle helmets etc in public places to compliment this potential invasive technology. The banning of Islamic shawls is just the start of it.

Jonny7 · 27-03-2012 10:38PM

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The customers for this technology will be government agencies using both fixed and mobile surveylance systems and not supermarkets or shopping malls.

Where are you getting that information from? it clearly says in the article..

"We think this system is suitable for customers that have a relatively large-scale surveillance system, such as railways, power companies, law enforcement, and large stores,' says the company."

Daithi 1 · 27-03-2012 11:03PM

Jonny7 wrote: »

it clearly says in the article..

"We think this system is suitable for customers that have a relatively large-scale surveillance system, such as railways, power companies, law enforcement, and large stores,' says the company."

Case closed then. :pac::pac::pac:

28-03-2012 01:37AM

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The customers for this technology will be government agencies using both fixed and mobile surveylance systems and not supermarkets or shopping malls.

The system could be set up on main thoroughfares, ports of entry, at demonstrations and football matches to pinpoint immediately, identify and log all those that are present or passing through .

We will more than likely get legislation in the near banning the use of head gear such as hoodies, facial scarfs, motorcycle helmets etc in public places to compliment this potential invasive technology. The banning of Islamic shawls is just the start of it.

But again, this is all already in place with CCTV.
And even then it was already in place with shopkeepers just remembering who you are and having the right to refuse admission.

Like all of the new scary technology you post about, there's nothing you can point to that's actually wrong with it, just vague warnings and claims about laws that are about to come into force, yet never arrive.

Jeboa Safari · 29-03-2012 07:57PM

As has been said, the article is somewhat sensationalist, its just doing things faster. I was looking at a documentary from 2001 which shows the system which then could process up to 15m faces a minute (21 mins in here for anyone interested). There are advantages, particularly in catching criminals which I fully support, but like others have said, it is a bit worrying way that things are going. Privacy is being eroded with the advance of technology

Run_to_da_hills · 30-03-2012 10:54PM

Jeboa Safari wrote: »

but like others have said, it is a bit worrying way that things are going. Privacy is being eroded with the advance of technology

More worrying when the price of this technology drops further and starts to appear live across public transport systems.

espinolman · 01-04-2012 01:10PM

The solution would be if someone developed a mask that looks like a real face , that you just slip over your face , but it would look like a real face . Like in the film Total Recall !
They probably already exist .:rolleyes:
Where can i buy one .

wexie · 01-04-2012 09:26PM

None of this is new technology, there is nothing new about this at all.

So really this is an announcement of a 'new' piece of software that can do what a number of different pieces of software can already do.

This software is still limited by the underlying hardware the same as the software currently already in existence.

So at worst they might be able to do slightly faster what the current software can already do. Ever flown to the US? Ever wondered what the cameras are for when you're going through preboarding? Well now you know.

(if it's any consolation, the current generation of facial recognition software is (allegedly) notoriously unreliable and quite easily fooled. Both due to the way it 'recognises' faces and the limitations in most CCTV systems)

JJJJNR · 01-04-2012 09:31PM

Skynet will love this when it goes live and self aware.

Jonny7 · 01-04-2012 09:55PM

Here's something that's much more intrusive (UK only)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17576745

"The government will be able to monitor the calls, emails, texts and website visits of everyone in the UK under new legislation set to be announced soon."

Sounds similar to the monitoring program Bush and Blair had going, I forget the name, bound to cause controversy anyway.

Facial recognitian CCTV developed that can scan 36 million frames per second

Comments