Group items tagged

At first glance, Chicago's latest crime-fighting strategy seems to be plucked from a Hollywood screenplay. Someone sees a thief dipping into a Salvation Army kettle in a crowd of shoppers on State Street and dials 911 from a cellphone. Within seconds, a video image of the caller's location is beamed onto a dispatcher's computer screen. An officer arrives and by police radio is directed to the suspect, whose description and precise location are conveyed by the dispatcher watching the video, leading to a quick arrest. That chain of events actually happened in the Loop in December, said Ray Orozco, the executive director of the Chicago Office of Emergency Management and Communications. "We can now immediately take a look at the crime scene if the 911 caller is in a location within 150 feet of one of our surveillance cameras, even before the first responders arrive," Mr. Orozco said. The technology, a computer-aided dispatch system, was paid for with a $6 million grant from the Department of Homeland Security. It has been in use since a trial run in December. "One of the best tools any big city can have is visual indicators like cameras, which can help save lives," Mr. Orozco said. In addition to the city's camera network, Mr. Orozco said, the new system can also connect to cameras at private sites like tourist attractions, office buildings and university campuses. Twenty private companies have agreed to take part in the program, a spokeswoman for Mr. Orozco said, and 17 more are expected to be added soon. Citing security concerns, the city would not say how many cameras were in the system. Mayor Richard M. Daley said this week that the integrated camera network would enhance regional security as well as fight street crime. Still, opponents of Mr. Daley's use of public surveillance cameras described the new system as a potential Big Brother intrusion on privacy rights. "If a 911 caller reports that someone left a backpack on the sidewalk, wil

In the 2002 film Minority Report, video billboards scanned the irises of passing consumers and advertised to them by name. That was science fiction back then, but today's marketers are creating digital signs that can display targeted ads based on information they extract from examining the contours of individual human faces. These smart signs are proliferating in commercial establishments and public places from New York's Times Square to St. Louis area shopping malls. They are a powerful innovation in advertising, but one that raises compelling privacy issues - issues that should be addressed now, before digital signs that monitor our behavior become the new normal. The most common name for this medium is digital signage. Most digital signs are flat-screen TVs that run commercials on a continuous loop in airports, gas stations, and anywhere else marketers think they can get your attention. However, marketers have had difficulty determining exactly who sees the display units, which makes it harder to measure viewership and target ads at specific audiences. The industry's solution? Hidden facial recognition cameras. The tiny cameras can estimate the age, ethnicity and gender of people passing by and can track how long a given person watches the display. The digital sign can then play an advertisement specifically targeted to whomever happens to be watching. Tens of millions of people have already been picked up by digital signage cameras. While camera-driven systems are the most common, the industry is also utilizing mobile phones and radio frequency identification (RFID) for similar purposes. Some companies, for example, embed RFID chips in shopper loyalty cards. Digital kiosks located in stores can read the information on the cards at a distance and then display ads or print coupons based on cardholders' shopping histories. Facial recognition, RFID and mobile phone tracking are powerful tools that should be matched by business practices that protect consu

In the 2002 film Minority Report, video billboards scanned the irises of passing consumers and advertised to them by name. That was science fiction back then, but today's marketers are creating digital signs that can display targeted ads based on information they extract from examining the contours of individual human faces. These smart signs are proliferating in commercial establishments and public places from New York's Times Square to St. Louis area shopping malls. They are a powerful innovation in advertising, but one that raises compelling privacy issues - issues that should be addressed now, before digital signs that monitor our behavior become the new normal. The most common name for this medium is digital signage. Most digital signs are flat-screen TVs that run commercials on a continuous loop in airports, gas stations, and anywhere else marketers think they can get your attention. However, marketers have had difficulty determining exactly who sees the display units, which makes it harder to measure viewership and target ads at specific audiences. The industry's solution? Hidden facial recognition cameras. The tiny cameras can estimate the age, ethnicity and gender of people passing by and can track how long a given person watches the display. The digital sign can then play an advertisement specifically targeted to whomever happens to be watching. Tens of millions of people have already been picked up by digital signage cameras. While camera-driven systems are the most common, the industry is also utilizing mobile phones and radio frequency identification (RFID) for similar purposes. Some companies, for example, embed RFID chips in shopper loyalty cards. Digital kiosks located in stores can read the information on the cards at a distance and then display ads or print coupons based on cardholders' shopping histories. Facial recognition, RFID and mobile phone tracking are powerful tools that should be matched by business practices that protect consu

Times West Virginian FAIRMONT - Two FBI police officers have been charged and one was arraigned Friday morning in Marion County magistrate court after videotaping high school girls who were trying on prom dresses at the Middletown Mall. According to an FBI press release, the two Clarksburg-based employees were charged with criminal invasion of privacy and conspiracy to commit video voyeurism by the Marion County prosecuting attorney's office. Gary Sutton Jr., 40, was charged with criminal invasion of privacy and being a party to a crime. And according to WDTV, a warrant has been issued for Charles Brian Hommema of Buckhannon. The charges stem from an event called the Cinderella Project that took place at the Middletown Mall in Fairmont that gave high school girls the opportunity to buy low-cost prom dresses. The event was sponsored by Hospice Care Corp. for the sixth year in a row and included $25,000 worth of dresses from Oliverio's Bridal Boutique in Clarksburg. The criminal complaint stated that the two men were on duty in the FBI's satellite control room, which coincidentally is located at Middletown Mall. The two allegedly stopped a security camera over a makeshift dressing room that had been set up to allow the girls to try on dresses during the event. The dressing rooms did not have ceilings, and the camera zoomed in and trained its focus on one particular dressing room for more than an hour. Several girls used that dressing room to try on prom dresses. The complaint stated that Sutton and Hommema were the only people in the control room and the only ones able to control the movements of the camera. The alleged activities were detected internally by the FBI and reported to the Department of Justice's Office of the Inspector General, prompting an investigation, according to the FBI release. "The FBI is committed to the timely and full resolution of this matter, but must remain sensitive to the privacy concerns of any potential victims

making best indexing in goggle and bing. RADJASEOTEA is a master of backlinks. You want indexing in goggle and bing. LOOK THIS www.fiverr.com/radjaseotea/making-best-super-backlink-143445

"Imagine that you are vacationing and get a phone call from your neighbor telling you that your alarm just went off, but there is nothing you can do about it. You don't know what set it off and if it is just a fluke. You find yourself now wide awake, asking yourself why you got the alarm to begin with. For iPhone users, the solution to this kind of situation lies in an application provided by CAVU Mobile Surveillance Solution. This app allows you to view live footage taken from any security camera on your iPhone, transforming it into a portable advanced home security system. With the CAVU Mobile Surveillance Solution, the next time a neighbor calls to tell you that your alarm has gone off again, you can automatically see what is going on inside your house on our phone- no matter where you are. This application also lets you save footage on your phone, which is useful in case you need to show/reference the footage on the go. From your phone you can even control the position of the camera - providing you with multi-camera views. If you're thinking to yourself right now about how you wish you had been nicer to your neighbor, because then he/she would be more likely to actually call you to tell you that there is a good chance you're being robbed- stop. This iPhone app also allows for poor neighbor to neighbor relations. It provides a self sufficient, independent of any neighbor, surveillance system on your phone to tell your that there is suspicious action going on. For a cool $19.99 you can be your own FBI squad team, the C, the, S and the I in CSI Crime Scene Investigation, and most importantly, sure that your home is safe."

"SACRAMENTO, Calif.-The state Assembly passed a bill Monday that would allow video recorders to be installed on vehicles' dashboards, raising concern about drivers' privacy. Currently, state law prohibits dashboard devices that may obstruct a driver's view. The bill is supported by companies that hire teams of drivers. They want to ensure their employees are driving safely and use the cameras to help determine fault in an accident. The bill's author, Assemblyman Nathan Fletcher, R-San Diego, says companies that use the recorders in other states have reduced their accident claims by 80 percent."

Will your car have to testify against you in court?

"Google Inc. co-founder Sergey Brin Wednesday said the Internet giant "screwed up" by collecting personal data through wireless networks and promised new oversight as European officials pledged to open investigations of the data collection. Authorities in Germany, Spain and Italy said Wednesday they were investigating Google and its Street View service, which uses camera-equipped vehicles to take street images and mark the location of Wi-Fi networks. Mr. Brin, speaking the same day at Google's developer conference in San Francisco, said the company would put "more internal controls in place" to prevent such data captures in the future, including the hiring of outside help. "Trust is very important to us," Mr. Brin said. "We're going to do everything we can to preserve that trust.""

G apologizes. Again, better to ask forgiveness... If users remain silent & gvt doesn't prosecute, why comply?

In May, OLG began rolling out the new facial recognition system designed to keep tabs on the province's estimated 300,000 "problem gamblers." Cameras were mounted at casino entrances to digitally scan the faces of all visitors. Problem gamblers who voluntarily signed up for the selfexclusion list can be stopped by security staff from playing at the casino. But regular casino visitors will also be digitally scanned, although their facial photos are almost immediately discarded if their name is not on the list.

The sheer volume of amateur cellphone sex videos on the Internet's porn site - while certainly culturally edifying - illustrates the new truth about sex in the 21st century: don't let anyone record it, or everyone will be enjoying it. But sometimes, the all-seeing and voyeuristic eye of consumer video culture has a happy ending: a businessman who recorded himself having sex with a university student was recently cleared of the charges after the footage was shown in court. Before the footage was presented as evidence, the judge warned both the gallery and the jury: "You are going to see a clip which from what I have been told you may find extremely distasteful." Despite this warning, though, the defense failed to exhibit a scene from Dustin Diamond's sex tape, but instead a rather traditional recording of an enthusiastic coupling. After the tape had finished playing, the judge ruled in the favor of the defendant. "You and Mr Taylor were very familiar with each other and comfortable in each other's presence." There's the possibility, of course, that the judge made the wrong decision: there could have been drugs involved. But score one for the good guys. A lot is made, rightfully, of the eradication of privacy in the digital age, but when it can help a man avoid wrongful imprisonment and the total ruin of his life, there's a bright side. The moral? If you're actively swinging, pony up for a cell phone with a good camera. And PornHub commenters say, the more megapixels, the better.

Laws in Canada and other countries are increasingly helping technology force people to identify themselves where they never had to before, threatening privacy that allows people to function effectively in society, a new study has found. "What we're starting to see is a move toward making people more and more identifiable," University of Ottawa law professor Ian Kerr said Wednesday. His comments followed the launch of Lessons from the Identity Trail: Anonymity, Privacy and Identity in a Networked Society, a book summing up the study's findings, at a public reading in downtown Ottawa hosted jointly with the Privacy Commissioner of Canada. Kerr led the study with University of Ottawa criminology professor Valerie Steeves. They collaborated with 35 other researchers in Canada, the U.S., the U.K., the Netherlands and Italy. The researchers reported that governments are choosing laws that require people to identify themselves and are lowering judicial thresholds defining when identity information must be disclosed to law enforcement officials. That is allowing the wider use of new technologies capable of making people identifiable, including smartcards, security cameras, GPS, tracking cookies and DNA sequencing. Consequently, governments and corporations are able to do things like: * Embrace technologies such as radio frequency identification tags that can be used to track people and merchandise to analyze behaviour. * Boost video surveillance in public places. * Pressure companies such as internet service providers to collect and maintain records of identification information about their customers. While Canada, the U.K., the Netherlands and Italy all have national laws protecting privacy - that is, laws that allow citizens to control access to their personal data - such legal protection does not exist for anonymity, Kerr said. "Canada is quite similar [to other countries] with respect to anonymity. Namely, it's shrinking here just as it is there.

A couple in Pittsburgh whose lawsuit claimed that Street View on Google Maps is a reckless invasion of their privacy lost their case. Aaron and Christine Boring sued the Internet search giant last April, alleging that Google "significantly disregarded (their) privacy interests" when Street View cameras captured images of their house beyond signs marked "private road." The couple claimed in their five-count lawsuit that finding their home clearly visible on Google's Street View caused them "mental suffering" and diluted their home value. They sought more than $25,000 in damages and asked that the images of their home be taken off the site and destroyed. However, the U.S. District Court for Western Pennsylvania wasn't impressed by the suit and dismissed it (PDF) Tuesday, saying the Borings "failed to state a claim under any count." Ironically, the Borings subjected themselves to even more public exposure by filing the lawsuit, which included their home address. In addition, the Allegheny County's Office of Property Assessments included a photo of the home on its Web site. The Borings are not alone in their ire toward the Google Maps feature. As reported earlier, residents in California's Humboldt County complained that the drivers who are hired to collect the images are disregarding private property signs and driving up private roads. In January, a private Minnesota community near St. Paul, unhappy that images of its streets and homes appeared on the site, demanded Google remove the images, which the company did. However, Google claims to be legally allowed to photograph on private roads, arguing that privacy no longer exists in this age of satellite and aerial imagery. "Today's satellite-image technology means that...complete privacy does not exist," Google said in its response to the Borings' complaint Not long after the feature launched in May 2007, privacy advocates criticized Google for displaying photographs that included people's faces and car license

It's been repeatedly said that one of the biggest issues our culture is facing right now, and will continue to face in the years to come, is defining and coming to terms with the legality behind privacy issues. As our lives become increasingly wired, connected and monitored privacy becomes an increasingly pressing concern, especially since technology changes much faster than laws can keep up with. While privacy issues are important for adults to be aware of right now, from access to medical records to who can see into our houses, it's probably even more important for the next generation to know what the issues are and how it does and will affect them in the future. Prying Eyes: Privacy in the Twenty-First Century by Betsy Kuhn is a book written for teens and older kids about privacy issues today in America. It looks at new and developing technologies from cameras to RFID chips, the significant laws and court cases throughout our history that have dealt with privacy issues, and how it affects each of us. Kuhn does an excellent job of keeping her subject relevant, but not too focused. Kuhn manages to show how all of these issues matter and affect us without being scary. She never turns technology, corporations or even the government into something frightening. When this is a topic that could easily have been made scary, it's nice that Kuhn managed to walk that line and make this serious without being something to obsess over.

"Federal agents can examine webcam photos and other information secretly collected from students' laptops and stored in the Lower Merion School District's computer network, a judge has ruled. Acting on a request from federal prosecutors, U.S. District Judge Jan E. DuBois agreed to broaden an earlier order that limited the release of the photos to the students or their parents and lawyers. His order was signed Friday and made public Monday. FBI agents and prosecutors want to review the images to see whether any laws were broken when school district employees activated a tracking system that snapped photos and copied screen images from lost or stolen laptops. Lower Merion school officials have acknowledged poor planning and oversight led the tracking system to capture at least 50,000 images - some showing teens or their relatives in their homes - from laptops that had already been returned to students."

Confused by the difference between privacy & security? What might your kid's laptop camera capture if it was secretly turned on by their school while searching for stolen laptops? Soon the FBI will be able to tell you.