Chicago Pondering Huge Camera Network 377
andyring writes "According to ABC7 in Chicago, mayor Daley rolled out plans to install thousands of video cameras in public places across the Windy City. In some ways, I suppose there are positives, as all the existing and future cameras are tied in to the 911 emergency center, allowing a 911 dispatcher to actually watch the area in question when someone dials 911. Dispatchers will be able to control some of the cameras, such as panning and zooming in."
to stop all re-threads here (Score:2, Insightful)
2. big brother
3. evil big government
4. real time real world quake laser tag finally!
Re:to stop all re-threads here (Score:2, Funny)
6. Profit!!
Re:to stop all re-threads here (Score:5, Informative)
Re:to stop all re-threads here (Score:2)
Zoom in! A Woman!
Re:Privacy vs Safety (Score:3, Insightful)
I think the difference between, say, someone on the other side of a public square being able to watch what you're doing and someone in a control room somewhere miles away being able to watch watch you're doing, is that in the first case the degree of privacy and the potential fo
move it! (Score:5, Funny)
Fuckin' Daley (Score:5, Informative)
This guy is a fucker. Underhanded bastard with no concern for the citizens of Chicago.
Re:Fuckin' Daley (Score:4, Informative)
Mayor Daley might have kileld people. The fire department's Helicopter squad was based at Meigs. When it was moved, it upped the response time to the lake by 10 minutes. In April? 2004, they were too late in rescuing people off the lake.
There ware about 15 planes stranded at the field. It costs a LOT of money to have a $250,000 Piper disassembled, shipped, re-assembled and then have the airframe re-certified. Anyone in the AOPA/EAA/ General Aviation community will turn red and rant for hours when one goes and mentions Meigs or Daley.
Anyway, like the parent post, anyone with such bad judgement should never be alowwed to make important decisions.
"Fucker" is not a good description. "Murderer" might be more accurate.
Re:Fuckin' Daley (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Fuckin' Daley (Score:3, Interesting)
For whatever reason, this same flight simulator (or one that borrowed the map)is the default loadout.
Earlier this year, just before a customer meeting, I found out that you could fly the thing using just the throttle and the yoke (I figured you needed extensive knowledge of the rest of the hundred some switches and dials). Initially only one person
Re:Fuckin' Daley (Score:5, Insightful)
I know, it's strange, but he's got it down to a science.
Re:Fuckin' Daley (Score:2)
Re:Fuckin' Daley (Score:2)
Seriously, the one time I visited Chicago, I fought a losing battle to see Meigs Field, after having performed hundreds of virtual take-offs and landings there. Sucks that I never will.
Privacy in public (Score:4, Insightful)
So what does that mean, I can't have privacy in a public place?
Re:Privacy in public (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Privacy in public (Score:2, Insightful)
It means that next time there are protests at, say, a political convention in Chicago, they'll be able to track everyone down and arrest them. There will be chilling effects on our 1st amendment right to assemble.
Re:Privacy in public (Score:5, Insightful)
You could also replace the 'protestors' with 'criminals' and your point makes alot less sense.
I think placing cameras , if properly used by lawenforcements / third parties, can only contribute to cleaning up some foul areas (as seen from first hand experience , in a bad neighbourhood in Rotterdam, the Netherlands) and might come in handy when they are in fact used for 'inspecting the area/accident' in case of an emergency.
I'm all for privacy ; but it is, and will be , a -public- place : Then again, i think drastic measures like this, should only be done after the city has made a vote for it in a 'referendum' (i am not sure if this is an english word) ; more or less a poll amongst the citizens of the city.
Re:Privacy in public (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/ptech/08/31/constants urveillance.ap/index.html [cnn.com]
I'm sure they're a big help in solving crime after its been comitted, but at least in the UK cameras don't seem to be much of a deterant to crime.
Sorry for posting the same link in two replies, but it was more appropriate to follow this post.
MOD PARENT UP (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Privacy in public (Score:3, Interesting)
Camera aren't needed for this. Weren't there demonstrators in the vicinity of the Republican convention who were arrested apparently for no good reason, other than as perhaps a potential threat?
Re:Privacy in public (Score:2)
Cameras won't make it any easier to track down protesters. "They're that crowd right there, the one with all the signs."
In fact, I would submit that protestors want as much public exposure as possible. That is, until they start doing something illegal. (Unless protests have suddenly become i
Re:Privacy in public (Score:2)
Re:Privacy in public (Score:3, Insightful)
You can't have privacy or security. England has done the same thing, installed 4.2 million cameras, and according to this article: http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/ptech/08/31/constants urveillance.ap/index.html cameras only drop crime by 3-4% while installing lights dropped crime by 20%.
The question... (Score:5, Insightful)
The question is: do you trust the government (and the people that work for it!) to use it responsibly?
Re:The question... (Score:4, Insightful)
I for one... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:I for one... (Score:5, Funny)
911 or 9/11? (Score:4, Insightful)
"Mayor Daley..." (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm surprised this family is still around and in power, am I missing something as to how great they are or something?
Re:"Mayor Daley..." (Score:2)
I'll be moving up to Chicago next month, and both times I've visited so far I've seen hundreds of things like "Mayor Daley welcomes you to Chicago!" "This Chicago Transit Authority bus brought to you by Mayor Daley!" "Mayor Daley Police Station #143!"
It seems like one can hardly go 5 feet without seeing a Mayor Daley sign
Re:"Mayor Daley..." (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:"Mayor Daley..." (Score:2, Interesting)
The current mayors dad was the one that setup the dynasty in the 60's or 70's, and he did a very thorough job.
Re:"Mayor Daley..." (Score:3, Informative)
But the reason that Daley is so popular as the parent said is due to his dad, who set up a well connected political machine. This, although somewha
I can see it now... (Score:5, Funny)
Operator: Okay, I see you. Oh wait, hold on, the camera's stuck.
Caller: Forget the damn camera, I need help!
Operator: Maybe if I press this button... these stupid things always lock up right when you need them...
Caller: Help! He's gaining on me!
Operator: Hey Bob, can you come over and have a look at this? Camera 76 is stuck again.
Bob: Yup, we should have a tech out there some time tomorrow.
Caller: Aaaaaaaaaaaaaauuuuugggggh!
Re:I can see it now... (Score:2)
"Tonight, on World's Funniest Citizen Beatup..."
Ok, Step 3 : Profit.
Re:I can see it now... (Score:2)
Hmmm (Score:4, Funny)
Excellent book: Transparent Society by David Brin (Score:4, Informative)
For some good ideas, read some David Brin:
The Transparent Society: Will Technology Force us to Choose Between Privacy and Freedom? [davidbrin.com]
Re:Excellent book: Transparent Society by David Br (Score:3, Insightful)
Stuff like this limits our privacy AND freedom.
The Witness Program - Peter Gabriel & Human Ri (Score:5, Informative)
There are major exceptions: places where there's minimal freedom until cameras arrive. -Joel
A Lens on the World: Musician Peter Gabriel Provides Human Rights Activists With Cameras for the Cause [changemakers.net]
By Ann Hornaday, Washington Post, Nov 21
For the past decade, activists and nongovernmental organizations all over the globe have taken up video cameras to document injustices in their countries, sometimes risking their lives to bring human rights abuses to light.
Women in Afghanistan used hidden cameras to capture the depredations of Taliban rule and, later, the aftermath of the U.S. military campaign. Garment workers in the U.S. territory of Saipan smuggled a camera into sewing factories where women worked 14-hour shifts under lock and key, often without pay, to make clothes for the Gap and other American retailers. In Sierra Leone, young women spoke publicly for the first time about the rapes they endured during a brutal 10-year civil war. In Burma, civilians who are being forced into relocation camps by that country's military regime are filming the activities of the very army that threatens to kill them.
What these and more than 150 other groups have in common is Witness, a nonprofit group founded by musician Peter Gabriel in 1992 that provides cameras, technical training and distribution support to people whose stories would otherwise most likely go unheard and unseen.
The more than 25 documentaries co-produced by Witness have been broadcast on television, used in network news stories, shown at film festivals and meetings, streamed on the Web and presented as evidence in federal courts, international tribunals and the United Nations. Though only one film has resulted in the filing of criminal charges, many have been used as evidence in war crimes trials or have prompted long-awaited policy changes. Others have simply spurred progress toward collective healing. Nearly every Witness film has illuminated crimes, injustices and crises that otherwise would have been known only by their perpetrators and victims.
Re:The Witness Program - Peter Gabriel & Human (Score:5, Insightful)
The audience.
A video only has power if it's publicly accessible. If all the camera feeds go straight to Police HQ where they disappear into vaults forever, they will be, at best, totally worthless and more likely to be abused as others have described.
not in my back yard (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem with blanket-covering an area with cameras is that after a while, the criminals simply go elsewhere...
Maybe it's like Go; we place our cameras around the country and slowly force the criminals into one little area and take it over?
About as absurd as thinking cameras will solve crime problems...
Re:not in my back yard (Score:5, Funny)
In my livingroom! (Score:2)
As an example I present pictures from 2 months ago when a neighbor broke into my house.
The missing link... (Score:2)
MaybeI should have checked the preview more carefully next time.
Re:not in my back yard (Score:2)
Re:not in my back yard (Score:2)
Re:not in my back yard (Score:2)
It *sounded* cool and insightful though!
Re:not in my back yard (Score:2)
Re:not in my back yard (Score:2)
Put cameras on the 4 corners of the city and all the criminals will gather at the center of the town. We'll just have to catch them with a net (oh my god, best Go pun ever...)
Re:not in my back yard (Score:2)
Won't work. If anything, cameras attract criminals. Just watch C-SPAN. :)
Re:not in my back yard (Score:3, Informative)
Ba-Zing!
You got mugged so now I should just ignore the possibility for abuse in a constant surveillance system? Moron.
People worried about these kinds of plans are not all paranoids opposed to any surveillance or law enforcement technology, some of us want real answers and details on storage duration, conditions under which footage is stored, what right we have to access live and archive footage, and so on.
Still privacy concerns (Score:5, Interesting)
With the pan/tilt and zoom features, what's to stop a camera from peering into a window? How long until they start adding things like infrared or night-vision? Maybe I'm just speaking for the tin-foil hat brigade, but these questions need to be asked.
This says nothing of the rights of the accused to face their accuser. When one of these systems is used to, say, issue a traffic citation, who's the accuser? You have no witness to the crime. It opens up a whole new can of worms, IMO.
Re:Still privacy concerns (Score:3, Interesting)
The fact that the witness to the crime is not a person is irrelevant. If the videotape shows that you did indeed run a red light, and the facts are indisputable, what does it matter that a cop didn't see it? Just because a police officer didn't see it, doesn't mean that you didn't break the law.
Re:Still privacy concerns (Score:2)
Re:Still privacy concerns (Score:2)
And what's to prevent them from watching someone who forgot to close their shades while dressing?
The fact that the witness to the crime is not a person is irrelevant. If the videotape shows that you did indeed run a red light, and the facts are indisputable, what does it matter that a cop didn't see it? Just because a police officer didn't see it, doesn't mean that you
Re:Still privacy concerns (Score:3, Insightful)
It makes it about a thousand times easier to do without getting caught. It also makes it possible to share the view with just about anybody you like instead of just describing it. It's worse by several orders of magnitude. And that's ignoring that nobody should be doing it at all, camera or not.
A cop parked in the same place would also see everything. So what?
Um, there's a world of difference between a cop and a video camera. It's a question of persis
Re:Still privacy concerns (Score:3, Interesting)
It is analogous to a cop sitting in his patrol car all night, every night, for the entirety of the time you live there, able to examine any activity you perform at any time. I suppose you would feel comfortable in that situation, right?
So, is your apartment or house across t
Re:Still privacy concerns (Score:2)
Oops... sorry about that little timing incident (Score:2)
Re:Still privacy concerns (Score:2)
Re:Still privacy concerns (Score:2, Interesting)
Apart from being fun, it was pretty educational. They use some kind of system (I'm low on details) whereby the windows of residential properties are actually blacked out with these worrying black squares when you pan over them.
The black squares appear on the stored video and everything.
Obviously the tin foiled lunatics will still hatch conspiracies about the blac
Re:Still privacy concerns (Score:3, Interesting)
I knew a consultant who lived with a couple of roommates in an apartment on Sheffield avenue, directly across from the Wrigley Field (Cubs, ya know) bleachers.
One of her roommates used to have a window facing the closed circuit security camera under the bleachers (don't know exactly where, don't know what kind of camera it was, either). The camera was remotely controlled, and the girl noticed that the camera swivelled towards her bedro
Where this goes (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Where this goes (Score:2)
My handle "Evil Twin Skippy" comes from the fact that I have a face with such average features that everyone swears they've met me before. I've had at least one "twin" me in every school I've attended, and every large office.
The problem with face recognition software is that while there are only a finite number of ways in which human faces are assembled. Even if the total combinations number in the millions, there are 250 million people in the United States. The probability of
Already done (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Already done (Score:2)
Re:Already done (Score:2)
Re:Already done (Score:2)
I presume Boston will think of deploying something a bit better in the quality department.
Re:Already done (Score:2)
Cool...! (Score:2, Funny)
Notes to self:
1. Hack into the Mayor Daley's databases.
2. Download photos of person to be stalked.
3. Fly to Chicago and track him/her down.
*evil laugh*
Nice...
Great news ! Always wanted to be on TV. (Score:4, Funny)
The perfect dying thought I'm sure you'd agree...
And to ask the dumb question........ (Score:3, Insightful)
How does *almost seeing* the situation help? I mean, granted, they're probably not going to be the crappy webcam quality cameras we think they are, but still it escapes me how this will actually proactively help an 911 operator help a victim. It might help them after the fact, but not before or during.
Re:And to ask the dumb question........ (Score:4, Insightful)
- Caller reports "There's been a major accident and there are bodies everywhere!"
- 911 operator turns on camera, notes that the involved vehicles have already been pulled off to the side of the road and nobody seems seriously injured, and only dispatches one ambulance and one police car.
Zooming cameras eh? (Score:4, Informative)
Yeah. On tits and ass.
(search for breasts)
a la http://www.aclu.org/NationalSecurity/NationalSecu
This is just another case of law enforcement making up (or wanting to) for gross incompetency by using technology.
This doesn't bother me as long as... (Score:4, Insightful)
This doesn't bother me as long as the cameras are completely public. That is, they are essentially web-cams whose content is recorded. Anyone can review any part of any recording. Anyone can make/keep their own copy of the video. CRCs digital signatures stored as "official copies" in multiple locations, etc. (e.g. some protection against screwing with the images after the fact.)
I like the idea of a transparent society. Let's be as transparent as possible - that is the best way to weaken entrenched power.
But then, I'm the guy who's number one desired feature on my next car is the ability issue tickets around me for bad driving. I want to be able to turn into a cop, only with the paperwork automated. Having full time camera on every inch of roadway is the closest I can get for the moment...
No, I don't value your "privacy" on public roadways. Its a public space. You don't get to be private in public. You have to play nice with the other kids.
I'll take off the flame-retardant suit in a few days. Maybe.
Cameras and Chicago (Score:3, Funny)
On August 28, I received a citation in the mail for a red light violation. The photo was taken May 12 and showed that I coasted through a right-on-red at a blazing 11mph instead of coming to a complete stop. For this, I am fined $90.
From articles in the Chicago Tribune, it is clear that the photo was taken during the 'testing' period and that the city has since gone back to those test shots and issued citations, in my case three and a half months after the fact.
I'm now more careful to come to an absolute complete stop when making a right on red (in Chicago during rush hour, this will often elicit a honk from the driver behind you), but I'll dread checking the mail for the next three months.
Re:Cameras and Chicago (Score:5, Informative)
You're *supposed* to stop at red lights, it keeps people from getting killed, that's why they're *red*.
Drivers in Chicago anyway, jeesh...
Re:Cameras and Chicago (Score:2)
In addition, your story h
We're creating a monster (Score:5, Insightful)
And yes, I know that privacy has been eroding for a while, but it feels like it's getting much worse, much faster, now.
More scariness in Emerging 'Surveillance-Industrial Complex' Is Turbo-Charging Government Monitoring, ACLU Warns in New Report. [aclu.org]
Masks Illegal (Score:2, Insightful)
With this stuff going on perhaps there is a need for a new fasion statement, Burkas for everyone (you know those head to toe concealing black robes with only eye slits covered by lace worn by women in the more "strict" islamic cultures)
Re:Masks Illegal (Score:2)
It's just like the way people would obviously cover their license plates in their cars if it were legal.
But once we get the RFID implants I guess it won't matter if we wear cloaks and masks or not.
See you at the nearest mountain stronghold! :)
You know what? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:You know what? (Score:5, Insightful)
Try thinking for a change. It works for me.
Using cell phone cameras (Score:2, Interesting)
How is this any different? (Score:5, Interesting)
Certainly tracking a person's every financial transaction is far more dangerous to democracy - (Did you order those movie tickets to Farienheit 9/11 by phone? The government has a record! Did you donate to the Green Party, or the Natural Law Party, or The Libertarian Party? Who you vote for might be secret ballot, but the government knows who you donated to! Did you fly out and rent a hotel to participate in a protest? The government knows! Pay by credit card for your web server? Don't think your controversial political web blog can't be traced to you!).
You never hear a peep from so called "Civil Libertarians" about what I mentioned above... probably because challenging the complete and total financial survailence of every American means that it would be hard to tax people, and be hard to pay for those expensive government entitlement programs that have so effectivly eliminated poverty, racism, and war (yeah right!).
Having cameras in public places is more akin to having a police officer on every corner. Yes, it can (and probably will) be abused... but people are regularly abused by Police officers without using any hidden cameras. And at least in public places, there is the understanding that you are in public and can't expect total privacy.
It seems to me that people are OK with Big Brother, so long as Big Brother will give us the illusion of "freedom". The government can know everything single detail about your political, social, and economic life. But god forbid they catch you on camera picking your nose or something!
Does it work? (Score:2)
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForeignBureaus.asp?P a ge =%5CForeignBureaus%5Carchive%5C200206%5CFOR2002062 8c.html
However, that is from 2002. Can anyone find more recent data?
The two areas I think would be of interest are:
Do they help prevent crime? and Do they increase t
UK has this.. (Score:2)
All the tinfoil hatters will complain about this but I'd much rather have it then not. I'm not doing anything illegal in the areas (at home.. well thats another matter) and if I got assaulted or raped for example they would have CCTV evidence and I wouldn't have to prove anything because the camera would of done it for me.
S
Re:UK has this.. (Score:3, Informative)
CCTV (Score:4, Informative)
Re:CCTV (Score:4, Insightful)
The most blatant one (don't remember the exact title, I turned it off after about 5 minutes of disgusted fascination) was something along the lines of "look at all these people doing embarrassing things caught on CCTV", like having sex in cars by the roadside, etc.
If that sort of shit doesn't adequately sum up all that can potentially go wrong with CCTV coverage, I despair of finding a more serious argument against it.
What's the Difference? (Score:2, Interesting)
I tend to look for cameras everywhere I go because I worked at a place where I monitored the security cameras for a while so it always interests me in where companies install them and where they are pointed (no, I am not a thief, I promise!). The other day I noticed that my local post office had cameras watching the mail boxes and also several
And again, Chicago (Score:4, Interesting)
Those of us who watched events unfold on television, can never forget the name Daley or the Chicago Police Force. This was one of the defining events of my generation.
positives my ass (Score:3, Insightful)
Yuu only *think* you will be safer as that is what the government has told you...
You will be no safer, and much less free.
time for public privacy rights (Score:5, Insightful)
Choking on the hypocrisy... (Score:4, Insightful)
The last thing Chicago needs is another pet project for King Richard to pour tax payer dollars into...we're still pulling our pants up after Millienum Park.
-R
Let's make a deal! (Score:3, Insightful)
Lets clear this up (Score:3, Interesting)
But lets clear up a couple of things:
He isn't planning to "install thousands of cameras." He's planning to centralize the monitoring of the existing cameras, while installing "a few hundred" more. Yes, "a few hundred" is vague, but the significance of this move is NOT the installing of these cameras, but rather the centralization. He could have installed those other hundreds of cameras without saying a word. Centralizing them, though, becomes a big deal, because it creates the "Big Brother" possibility. Bottom line: Most of these cameras already exist.
As for Daley himself: There are a lot of replies about Meigs and about all the bullshit Daley pulls. For background on this, read Boss by Mike Royko [amazon.com] or read any and all of John Kass's columns in the Chicago Tribune [chicagotribune.com] (there is a particularly good recent one about his long-standing "freindship" with Daley) (free reg. req.).
On Meigs: The closure of Meigs did NOT place any further burden on any other airports. Meigs was ONLY general aviation and provided NO long-term parking. Furthermore, Meigs was scheduled to be closed in 2005. I, myself, was sorry to see it go (I have taken off and landed from Meigs only a couple of times, but they were plenty of fun). It WAS shady how he closed it, but you get over that. That's how politics work in Chicago.
Chicago wouldn't be Chicago without Chicago politics. City Hall is corrupt. Corrupt as hell. But it works. And it is a government of the People. Daley is from Bridgeport, a blue collar neighborhood southwest of downtown. You'll see truck drivers, construction workers, factory workers who are better connected than the richest businessmen in the city. In some sense, its the universal equalizer.
Chicago politics are great; great in a neverending-amusement way. But while you can bitch and moan about civil liberties in relation to these cameras (I'll be there right along with you), pay attention to what actually is being done here: The innovation here is CENTRALIZATION, not INSTALLATION.
I forgot to mention (Score:2, Informative)
Re:But Grandpa, you don't watch TV. . . (Score:2)
You are.
(Hits DVR button, plays video back a second time for added effect.)