Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

The Pentagon Wants a 'TiVo' to Watch You

Journal written by Jeremiah Cornelius (137) and posted by Zonk on Sun Mar 04, 2007 08:57 PM
from the i-think-the-shulmans-are-particularly-funny-this-week dept.
Privacy Technology
An anonymous reader writes "Danger Room, a Wired blog, today cites a study of future electronic snooping technologies from Reuters, written by the Pentagon's Defense Science Board. More than anything, it seems these outside advisers want a surveillance system that would put Big Brother to shame, and they're looking at the commercial sector to provide it. 'The ability to record terabyte and larger databases will provide an omnipresent knowledge of the present and the past that can be used to rewind battle space observations in TiVo-like fashion and to run recorded time backwards to help identify and locate even low-level enemy forces. For example, after a car bomb detonates, one would have the ability to play high-resolution data backward in time to follows the vehicle back to the source, and then use that knowledge to focus collection and gain additional information by organizing and searching through archived data.'"
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

The Pentagon Wants a 'TiVo' to Watch You 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • In the United States of America, government TV watches YOU!

    I'm sorry, I had to.

  • In Soviet Russia... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 04 2007, @09:00PM (#18232584)
    You watch TiVos

  • Where is this service provided? (Score:4, Funny)

    by ATAMAH (578546) on Sunday March 04 2007, @09:02PM (#18232602)
    Geographically, would it be in Soviet Russia, by any chance?

  • I for one... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 04 2007, @09:03PM (#18232612)
    ...Welcome our new Hooveristic overlords.

    On a serious note, since when as an analytical, scientific approach worked in catching bad guys. It's like C-3PO consistently panicking about the odds of a disaster happening while everybody else ( who isn't a robot ) uses their common sense and rationality without panicking, to get them through.

    We all know that people are unpredictable. You can't apply scientific rationale to people.

    Just my two cents.

    • Re:I for one... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by couchslug (175151) on Sunday March 04 2007, @09:20PM (#18232758)
      "For example, after a car bomb detonates, one would have the ability to play high-resolution data backward in time to follows the vehicle back to the source, and then use that knowledge to focus collection and gain additional information by organizing and searching through archived data."

      No more "Hooveristic" than a camera at the local Quickie Mart. An action is filmed, the data trail is followed backwards until something useful is found.

      "We all know that people are unpredictable. You can't apply scientific rationale to people."

      This is not about predicting them, it is about recording what is done in public space and using it to trace activities back to source.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by lawpoop (604919)
        "No more "Hooveristic" than a camera at the local Quickie Mart. An action is filmed, the data trail is followed backwards until something useful is found."

        You're telling me that every video camera at every little Quickie Mart has a wire leading back directly to the Pentagon where they have full DVR capabilities?

        This is entirely different than a Quickie Mart. This is real-time wide-area surveillance capabilities.

        Suppose you had an 'enemies' list and had a plot to disappear each of them in the course of o
    • of course people are predictable... individuals and groups...

      at the individual level, lets say for me, rudimetary surveilance would have me leaving for work M-F at 8:30 AM and returning shortly after 5:00 pm. Therefore, one could easily extrapolate that tomorrow, i'll be on the same schedule. Further, if someone tracked me, they'ed see that each morning i go to starbucks. though the drinks vary, the schedule is the same...

      likewise in groups. with a large enough group, though you won't necessarily be able to

  • The only reason I'm not scared.. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Frogbert (589961) <frogbert@nosPAM.gmail.com> on Sunday March 04 2007, @09:04PM (#18232620)
    The only reason this doesn't scare me is that I'm supremely confident that government red tape, massive budgetary blow outs and vendor selection based purely on campaign contributions will never result in a workable system.
    • I agree - it's clearly beyond the scope of what the current administration can offer. Besides, they only have two years to get it done- in the next election, I foresee even more Republicans getting their walking papers. Ain't gonna happen. And if it does, it's time for recalls. Congress STILL controls the funding.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by ojQj (657924)
          That onlinejournal.com basically says there is a small cabal of Jews trying to control the world by playing the US like a puppet. That's not very credible. I don't agree with everything Israel does, but this kind of anti-Semitic conspiracy theory is ugly. It also reduces the credibility of any unrelated claims the article makes, for example about a missing 3 trillion. I think it's a shame that this comment was rated informative.
          • On October 3, 2001, I.A.P. News reported that according to Israel Radio (in Hebrew) Kol Yisrael an acrimonious argument erupted during the Israeli cabinet weekly session last week between Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and his foreign Minister Shimon Peres. Peres warned Sharon that refusing to heed incessant American requests for a cease-fire with the Palestinians would endanger Israeli interests and "turn the US against us. "Sharon reportedly yelled at Peres, saying "don't worry about American pres

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Kisil (900936)
      I think you're partly right - there will likely not be a workable system.

      Unfortunately, there will very likely be a system that partly works. Massive amounts of data will be collected, but processing will not be intelligent enough to translate this into real results in crime-fighting. Any data mining will result in many more false positives than actual results and waste government agents' time, which could otherwise be spent actually tracking down criminals (or terrorists.) Meanwhile, no thought will be

  • Neoconned alert! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dbIII (701233) on Sunday March 04 2007, @09:06PM (#18232630)

    will provide an omnipresent knowledge of the present and the past

    Does the mindset of whoever wrote this creep you out too? It isn't about being religeous - it's about being Gods themselves and making you worship them.

  • Sounds like the US government allowed the Stasi into the US and gave them control of the citizen monitoring project?
  • So it well seems it's intended for military deployment to combat assymetric (and urban) warfare. That is to say to enable the military to seek out the offending insurgent/combatant after a martial event. When your local constable gets interested in this technology then it'll be time for you to worry. In the meantime keep an eye on the developments, but don't be alarmed just yet.

    • Re:This is military procurement-turn down your ala (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Watson Ladd (955755) on Sunday March 04 2007, @09:41PM (#18232964)
      That kind of asymmetric warfare is what citizens would do against a repressive state regime.
    • I'm worried about the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT having this capability. The local cops are local people with local knowledge and local families.

      If this is developed for use on the battlefield, it WILL be available to monitor us. Databases don't care whether it's the USofA or not. Cameras don't understand Freedom.

      The only thing that would prevent it being deployed in our country is the good will and honest nature of our politicians. They'd be testing it on us before it made it to the military.

  • A shame (Score:5, Funny)

    by Chairboy (88841) on Sunday March 04 2007, @09:11PM (#18232688) Homepage
    It's a shame, if they had chosen ReplayTV instead, they could automatically skip commercials.

  • Pointless. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Ant P. (974313) on Sunday March 04 2007, @09:15PM (#18232724) Homepage
    For example, after a car bomb detonates, one would have the ability to play high-resolution data backward in time to follows the vehicle back to the source
    Until you realise the source is in a rural area 50 miles past the first camera to see it.

    "Anti-terrorism" cameras will not stop suicide bombers, nor will they even deter them. They're completely and utterly useless for their stated purpose, which means the government probably has no intention of using them for their stated purpose.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by dreamchaser (49529)
      Did you even bother to RTFA or did you just copy a random blurb? All this initiative is about is better ways to analyze intel after a battle or attack. It's not about 'anti-terrorism cameras'. Either you didn't pay attention to much of the article, you have your own agenda to push, or you're daft.

      • Re:Pointless. (Score:5, Insightful)

        by srmalloy (263556) on Sunday March 04 2007, @11:09PM (#18233596) Homepage
        How are you going to be able to run surveillance backward from a car bomb detonating to the origin point of the bombers -- or forward, following them to where they're hiding -- without a pervasive net of surveillance? And once you have the capacity to do this in a hostile environment, where you can assume that the opposing forces will place a priority on disabling the surveillance system, it's no stretch at all, given the track record of the Heimatsicherheitsdienst, to see the government deploying these systems in the US for our 'protection', where the populace would have much less incentive to disable surveillance (after all, if you don't have anything to hide, why would you object to someone watching you?) -- particularly since this link [villagevoice.com] in TFA, where it's specifically stated "The primary application is for homeland security"; you might want to try reading more deeply than just a light scan of the first few paragraphs. The potential of this technology reminds me strongly of David Drake's dystopian story collection Lacey and His Friends [amazon.com], written back in the '70s.
    • Think satalite feeds.

      I think maybe someone high up in "homeland security" watched ghost in the shell SAC and thought "if only we had those tools".

  • Excellent (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Waffle Iron (339739) on Sunday March 04 2007, @09:21PM (#18232772)
    The top priority needs to be setting up these systems inside the White House and the Pentagon. Then the next time they blunder into a quagmire like this, we can scan the databases and quickly find out exactly who needs to be held accountable. Then the problem can be rectified: "It looks like we're going to have to dock your paychecks for a total of $5.0e11."
    • Ya, wouldnt it be nice to record politicians, cops, and other government officials 24/7 (or at least while theyre working)? It would really cut down on corruption. Dont hold your breath though.
  • For example, after a car bomb detonates, one would have the ability to play high-resolution data backward in time to follows the vehicle back to the source, and then use that knowledge to focus collection and gain additional information by organizing and searching through archived data.

    The irony being that the vast majority of car bombs reported in the media these days are in the last place these very same people "improved." Indeed they are a direct consequence of that improving.

    Those that don't study histo

  • headline is misleading; turn down the alarms (Score:5, Insightful)

    by finlandia1869 (1001985) on Sunday March 04 2007, @09:23PM (#18232792)
    See the word "battlespace" in the description - that's DoD-ese for "battleground." They're talking about being able to go back and rapidly review/search recordings from satellites and other sensors monitoring combat zones. It's a very good idea - if you could track a car back to a house, you can then see who went in a out, and so forth. You could backtrack a small boat coming out of a sheltered hiding spot, and so forth. It's about time someone thought of this, frankly.

    This isn't domestic surveillance that they're talking about.

  • Nothing new here (Score:3, Funny)

    by The Dobber (576407) on Sunday March 04 2007, @09:24PM (#18232802)

    Jack Bauer and his pals at CTU have been Tivo'ing us for at least six seasons.

  • But.... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by djupedal (584558) on Sunday March 04 2007, @09:25PM (#18232816)
    What is supposed to happen, actually? Are we going to have cameras follow every person, 24/7? That means someone to study that footage, right? And someone to study the footage of them studying the footage of you? And....on and on.

    It is clear such clinical monitoring would break down under its own weight - speculative follow-thru says the most logical approach is to give every camera the autonomous ability to decide if something you've done warrants being flagged. Happen in practice? Not hardly.

    Back track from the scene of a car bomb explosion? How many cameras are you using? One or several? If several, where are they located in relation to the car? Points of the compass? Sure, if you know to watch the car from the beginning, in which case there is no point in following the arrow of time back to the start, right?

    While THX1138 hinted at this and other B'Brother style tactics, it also tried to show why such a system simply isn't feasible. There are just too many ways of being defined as outside the box in terms of what such a system could handle. All it takes is one exception, and the system is no longer worth the time it took to draw up the prototype.
    • What is supposed to happen, actually? Are we going to have cameras follow every person, 24/7? That means someone to study that footage, right? And someone to study the footage of them studying the footage of you? And....on and on.

      They arent suggesting watching everyone. They want to record everything, then when something happens, rewind and then watch the given location. We obviously dont have the man power to watch everyone, but when computers can do it for us....

  • Um, sensationalism anyone? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by dreamchaser (49529) on Sunday March 04 2007, @09:28PM (#18232840) Homepage Journal
    The title of this article is totally off. This is nothing more than a way to analyze battlefield intel better. It's got nothing to do with any kind of surveillance programs or anything other than being able to better catagorize threats and analyze data after a conflict.

    This gives a whole new meaning to 'knee jerk reaction'.

  • 24 (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mastershake_phd (1050150) on Sunday March 04 2007, @09:37PM (#18232928) Homepage
    Someones been watching too much 24. I dont believe the Uk even records every camera for much time.. Lets assume you use 350mb an hour to store your video, not the best but acceptable quality.

    24 X 350 = 8400 = 8.4 GB a day

    1000 cameras x 8.4 GB = 8.4 TB a day

    Hmm, on second thought this seems possible.
  • If i were trying to fight the Iraqi (or other) insurgency i sure as hell would want a tool like this.

    W/o getting into a moralistic analysis, it's clear that while such monitoring is not a panacea, it would at least raise the bar for the insurgents, and increase their exposure to OPSEC fubars.

    We do this already in a less-than-coordinated fashion in the US. The police regularly survey all the security camera tapes in the area of crimes, esp. murders, to try to create a gestalt of the crime scene area. Works

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by dbIII (701233)

      If i were trying to fight the Iraqi (or other) insurgency i sure as hell would want a tool like this.

      In that sort of situation you'll get a lot of footage of guys in masks stealing cameras. Over Lebanon the Israeli forces borrowed or bought drones to film from above.

  • Tin Foil Hats for sale (Score:3, Funny)

    by pagerwho (1071772) on Sunday March 04 2007, @11:23PM (#18233686)
    I have a special on tin foil hats. Buy two and I'll throw in a free government conspiracy guide free. Buy four and you'll get the government conspiracy guide, AND the book "UFO's Exist" for the low, low price of $19.95 plus shipping and handling. In other news, Bush finally figured out what a pentagon was.

  • Not new (Score:4, Informative)

    by hcdejong (561314) <acme AT xmsnet DOT nl> on Monday March 05 2007, @06:23AM (#18235758)
    The military have been doing this (in a more limited fashion) for years. AFAIK it started with analogue VCRs being coupled to JSTARS radar output. With the VCR, they could track radar contacts (vehicles) over a longer period of time (hours).
    For this sort of surveillance to be useful, you'd have to have 24/7 overhead coverage, either radar or optical. That's not something they're going to be able to sneak into a non-battlefield area (i.e. the US). Also, JSTARS coverage of the entire US would be prohibitively expensive.

    • Re:Wouldn't It Be Easier Just To... (Score:5, Funny)

      by Hotawa Hawk-eye (976755) on Sunday March 04 2007, @09:36PM (#18232912)
      Yes, but think of the defense contractors that contribute heavily to both political parties! Won't someone think of the defense contractors?

      • Re:Wouldn't It Be Easier Just To... (Score:5, Informative)

        by Anomolous Cowturd (190524) on Monday March 05 2007, @12:20AM (#18234078)
        We could stop poisoning ourselves with floride, mercury, lead, aluminum and arsenic.

        Flouride in water supplies is beneficial. The others aren't.

        The entire pharmaceutical industry could decide to stop fucking everyone over and make the secrets of real whole health known. Simple cures for cancer, diabetics, and other diseases are well known to naturopaths.

        Bullshit. Bull shit. Bovine excrement. Quackery. Pseudoscience. Fraud. Snake oil. No doctor on earth would hold back a cure for cancer or diabetes if such a thing existed. Bullshit artists preying on the terminally ill, peddling eye-of-newt potions and magical crystals, are the lowest form of life on the planet.

        • Re:Wouldn't It Be Easier Just To... (Score:4, Funny)

          by Creepy Crawler (680178) on Monday March 05 2007, @12:55AM (#18234336)
          What?! The magical crystal I bought for 300$ from my local fortuneteller wont actually stop my cancer???

          She promised in the tarot reading that my cancer was in remission!!

        • Re:Wouldn't It Be Easier Just To... (Score:4, Funny)

          by Triv (181010) on Monday March 05 2007, @05:51AM (#18235648) Journal

          Bullshit artists preying on the terminally ill, peddling eye-of-newt potions and magical crystals, are the lowest form of life on the planet.


          Oh yeah? I work in Marketing.

          Your move, Trebek!


          Triv

        • Re:Wouldn't It Be Easier Just To... (Score:4, Interesting)

          by BalanceOfJudgement (962905) on Monday March 05 2007, @02:56PM (#18241302) Homepage

          No doctor on earth would hold back a cure for cancer or diabetes if such a thing existed.
          It may say something about the state of my cynicism that I do not believe that to be true.

          It is not so much the doctors themselves I believe capable of this treachery, since doctors actually interact with the patients they'd be forcing to suffer, and few humans are capable of purposefully inflicting pain on a known victim for the sake of profit; rather, the pharmaceutical companies that have everything to gain from never-ending poor health.

          When you never have to see the face of those you cause to suffer, it is easy to write off their suffering as unimportant.
        • Flouride in water supplies is beneficial. The others aren't.

          Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous Communist plot we have ever had to face?

          Have you never wondered why I drink only distilled water, or rainwater, and only pure-grain alcohol?

          I can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.

              • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

                by Dan Slotman (974474)
                ...Who the hell do you think they attacked when they conquered the land? Anarchies typically don't produce walled cities. By your standards, the Greek city-states weren't self-governing either.

            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              by Descalzo (898339)
              That may be true, but the idea that they haven't done anything more than knock over a building is crazy talk. It makes it very difficult to have an intelligent discussion about it.

              I think it's clear that if these guys had a nuclear weapon, they would use it. That fact alone makes them a vastly more dangerous threat than the muggers.

              Now whether or not even the threat of a nuclear attack is worth changing our laws is a valid question. If we change them too much, if we give up too many freedoms, what do w

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.