Big Brother Really Is Watching Us All

siddesu writes "The BBC has a nice high-level overview of some technologies for surveillance developed in the US and the UK. 'The US and UK governments are developing increasingly sophisticated gadgets to keep individuals under their surveillance. When it comes to technology, the US is determined to stay ahead of the game ... But it [a through-the wall sensing device in development] will also show whether someone inside a house is looking to harm you, because if they are, their heart rate will be raised. And 10 years from now, the technology will be much smarter. We'll scan a person with one of these things and tell what they're actually thinking.'"

Elevated Heart Rate?

[Gabrill (556503)]

Boy that surprise birthday present sure landed me in jail quick. I hope I can explain that brand new S&M outfit adequately in court!

Re:Elevated Heart Rate?

[Joebert (946227)]

Your honor after carefull consideration we've determined the defendant is of no danger to society, however the prosecution requests the defendant not be allowed within 1000 feet from any property which houses goats.

Re:Elevated Heart Rate?

[jagdish (981925)]

however the prosecution requests the defendant not be allowed within 1000 feet from any property which houses goatse.
Fixed!

This is when...

[by Anonymous Coward]

I'll become a millionaire overnight selling my own brand of tin-foil clothing!

CAUTION: May cook organs/skin during warm weather.

Re:This is when...

[Joebert (946227)]

It's gettin hot in here.
So take off your tinfoil cloths.

I hope they really can read my mind....

[timmarhy (659436)]

.. I'll just think of tub girl and goatse.cx man all day. take that fuckers.

Re:I hope they really can read my mind....

[dircha (893383)]

"No, don't talk - don't say anything. I'm filling my mind with a picture of beating their huge, misshapen heads to pulp!. Thoughts so primitive they block out everything else; I'm filling my mind with hate!"

Captain Pike salutes you :)

Re:I hope they really can read my mind....

[Perseid (660451)]

Yep. And what will the parents have to say when their kids scan them and see all the same stuff? :)

This reminds me of my youth in Poland.

[by Anonymous Coward]

I grew up in Poland in the 1960s and 1970s. This is the sort of shit we dealt with each day.

The Communists claimed to have devices that could read minds to determine one's intentions. Now, we didn't know if this was true or not. But seeing as many of us wanted to live another day, or at the very least not get tortured, we assumed they did.

It seems that the citizenry of the UK and the US are now in a very similar position....

Re:This reminds me of my youth in Poland.

[b0s0z0ku (752509)]

I grew up in Poland in the 1960s and 1970s. This is the sort of shit we dealt with each day.

And it's funny, I was just in Poland (Krakow) two months ago. The place felt *worlds* more free than NYC or London. Fewer cameras around. No constant babble about how bags are subject to search because of terrorism. Able to buy an intercity train ticket for cash without ID (same went for a domestic plane ticket, though they did glance at my passport when I boarded). Fewer police swarming about, unlike in NYC where they seem to be out in force near Penn Station or driving in cavalcades, lights flashing to an unknown destination.

I love the USA, but Poland definitely has its good points...

-b.

Re:This reminds me of my youth in Poland.

[b0s0z0ku (752509)]

You should move there. Let us know how it goes.

I'm considering it -- plenty of opportunities in technology and engineering since the country is developing rapidly, and I'm a citizen by parentage so I'd have no problem getting a work permit or establishing a corporation there.

BTW: I never quite understood the sentiment that if someone says that a place has some good points over the USA, they're somehow not worthy of being an American. Having a citizenry that acknowledges its country's faults makes that country a better and stronger place, since they talk about the faults and strive to correct them. Blind acceptance serves no one.

-b.

Heart Rate Raised?

[Randseed (132501)]

Harm you because their heart rate is raised? They could be overdosing on caffeine. They could be on meth. They might be some teenager on Ritalin or its relatives. They might be masturbating. They might just have physiological tachycardia.

I'd rather the government not base their decision on whether to come in guns blazing on something as ridiculous as whether my heart rate is increased above some theoretical average at the time.

It's just an excuse. Re:Heart Rate Raised?

[Erris (531066)]

I'd rather the government not base their decision on whether to come in guns blazing on something as ridiculous as whether my heart rate is increased...

They will base the decision on your political expression and activism, the other things will simply justify your murder. The elevated heart rate will come when they ask you if you and your children would like some pancakes [rotten.com]. The report will say that they had reason to believe you were armed and dangerous.

Unless the US returns to rule of law, tools used to track individuals will be used to identify, harass, intimidate, disrupt and eliminate opposition. Domestic spying is against the law. Unreasonable search violates the Constitution. It is completely unreasonable for government or industry to keep tables of "gait DNA" and other metrics for people who have not committed crimes. The purpose for this kind of thing is a crime in itself.

Big brother is so cliche

[Raul654 (453029)]

Big brother has nothing on Ceiling cat [ceilingcat.com]

Revolting against over-surveilance

[shbazjinkens (776313)]

So in the end, my question is what can we do about it? It's impossible to get the masses (in the US) to actually get out and do something about this right now, I just don't think they care enough. Mass opinion is that if you don't have anything to worry about the government finding then don't worry about them watching you.

The only credible methods I've seen for avoiding surveilance involve actually destroying the surveilance equipment.

The only way to circumvent them is by RF jamming, wire cutting and creating a bright spot around you at all times to flood the camera view - which involves wearing bright LED's or a laser.

Does this mean that eventually there are going to be rogue groups going around and destroying government surveilance equipment? I think so. When you feel you're cornered you do what you have to.

Does this mean that people who are planning terrorist attacks in the future will develop plans to destroy/jam all of the surveilance equipment if they want to get out alive? Definately.

Chicken Joke

[Dragonflite (1155813)]

Why did the chicken cross the road?
Big Brother: I've seen many chickens cross many roads. Please specify.

NOT NEW

[Jane Q. Public (1010737)]

There is already court precedent for this in the U.S.

Through-the-wall IR scanners have been available to some police departments in the US for a while now. There has already been at least one court case about them.

In the United States (yes, still), it is illegal for officers of law enforcement to use electronic means to determine what is going on in your home without first obtaining a judicial warrant. The case I mentioned dealt with police using an through-the-wall scanner to determine where an alleged drug dealer was inside someone else's house, before they raided it. Because they had not obtained a warrant, the evidence was thrown out of court. The judge ruled that it was clearly an electronic device, and thus fell under the Federal Statute preventing its use.

I wish I had a citation at hand for this case, but I do not. I will try to find it.

Re:NOT BS.

[Peyna (14792)]

Kyllo v. U.S. [cornell.edu] is probably what you're looking for. The legal standard has fluctuated a bit in recent years, but right now the Court is sticking with "general public use," for determining whether a particular type of technology constitutes a search.

Where do they get their numbers?

[gillbates (106458)]

Interestingly, we, the public, don't seem to mind. Opinion polls, both in the US and Britain, say that about 75% of us want more, not less, surveillance.

I think we've just found the next Jason Blair.

I have to call bullshit on this one. In my entire life, I have met atheists and believers, gays and straights, liberals and conservatives, and not once, ever, in my life have I met someone who espoused more surveillance. Now, I live in a large metropolitan area - one with numerous projects involving installing more surveillance cameras, and even the most conservative, cop-loving suburbanites are at best indifferent, and quite often, vehemently opposed. There's a lot of hostility, but absolutely no support. The law of statistics would dictate that if 75% of the population supported more surveillance, I would have - at least once in my life - have heard someone argue in support of it. But I've never heard it from anyone. Not even the most gullible of idiots or stupidest of patriots I've met has ever said they'd like to see more surveillance.

Re:Where do they get their numbers?

[gillbates (106458)]

There's a big difference between "don't care" and "wanting more surveillance".

I too, have met the I'm-an-idiot-so-I-have-nothing-to-hide type. However, their indifference is fueled by their trust in humanity, and the fact that for most people, getting struck by lighting is a greater risk than being falsely imprisoned by their government for political reasons. Those without any political convictions won't ever be political prisoners.

I could accept that 75% are indifferent. What is unacceptable is translating "indifference" to "wanting more surveillance". I believe it is more correct to say that the average American doesn't want to be bothered by the question of surveillance, a subtle, but important difference. It doesn't mean they want more surveillance, but that they consider the appropriate level a surveillance a question better answered by the police. If they had to personally share the cost of the cameras; if the cameras inconvenienced them in some way, they'd probably take a different view.

Re:Ineffective

[Nossie (753694)]

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA !!!!

And you actually thought it was aimed at terrorism?

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA !!!! /moment of temporary insanity

Re:Ineffective

[DaedalusHKX (660194)]

Actually most trained professionals generally maintain calm when preparing to kill someone.

Its only untrained schmucks like us out here in the "regular Joe Bloggs world" that start pushing lots of red stuff through our hearts when we're about to do something we're not accustomed to (on slashdot, that is equal possibilities, sex or killing... j/k). I'm pretty sure most of us slashdotters have only killed things in videogames and with a fly swatter.

I can guarantee there isn't one among us who would have the ability or training to remain calm while the ninja masked, body armored thug squad is romping through the house, searching for us with the heartbeat monitor... If you can maintain your cool while that is happening, then you should be operating your own assassin for hire business and stop posting on slashdot... you're wasting your time here :)

As for the rest of us... take deep breaths folks... we've already given them so much leeway to use when they screw us, why stop now?

Re:They can do this now, sort of.

[CastrTroy (595695)]

You would have to have some pretty good filtering technology to filter out someones brain waves from another room with all the other ambient electromagnetic radiation going around. A standard action potential [wikipedia.org] only fluctuates the membrane voltage by about 120 mV. Meanwhile, a CRT, which actually is vulnerable to Van Eck Phreaking, requires a voltage of 32,000 volts [wikipedia.org] to display an image on the screen.

Re:They can do this now, sort of.

[eli pabst (948845)]

AFAIK, they do this using fMRI. So they'll need to figure out how to build a MRI machine that is big enough to fit over your house without anyone noticing and a way to keep all the ferrous metal objects in your house from turning it into one big blender, otherwise I doubt they could detect field changes that small anytime soon. I would agree with you about correlating general emotional responses with specific brain activity though.

Re:Just like the polygraph

[Harmonious Botch (921977)]

You forgot ROCK&ROLL!

I forget a lot of things that come after drugs.