Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Security Government Privacy Politics

Mind How You Walk - Someone is Watching 256

Posted by Zonk from the they-can-seee-yooo dept.
mrbluze writes "The Telegraph has an opinion article about the future of the extensive CCTV network in the United Kingdom. Automated analysis of how and where people are walking or otherwise moving, and what objects they carry or leave behind, flags the attention of security staff. This is meant to preempt a crime and make suspects identifiable even by gait. The technology is of questionable public benefit since street crime has not decreased despite the presence of CCTV. 'An airport camera can be programmed to know what a departure hall should look like, with thousands of separate movements. A single suitcase left for any length of time would trigger an alarm. This technology was developed for use in hotels to alert staff to a breakfast tray left outside a room. Soon, it will be coming to a street near you. Why not go the whole hog and have microphones attached to cameras or embedded in street lights?'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Mind How You Walk - Someone is Watching More

Mind How You Walk - Someone is Watching

Comments Filter:

  • Silly Walks (Score:5, Funny)

    by Leibherk ( 112156 ) <Leibherk@@@hotmail...com> on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @12:11PM (#18502431)
    I wonder if it can identify silly walks.

  • Finally! (Score:4, Funny)

    by HolyCrapSCOsux ( 700114 ) on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @12:11PM (#18502435)
    The first Ministry of silly walks?
  • Why not go the whole hog and have microphones attached to cameras or embedded in street lights?

    Already done :-( I don't know about sleepwalking into a surveillance society. I think we're running towards it with open arms at the moment. http://tinyurl.com/2vbx8g [tinyurl.com]

    • Re:Big Brother alive and well in the UK (Score:5, Insightful)

      by peterprior ( 319967 ) on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @12:31PM (#18502731)
      From the article you linked to:

      "The mobile units cost £15,000 each and are similar in design to the cameras used in the reality show Big Brother in that they can rotate 360 degrees."

      I'm amazed people don't see the irony here..

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Daniel Dvorkin ( 106857 ) *
        There's no irony if you consider the fact that, apparently, people love Big Brother.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Teun ( 17872 )
          Yep, and bending over backwards was invented by these same Brits.

          Anything to please the nanny state, the Tories and Labour are outdoing each other on the subject!
        • Personally, I don't know which one is worse.

          I actually have nightmares about innocently watching channel 4 and then seeing that eye flash on the screen for a split second. It's not that the eye which scares me but the knowledge that all enjoyment of watching TV is going to be completely destroyed in a couple of weeks time.

          And you just now that on the next Big Brother, Channel 4 will come up with another publicity stunt like the whole "racist comments" thing from last time so all other media outlets will onc
    • There are already microphones attached to telephone poles in high crime areas of Chicago to detect gunshots and alert police: wired.com [wired.com]

      • Re:Microphones used to detect gunshots (Score:4, Funny)

        by cayenne8 ( 626475 ) on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @01:18PM (#18503373) Homepage Journal
        "There are already microphones attached to telephone poles in high crime areas of Chicago to detect gunshots and alert police..."

        I wonder how hard it would be to come up with a player device to simulate gunshots?

        Would be interesting to have a few friends in different parts of the city...some maybe across the st. from each other, and fire out gunshot sounds. Heck, make it interesting...mix up the reports, like a few 357 magnums, maybe a 50 cal Desert Eagle, some shotguns...for real fun, get one full auto here and there.

        I can't imagine at this point, there is a law against playing gunshot 'sounds'....

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Grishnakh ( 216268 )
          The problem is you'd need a powerful stereo and big-ass speakers to simulate the sound of a gunshot.

          But if you could do it, go all out: make it play machine guns and explosions like it's a battlefield. Then watch the National Guard deploy, since that's too much for the SWAT team to handle.
        • It would be hard with a speaker, but a gram or so of gunpowder will do the trick. Mix it with bits of flint or sand, wrap it in a tissue, and throw. It won't do any damage other than a small burn mark where you hit, but it will make a big bang.

        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by OriginalArlen ( 726444 )
          Why would you want to do such a thing, just to fuck up an attempt to detect & prevent crime which is new, effective, and AFAIK has virtually NO negative consequences for civil liberties, privacy etc? (So long as they're sited by an algorithm running on data about gun crime, rather than (say) ethnicity or income levels.)

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by superbrose ( 1030148 )

      What good is having CCTV and microphones when the punishment does not fit the crime?

      A friend of mine was attacked in a pub for spilling someone else's pint of beer. Despite apologising, he was punched in the face and had to go to hospital, where he received numerous stitches.

      Upset about the whole event he sued his assailant - the outcome: No fine, no social work, but simply a Warning.

      How is this going to deter anyone? Who cares about being filmed and convicted of some crime or another, if there is no pro

      • Or rather, the job they are doing isn't the one that your average victim in the street wants them to be doing. Instead, they're doing the job that the politicians want them to do.

        So... If the police and courts aren't doing the job, who will?

         

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by kencurry ( 471519 )
        how come the brits say "go to hospital"

        and the americans say "go to THE hospital"?

        Why don't the brits use an article there?

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by ozbird ( 127571 )
          Why don't the brits use an article there?

          Hey, it's their language...

          Do you "go to bed", or "go to THE bed"? "Go to hell", or "go to THE hell?" etc.

          As a counter argument, why do (some) Americans say "I'm going to the mall; you want to go with?" Go with what, bells on?
    • Oh, they're also planting cameras in baked bean cans [thesun.co.uk] to catch people who put their rubbish out on the wrong day.

      Nice eh?

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Seumas ( 6865 )
      As an American it is apparently my duty to give up my freedom and privacy and conveniences to protect children from being molested, old ladies from being mugged and terrorists from... uh... doing whatever.

      Remember, we must give up the freedoms we are fighting for so we can defeat the terrorists who want to take those freedoms away!

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Evilest Doer ( 969227 )

        Remember, we must give up the freedoms we are fighting for so we can defeat the terrorists who want to take those freedoms away!
        No, no! You've got it all wrong! The terrorists hate our freedoms. Ergo if we have no more freedoms, there will be no more terrorists hating us.
    • [quote]
      NEW YORK - Along a gritty stretch of street in Brooklyn, police this month quietly launched an ambitious plan to combat street crime and terrorism.
      But instead of cops on the beat, wireless video cameras peer down from lamp posts about 30 feet above the sidewalk.

      They were the first installment of a program to place 500 cameras throughout the city at a cost of $9 million. Hundreds of additional cameras could follow if the city receives $81.5 million in federal grants it has requested to safeguard Lower

  • Finally! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Billosaur ( 927319 ) * <wgrotherNO@SPAMoptonline.net> on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @12:12PM (#18502443) Journal

    A way of identifying all those people who soil themselves!

    I believe it's safe to say that using someone's gait to determine their relative guilt/innocence, ranks right up there with dumping a woman in a river to see if she's a witch.

    • I believe it's safe to say that using someone's gait to determine their relative guilt/innocence, ranks right up there with dumping a woman in a river to see if she's a witch.
      On the plus side, though, it will give the police an excuse to harass anyone with a handicap or who has a sprained ankle. I think we can all agree that would be totally awesome.

    • Re:Finally! (Score:5, Funny)

      by omeomi ( 675045 ) on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @12:28PM (#18502697) Homepage
      They should find some way to incorporate Phrenology [wikipedia.org] into the system.
      • They're not too far off... [bbc.co.uk]

      • Re:Finally! (Score:5, Funny)

        by smellsofbikes ( 890263 ) on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @01:41PM (#18503741) Journal
        If phrenology is the forecasting of someone's personality by looking at the bumps on the person's head, how about phrenotherapy: behavior modification by adding bumps to someone's head. I think the people authorizing this sort of wide-spread spying are obvious candidates for phrenotheraputic treatments.

        I wonder how they'll classify me, given that I have an irrational aversion to stepping on cracks (which means I often don't have a regular pace.) Probably 'loser geek' but I might get 'hiding something: investigate!'
    • That's not what it says. It uses their gait to recognize them from prior surveillance footage where it has "fingerprinted" people's stride.

      Its time for another visit to the Ministry of Funny Walks (or whatever that old Monty Python sketch was).

    • Re:Finally! (Score:5, Funny)

      by Skyshadow ( 508 ) * on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @12:33PM (#18502755) Homepage
      I dunno about a witch identification, but I'm betting this thing could pretty easily spot the Walk of Shame. Head down? Check. Shuffling gait? Check. Obviously yesterday's clothes wrinkled from a night on the floor? Oh yeah.

      In fact, I can think of a number of amusing things this could watch for: The 'ol Toilet Twostep, the Hemroid Hobble, the Slow-Up-Your-Walk-to-Stay-Behind-the-Chick-with-th e-Smokin'-Hot-Ass Walk (oh, sure, pretend you've never done it). I dunno if it'll prevent terrorism, mind you, but it'll keep those "funny video" TV shows in material for ages.
      • They'll be accosting a lot of "Lost and Confused Tourists" and "Homeless Guy Dumping Trashbag" folks.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Irvu ( 248207 )
      Given that this will probably lead to hauling people in based upon spotty clues such as gait, fingerprinting them and taking DNA Samples (never to be destroyed) and then prosecuting a handful for "Failure to Obey" or some other nonsense statute thus clogging the courts with stupid cases this ranks more up there with setting someone on fire to see if their innocence will protect them.

      The article is right. At best, high-tech CCTV has been used to identify people after the fact, in some cases but has done not
      • or some other nonsense statute thus clogging the courts with stupid cases

        Don't worry, I'm sure jolly 'ol England is well on the way to eliminating that step entirely, saving you, the citizen, much wasted time!

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Irvu ( 248207 )

          Don't worry, I'm sure jolly 'ol England is well on the way to eliminating that step entirely, saving you, the citizen, much wasted time!


          No no, not citizen, subject. England has no constitution, only a queen.

    • I believe it's safe to say that using someone's gait to determine their relative guilt/innocence, ranks right up there with dumping a woman in a river to see if she's a witch.

      FTB (Blog):

      My favourite is automatic gait recognition. This identifies people by the way they walk and the Government has asked Ministry of Defence scientists to develop it for widespread use.

      FTS (inaccurate and/or misleading):

      This is meant to preempt a crime and make suspects identifiable even by gait.

      You're misinterpreting wh

    • There are (at least) two separate technologies being discussed in the article summary. This being Slashdot, they're all muddled together.

      The "gait recognition" is fairly new, and I'd agree it's a tad creepy.

      However, the non-moving-object detection isn't that new, and is a pretty good idea IMO. It's one of the things that actually makes cameras effective rather than just a tool to help the police sort out what the hell happened after a crime or act of terrorism has already been committed.

      Basically, you can t

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by kabocox ( 199019 )
      A way of identifying all those people who soil themselves!

      I believe it's safe to say that using someone's gait to determine their relative guilt/innocence, ranks right up there with dumping a woman in a river to see if she's a witch.

      You forgot the most useful aspect of this tech. To determine which couples just finished getting busy by how they walk!
    • This walking analyzer will be a tremendous aid for fans of hip-swaying bootys [wikipedia.org].
  • Why not go the whole hog and have microphones attached to cameras or embedded in street lights?

    Don't give them ideas.
    • y'know the push for newer, more secure/informative types of ID?

      I say, in addition to RFID stuff, all forms of ID have to have a miniature microphone and camera attached, and a small bit of storage(a flash card?), and a transmitter. At regular times, the card will spit out any information it's collected to receivers.

      It would of course, be mandatory to display your card on the front of any clothing you're wearing, much like many checkout people have to wear(Hi! My name is ...) Anyone not uploading good, un

  • More interested in those that don't walk (Score:4, Interesting)

    by solevita ( 967690 ) on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @12:16PM (#18502519)
    As part of efforts to instil a sense of transparency into the CCTV society, a special couple of days were undertaken by the camera operators in the Welsh capital Cardiff. Under the scheme members of the public could come in and watch CCTV operators at work.

    I've seen a conference paper based upon the insight this scheme provided. The conclusion? CCTV operators are presently trained to concentrate on those people that aren't moving; standing still is regarded as suspicious.

    I don't know what impact this new technology will have on this practice.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by linvir ( 970218 )

      Fascinating. In that case, if I ever need to set off a dirty-pipes bomb in central London, I will be sure to continue walking as I reach for the little red PTM switch.

      Am I paranoid for seriously considering the implications of posting such a sentence? Or is it just another result of the totalitarian shithole that this country has become?

      • Do not worry, Henry Smith of Liverpool, we will be to flat 23 shortly to have a pleasant chat with you about your interesting ideas. Don't bother getting up, we'll let ourselves in.
        .
        .
        .

        (I love DNS lookup...)

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by glwtta ( 532858 )
      Did they happen to catch any blue police boxes appearing out of nowhere?

      (Cardiff just doesn't come up in conversation too often, gotta go with what I know)
      • 'fraid not sir, there was no Doctor Who, just a lot of video of a lot of people doing nothing at all.
  • If you're part of the Ministry of Silly Walks, you're going to get outed.

  • Microphones are already in place, thank you. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by twitter ( 104583 ) on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @12:18PM (#18502551) Homepage Journal

    Why not go the whole hog and have microphones attached to cameras or embedded in street lights?'"

    Why go through that kind of expense when cell phones can already be used that way? Cell phones are always in hearing range and can be programmed to be on when they look off. The cameras would increase coverage, but again private "security cameras" will do the job in all the places people care about if access is granted by law to government. Soon enough, people will want cameras in their "smart" houses to turn on and off lights and listen for commands. As long as non free software is used for this, the coverage will be complete.

    Quiet, casual voice, "We shall meet in the place where there is no darkness."

    Love,
    Big Brother

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Reziac ( 43301 ) *
      It wouldn't matter if the cellphones all ran OSS; if the chips were hardcoded to be ON all the time you'd still be monitorable. Most particularly if "always on" and GPS were required by gov't regulation. You could be eavesdropped and tracked any time someone felt the urge, and whether the software used was OSS or not would be irrelevant.

      Unfortunately I think that's the direction it's headed; Treach^H^H^H^H Trusted Computing will lead to Trusted Phones with the same TC "security" features, because without a
  • "Why not go the whole hog and have microphones attached to cameras or embedded in street lights?"

    Whole hog would be more along the lines of drawing from a page in hitler's book, where we train our children to turn us in as soon as we bitch about the current administration...

    "Yes, Lead Teacher, that's right - my Father said the Prime Minister has lemons for testicles and pees sitting down."
    • , where we train our children to turn us in as soon as we bitch about the current administration.

      Oh man, you think our prisons are crowded now.

  • I'll let V say it for me. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rantingkitten ( 938138 ) <kitten@NOSpAM.mirrorshades.org> on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @12:28PM (#18502693) Homepage
    Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. I know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn't be? War, terror, disease. There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. Fear got the best of you, and in your panic you turned to the now high chancellor, Adam Sutler. He promised you order, he promised you peace, and all he demanded in return was your silent, obedient consent.
  • Tonight on BBC1, a night of Shakespeare. On BBC2, it's comedy night, starting with Hikinks In Welsh. BBC3, Streetwalkers in Exeter. BBC4, pedestrians on The Mall. BBC5, Best of Silly Walks on Picadilly. BBC6, Crimes in Progress.

    Please pay your video tax promptly, thank you.

  • May not be a bad thing (Score:4, Informative)

    by abhikhurana ( 325468 ) on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @12:34PM (#18502775)
    This technology has been around for some time now and has been tested successfully in many instances. Contrary to the impression this article gives, the technology came from US and Israel, where it was successfully used for border surveillance and also for protecting airports and railways, infrastructure crtical for teh working of a company. This is reflected in the companies working on this technology, namely Object Video [objectvideo.com], IoImage [ioimage.com] etc. But lately UK has become very active in this and like with most surveillance technologies, it has surpassed the rest of the world [coe.co.uk] but the applications that UK is looking at are not all 1984ish. One of the biggest applications which is being looked in UK is to alart the CCTV operators when a car parks in the hard shoulder for more than say 5 minutes and automatically alert highway patrols. This is potentially very useful. I am not sure about the rest of the people here but I have spent hours on the roadside with a punctured tire in really cold weather on more than one occasion (on for those are wondering why I didn't use the spare, try changing a driver's side tyre with all the big trucks passing within a feet or so of you and you will know) and I think it would have been great if help had come sooner. So like all technology, the technology itself is not bad. But you can use in both constructive and destructive way.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by 0123456 ( 636235 )
      "One of the biggest applications which is being looked in UK is to alart the CCTV operators when a car parks in the hard shoulder for more than say 5 minutes and automatically alert highway patrols."

      Ah, so next time you stop for a pee in the bushes, better make it quick before you're charged with public indecency.
    • So... we all have to be watched all the time, just so that you can drive round without carrying a mobile phone?

  • More costs, no gauranteed benfit (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Jtheletter ( 686279 ) on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @12:35PM (#18502785)
    This is one of the biggest problems I see with current governments' agendas to implement mass surveilance and other technology security measures - an almost total lack of cost-benefit analysis that demonstrate a clear need to implement the technology. For many of these cases there are clear privacy concerns, the potential for abuse of the system, and encroachment of liberties, and in addition there are the projected costs of implementing the systems - costs for hardware, software, infrastructure, agencies, staffing, etc. Most of the time the monetary estimates run into the billions, and that's before the usual reality of budget and schedule overruns, unforeseen implementation problems, contractor cost inflating, etc etc. And yet to balance all these costs, projected and real, there is usually not much more supporting argument than "it fights terrorism/crime/think of the children". Rarely with any sort of hard data backing up the plans, rarely with in-depth studies of test cases, or even analysis of how similar systems are working in other countries where they have already been implemented. This whole idea of "trust us, it's for the better" is infuriating coming from our chosen leaders.

    And what about if the system doesn't provide the expected benefits? When was the last time a huge security program was dismantled when shown to not deliver what was promised, or even evaluated for success? (programs like Carnivore and Total Information Awareness continue on in other guises even now) Too often there are earmarks, kickbacks (monetary and political) and whatnot tied into the whole process so supporters are even less likely to admit failure when a program is still personally lucrative in some way. None of the funding for these mass surveilance and automated security measures seem to have any sort of merit-based budgeting built in. It ends up being a huge political fight to close useless programs, meanwhile the costs - monetary and liberty - continue to pile up, restricting freedoms and draining our public coffers (or in the case of the US continuing to pile onto a mountain of debt that cannot possibly be repaid without massive negative consequences). Our representatives in government need to be held accountable to hold these programs accountable! There need to be provisions, milestones, evaluations and hard-set sunset clauses that force these programs to deliver or die. And there needs to be more scepticism upfront with regard to the promised benefits that have little to no factual backing, and more than that, the coefficient placed in front of the value of infractions of liberty needs to be increased! The practice of implementing Security Theater programs with no accountability to success has got to stop. We're stepping on freedoms and spending like a drunk with no proven returns, how is that good public policy?

  • Going too far? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by hindumagic ( 232591 ) on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @12:36PM (#18502799)
    Really, if the Bad People (TM) want to make modern society grind to a halt, all they have to do now is start to leave shopping bags and other, random containers lying around in public places. It would be pretty effective in making this kind of technology useless, and quite a drain on the system, if you get enough volume of bags being left behind in random public places.

    Sometimes the most simple things can bring to a halt the most complex of systems. No need for anything dangerous, society will bankrupt itself trying to oversee and purify itself.

    • People have already shut down [msn.com] sheep-cities by leaving harmless, if not offensive, marketing collateral around.

      Right now, I have a hard time believing that TerroristsTM have any significant interest in attacking the mainland United States or Britain. What would be the point? They've already proven they can do it and worried the public and governments to the point that our freedoms are being eroded daily.

      Right now it might 'only' be video cameras. Soon it could be a McCarthy-style witch hunt seeking ou

    • Re:Going too far? (Score:4, Funny)

      by jsewell ( 86485 ) on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @01:36PM (#18503659)
      Either that, or leave little boxes with flashing LEDs all over the place. The authorities handle those very efficiently.

  • No more random walks (Score:3, Insightful)

    by metoc ( 224422 ) on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @12:43PM (#18502881)
    In an airport situation, I could see the cameras tracking you from the checkin counter to your gate. As soon as you identified yourself to a person or kiosk it would know where you should be going and watch you if you strayed. It would also notice things like people who meet and talk but did not arrive together or leave together. On city streets it would look for cars and people, and start to build correlation databases (i.e. Mrs. X's son always visits on Sundays).

    Get used to it. The technology is only going to get smarter, and eventually the street lights will know where you are going and change accordingly. When you deviate it will issue and alert and require you to file a report.

    I personally have no problem being watched as long as I can watch back. It would be interesting to know where the politicians are at 2 AM.

  • whole hog (Score:3, Insightful)

    by nurb432 ( 527695 ) on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @12:44PM (#18502889) Homepage Journal
    Why stop at every streetlight? Lets just mandate implants for everyone, and a worldwide sensor network, and get it over with.

  • All the joking aside... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by rthille ( 8526 ) <web-slashdot@ran g a t .org> on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @12:46PM (#18502923) Homepage Journal

    I've long realized that I recognize people I know well from a _distance_ more by how they move than by the shape of their face or other more 'normal' visual cues. It probably comes from evolving in an area where predators moved differently from prey.
  • This smells of another expensive techno-solution begging for a problem to solve. The fact that someone put it in place before they have a need just points towards ineptitude at a high level.

    By this time next year the people operating the equipment will be reassigned and whatever data is collected will be shunted to /dev/null just to get it out of the way.

    But it will appear on Slashdot again and again.

  • Thought crime (Score:5, Insightful)

    by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @01:08PM (#18503227) Homepage Journal
    Surely this is an actual, real world example of thought crime being punished? No longer do you actually have to comit a crime - simply acting like you might comit some, thinging about it, planning it in some way, or suggesting it to others is now a crime.
    • In pretty much any country you can be changed for plotting to do a serious crime before you get to actually do it.

    • Walkcrime is DoublePlus Ungood
    • But doesn't that already happen?

      I just read an article about a guy who wrote in a blog that he was "thinking of" going to visit some friends in California. He happened to be conversing with an undercover officer in California who was posing as a 14 year old. It was specifically mentioned that he had never stated his intention to meet this person, nor had there been any sort of sexual communication of any kind.

      He was arrested for "intent" to cross state lines to meet a minor for the purpose of sex.

      It no l
  • Have you ever seen the odd gate that the Ts have on CounterStrike? They'd be easy to identify with this system.

    Thank God! Another fine technological breakthrough!

  • I should just turn myself in (Score:3, Interesting)

    by MrP-(at work) ( 839979 ) on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @01:17PM (#18503359)
    I have social anxiety, whenever I go to a store (rarely) I get all jumpy and paranoid. Sales people are always watching me, probably thinking I'm going to steal something

    This is one reason I'm sure I'll never fly, I'd be way freaked out at an airport.

    Oh well, if this ever comes to the states I guess I can become a complete hermit.
  • My undergraduate project talked about the exact same idea... tracking moving objects and people and associating crossed paths (which could be used to indicate if they knew each other etc).. my project information can be found at http://www.geekpursuit.com/ [geekpursuit.com] .

    I never thought the govt would be so crazy to implement such an idea on large scale, except that it would be an interesting project for geeks.
  • I don't remember the exact words, but it went something like this:

    Majority of civilizations are based on cowardice. They can easily evolve by teaching cowardice. They need to lower those standards, that develop courage, manliness. They limit the free will. They regulate the appetites. They limit the horizons. Every step within them must be predetermined by the law. They deny the existance of chaos. They teach the children to breath quietly. They tame.

  • It has long been known that certain racial and ethnic groups have a certain gait, as a matter of simple conformance with their culture. It shouldn't surprise anyone that a child grows up imitating their parents, including their manner of walking.

    So, by teaching computers to recognize a person's gait, and single out people based on their gait, we have, in essence, taught computers to give greater scrutiny to individuals of a particular ethnic or racial group.

    In other words, we've programmed computers

  • "No, ossi... ossi... sir, I'm not drunk: I was just trying to poison their filtering software!"

Slashdot Top Deals

It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.

Close