Smart Cameras
Since the events of September 11th the governments in the United States and other countries have increased their surveillance of society. Meanwhile smart cameras are steadily becoming smarter and more usable. It is often difficult to estimate what impact new technology will have on society. What are the ethical issues that smart cameras bring about?
The technology behind smart cameras
The main difference between a smart camera and an ordinary one is that a smart camera analyzes what it sees, and makes certain decisions based upon the results of the analysis. An example is a smart security camera that calls the attention of the staff when it suspects a crime is committed.
How does this work?
The first step is to transform the signal from analog to digital, if the camera itself is not digital already. The data is then processed and based on the results certain actions are taken. The processing occurs in the camera itself, if required hardware for this is built in, or the data is sent to a computer.
Applications
There is a wide spectrum of applications, from different security systems for crime prevention and investigation to commercial and private use. For example, doors that open automatically have existed for a long time. To save energy, if a smart camera is used instead of a simple motion detector, the camera can choose to open the door if a person is approaching or leave it closed if a person is just walking by the door. One of the most sophisticated tools for smart cameras is a method called facial recognition.
Facial Recognition
Computerized facial recognition is an old idea conceived decades ago, but the use of it has accelerated since the 1990s, due to cheaper technology and...
... middle of paper ...
...ight © 1993, HarperCollins Publishers
http://www.ccsr.cse.dmu.ac.uk/resources/general/ethicol/Ecv12no1.html
http://www.library.ca.gov./CRB/97/05/index.html
http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,52563,00.html
http://www.aclu.org/issues/privacy/FaceRec_data.pdf
http://www.aclu.org/issues/privacy/CCTV_Feature.html
http://www.aclu.org/issues/privacy/drawing_blank.pdf
http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,52563,00.html
http://www.eff.org/Censorship/Terrorism_militias/fisa_faq.html
http://faceit.com/
http://www.privacy2000.org/
http://amsterdam.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0111/msg00045.html
http://www.privacy.org/pi/conference/copenhagen/report.html
http://www.notisum.se/rnp/SLS/LAG/20000344.HTM
http://www.house.gov/Constitution/Amend.html
http://www.wespot.com/
http://whatis.techtarget.com/
“With surveillance technology like closed-circuit television cameras and digital cameras now linked to the Internet, we now have the means to implement Bentham's inspection principle on a much vaster scale”(Singer) Bentham's inspection principle is a system that allows the collection, storing and dissemination of data on individuals, corporations, and the government. This collection of data has large implications in regard to privacy and security. “There is always danger that the information collected will be misused - whether by regimes seeking to silence opposition or by corporations seeking to profit from more detailed knowledge of their potential customers.”(Singer) What is done with the information collected is the main issue in terms of privacy. We do not want to be marketed to, or inundated with spam from third-party sources. We also do not want our private social circles and experiences to appear that they are being monetized or subjected to surveillance outside our control. In addition, surveillance has a large effect on the government that can beneficial or detrimental to democracy. Exposure of government secrets may make officials tread carefully when making decisions, ensuring that politicians are nothing but just and fair.“The crucial step in preventing a repressive government from
If misused, body-cameras can be a violation of privacy. In order to prevent this, proper legislation needs to be enacted in order to ensure privacy rights are protected. The only policy related document regarding police body cameras is the “Guidance for the use of body-worn cameras by law enforcement authorities” which is issued by the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada. This document discusses that rules should not be enforced only by local police departments, but for Canada as a whole. As this is the only document related to police body cameras, it is undoubtable that there needs to be serious legislation created. As it is suggested that body cameras pose as a risk for privacy rights, it is evident in order to implement them effectively, there needs to be regulation constructed. Body cameras can be an effective and useful tool, but without legislation, they can cause problems. Bruce Chapman, president of the Police Association of Ontario expresses, “We want to do it right. We don’t want to do it fast” when asked about the implementation of body cameras. While body cameras, are important to have in today's society, it is also dire to have it done properly. By enforcing strict guidelines, and documents addressing body camera legislation, it will ensure the process is done correctly. In order to implement body cameras properly, privacy rights need to be assessed. This process takes time, and proves body cameras need to be implemented at a pace legislation can follow. Thomas K. Bud, discusses the worry that privacy will be violated with body cameras. Factors such as facial recognition, citizen consent of recording, and violations of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms all pose as risks. While legislation has not matched their guidelines with modern technology, it proves how important it is to create new documents, in order for changes to be made. Therefore body
The government is always watching to ensure safety of their country, including everything and everyone in it. Camera surveillance has become an accepted and almost expected addition to modern safety and crime prevention (“Where” para 1). Many people willingly give authorization to companies like Google and Facebook to make billions selling their personal preferences, interests, and data. Canada participates with the United States and other countries in monitoring national and even global communications (“Where” para 2). Many question the usefulness of this kind of surveillance (Hier, Let, and Walby 1).However, surveillance, used non-discriminatorily, is, arguably, the key technology to preventing terrorist plots (Eijkman 1). Government surveillance is a rising global controversy; and, although minimal coverage could possibly result in safer communities, too much surveillance will result in the violation of citizen’s privacy.
Harris, T. (n.d.). How Red-light Cameras Work. HowStuffWorks "Auto". Retrieved September 20, 2013, from http://auto.howstuffworks.com/car-driving-safety/safety-regulatory-devices/red-light-camera1.htm
Current advancements in technology has given the government more tools for surveillance and thus leads to growing concerns for privacy. The two main categories of surveillance technologies are the ones that allow the government to gather information where previously unavailable or harder to obtain, and the ones that allow the government to process public information more quickly and efficiently (Simmons, 2007). The first category includes technologies like eavesdropping devices and hidden cameras. These are clear offenders of privacy because they are capable of gathering information while being largely unnoticed. The second category would include technologies that are used in a public space, like cameras in a public park. While these devices
The article by Elida S. Perez discusses the Police Union’s push back on body cameras in El Paso, Texas. Perez states the denial of El Paso Police Department to equip body cameras because they believe other funding priorities and privacy concerns must be addressed. Some of the top funding priorities that Perez states are “hiring more police officers, buying new police cars, and updating radios”(par. 5). In addition, the police union is also concerned over unfair disciplinary actions against the police officers because of any camera malfunctions. She added an example that explained El Paso Municipal Police Officers Association President Ron Martin’s statement, “sometimes emergency situations unfold so quickly that an officer may not have time to turn on the camera, which he fears may be seen as an attempt to hide what occurred” (par.
Although they can be easily tracked, people overlook the invasion of privacy possibility because of the convenience they bring to every day life. Systems like OnStar installed in cars have made the tracking of stolen cars practically effortless. Similar tools are being used by law enforcement, Penenberg stated “cell phones have become the digital equivalent of Hansel and Gretel’s bread crumbs” (472). He then goes on to discuss how in Britain in 1996, authorities installed 300 cameras in East London. Although this didn’t affect the terrorism, it did affect the crime rate which fell 30 percent after the cameras were put into place. Penenberg closes his essay by mentioning that the surveillance is not only used to watch the citizens but also for citizens to keep an eye on the government. Through his organization, relevant information, and professional tone, Penenberg creates an effective
have stopped to consider the possible impacts these cameras have on our lives. And it is
Biometrics is described as the use of human physical features to verify identity and has been in use since the beginning of recorded history. Only recently, biometrics has been used in today’s high-tech society for the prevention of identity theft. In this paper, we will be understanding biometrics, exploring the history of biometrics, examples of today’s current technology and where biometrics are expected to go in the future.
There are an estimated 30 million surveillance cameras in the United States, proving to be a normal feature in American lives (Vlahos). This is no surprise because in the past several years, events such as the 9/11 attack and the availability of cheaper cameras have accelerated this trend. But conflicts have come with this and have ignited, concerning the safety of the people versus the violation of privacy that surveillance has. Although camera surveillance systems are intended to provide safety to the public, the violation of privacy outweighs this, especially in a democratic country like America.
Users rarely make eye contact with traditional surveillance technology such as street cameras, but the webcam’s functionality forces users to gaze into the webcam. Users retain power over their spectators by gazing into the webcam and addressing the webcam’s presence, whether their spectators are anonymous or identifiable, “living in the eye of the camera mean[s] a person, people, institutions, organisations [are] no longer insular and immune” (Dennis, 2008, p. 348). Webcam spectators lose power and immunity, which correlates to the surveillance society and its institutions losing power and immunity. The act of looking is a “medium of control” (White, 2003, p. 9) and directing it at webcams asserts power over those on the other
The term biometrics is commonly known as the field of development of statistical and mathematical methods applicable to data analysis problems in the biological sciences. Though, even more recently it has taken on a whole new definition. Biometrics is an amazing new topic referring to “the emerging field of technology devoted to the identification of individuals using biological traits, based on retinal or iris scanning, fingerprints, or face recognition”. Biometrics has already begun using applications that range from attendance tracking with a time clock to security checkpoints with a large volume of people. The growing field of biometrics has really been put on the map by two things, the technological advances made within the last 20 years, and the growing risk of security and terrorism among people all over the world. In this paper I will focus on: the growing field of biometrics, why it is important to our future, how the United States government has played a role in its development and use, the risks involved, the implications on public privacy, and further recommendations received from all over the science and technology field.
In the modern day era, we find in society a ubiquitous usage of technology that seems to be never ending and forever growing. Included with this notion, the broad subject of surveillance is of course included. Contemporary surveillance, or more specifically technological surveillance, has been described as ambiguous; meaning that it is often misunderstood or open to different interpretations. The representation of surveillance within popular culture has played an impacting role on how we as a society perceive it and this raises certain questions that may reflect back on to society. The 1998 film Enemy Of The State directed by Tony Scott, Starring Will Smith, Gene Hackman and Jon Voight is considered to be a ‘spy-thriller’ blockbuster. Its central themes explore a range of surveillance techniques and equipment and also provides some insights, no matter how realistic or unrealistic they may be, into the real life security organisation; The National Security Agency (NSA). Using this film as an example and analysing how these themes are represented will hopefully allow us to key these ideas back to modern surveillance theories and practices.
In The New York Times newspaper, the author Kareem Fahim wrote an article called “Surveillance Will Expand To Midtown, Mayor Says,” back in 2009 the mayor of New York City Michael Bloom Berg reported that Homeland Security contributed $24 million to expand surveillance camera from Lower Manhattan to Midtown Manhattan. The new advanced technology cameras have capability to detect weapons through cameras. Therefore, the securities will be able to protect significant place located on that particular area such as Grand Central Terminal, Empire State Building and the United Nations. The police department can observe the public through a huge 40 foot screen videos maps. Moreover, the passage “surveillance cameras and the Times Square bombing” by William Saletan shows that surveillance cameras can’t eliminate crimes, but It able to reduce crimes. In May 1, 2010, a Pakistani/American citizen named Faisal Shahzad who set off car bomb in Times Square.
Basically security cameras are basically good and bad in all ways due to helping the public and bad for invading peoples privacy daily which would not surprise me that the government is also up to no good doing all of this but if it helps catches people who are hacking computers from other countries then oh well with that stuff. So in all ways they are good and bad for most public areas besides stores and high criminal activity area parking lots for the US otherwise crime will not stop for the people in the US and privacy will keep being invaded as long there is crime.