Audio CCTV and AI enforcement

[Bletchleyite]

yet you are using the internet, where multiple records of user activity are logged by dozens of software and hardware devices between user and server.

and having a live microphone sending your data to the same internet destinations in peoples houses has become an acceptable norm…Alexa, Siri…

Even your doorbell comes with cctv and sound.. Ring

Behind off of this are algorithms looking to exploit you, yet its acceptable. So why not for solving crime and improving journeys in public places ?

I'm happier with a commercial company doing these things than the State. Their motivations are clear - they use the data to make profit by selling advertising. Nothing more, nothing subversive.

As for the Internet, there's a big difference between that data being there (accessible using a warrant if necessary) and bringing it together in a manner designed to ease using it for State control of populations.

State control of such matters is much, much, much more dangerous.

And I'd also like to see regulation around Ring doorbells etc. I don't find it acceptable that private individuals can surveil, often covertly, video and audio, places outside their property curtilage. It should be mandatory for them to be installed professionally and tested periodically to ensure they capture nothing at all from outside individual property. Far too many of the things are looking into the windows opposite, and that's totally unacceptable to me. And the requirement to register them with the Data Protection Registrar should be reinstated.

 

[gg1]

yet you are using the internet, where multiple records of user activity are logged by dozens of software and hardware devices between user and server.

and having a live microphone sending your data to the same internet destinations in peoples houses has become an acceptable norm…Alexa, Siri…

Even your doorbell comes with cctv and sound.. Ring

The major difference is it's personal choice whether you have Alexa and Siri in your home, I don't specifically because I don't like the idea of a permanently live internet connected microphone in my home. A commercial organisation knowing my browsing history doesn't concern me to anywhere near the same extent.

And I'd also like to see regulation around Ring doorbells etc. I don't find it acceptable that private individuals can surveil, often covertly, video and audio, places outside their property curtilage. It should be mandatory for them to be installed professionally and tested periodically to ensure they capture nothing at all from outside individual property. Far too many of the things are looking into the windows opposite, and that's totally unacceptable to me. And the requirement to register them with the Data Protection Registrar should be reinstated.

Agree 100%. Also I don't see any technical reason why they couldn't be designed so they only capture clear sound and images within a distance of a couple of metres (ie someone standing at your door) if that requirement was stipulated by law.

 

[Howardh]

Where there are frequent instances of cars parked on roads being vandalised and so on, isn't it a good idea that home security cameras DO capture images from the road? If I were mugged/stabbed for example, one of the first questions I'd ask the police is could they find any footage from either local houses cameras or dashcams from passing motorists?

That doesn't mean I agree with 100% survelliance whether it be private or state, there MUST be strict rules to prevent invasion of privacy (and to protect your silly moments ending up on facebook etc!) but haven't a clue how that could be done. Statutory limits on how long footage can be kept before deletion?? No public viewing unless with specific permission?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Where there are frequent instances of cars parked on roads being vandalised and so on, isn't it a good idea that home security cameras DO capture images from the road? If I were mugged/stabbed for example, one of the first questions I'd ask the police is could they find any footage from either local houses cameras or dashcams from passing motorists?

I could accept it if there was a legal framework surrounding how such images are captured, stored and processed, and things like professional installation and maintenance were mandatory to ensure those frameworks were always respected.

I don't find it acceptable to have a CCTV camera pointed through my front window, and too many of them do exactly that because of that lack of oversight. The house opposite has a Ring doorbell and, knowing the quality of the footage from them, if it wasn't for his hedge it'd be able to see clearly into my lounge. Sure, people walking past can too, but that's incidental, recording me 24/7 is quite different.

Under no circumstances at all is audio CCTV acceptable to me in a public space; those Ring doorbells should be mandated to only record audio for a short period after the bell is pressed for the purposes of conducting the call, and bodycams should only record it when specifically activated and again for a limited period.

 

[Meerkat]

AI will do it.

The tech exists to be able to ID the culprit, even before the offence is reported, probably within a few seconds of the crime being noted, if the cameras are in the right place and connected.

Indeed AI could well become a future train ticket.. your face recognised throughout your journey from entry to exit, even maybe predicting your habit and destination.

Just add sound to cctv and they could even convict themselves before leaving the train.

What an awful dystopian future! Which would oppress the innocent majority whilst the guilty would have scarves, hoodies, and sunglasses.

yet you are using the internet, where multiple records of user activity are logged by dozens of software and hardware devices between user and server.

and having a live microphone sending your data to the same internet destinations in peoples houses has become an acceptable norm…Alexa, Siri…

Even your doorbell comes with cctv and sound.. Ring

I don't have Alexa etc for just that reason - I can't believe people are so unconcerned about having microphones linked to the world inside their house.
I dont have a Ring doorbell. In fact I think they should be banned or at least strictly controlled as they clearly infringe neighbours and passers by's privacy.

 

[Dougal2345]

I don't have Alexa etc for just that reason - I can't believe people are so unconcerned about having microphones linked to the world inside their house.

Do you have a mobile 'phone though? That has a microphone (that is likely listening for an 'OK Google') and camera that could be relaying everything to the outside world...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Do you have a mobile 'phone though? That has a microphone (that is likely listening for an 'OK Google') and camera that could be relaying everything to the outside world...

The "OK Google", "Hey Siri" or "Alexa" is done on the device and isn't sent anywhere. Of course you may well not trust that, which is fair enough, but if the devices do operate as billed the only time they're sending anything anywhere is after that phrase has been used to activate it.

You can configure Alexa devices to bleep when they recognise that word. Sometimes they do seem to erroneously respond to something else, which is how I think people end up with whole conversations recorded.

 

[Meerkat]

Showing anyone other than the police footage from a Ring camera should be illegal. The should probably only record if the doorbell is pushed as it is difficult to place them such that they don't monitor off the property.
I've seen clips where you could hear what people were saying on a neighbour's doorstep, or the conversations of passersby.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Showing anyone other than the police footage from a Ring camera should be illegal. The should probably only record if the doorbell is pushed as it is difficult to place them such that they don't monitor off the property.
I've seen clips where you could hear what people were saying on a neighbour's doorstep, or the conversations of passersby.

Yes, I think it'd be reasonable that their CCTV function should be restricted by law, with the camera only on when someone is detected within a metre or two and definitely the audio only on when the actual video conversation is taking place. The nature of them is such that it's impossible to direct the camera properly.

 

[Meerkat]

Yes, I think it'd be reasonable that their CCTV function should be restricted by law, with the camera only on when someone is detected within a metre or two and definitely the audio only on when the actual video conversation is taking place. The nature of them is such that it's impossible to direct the camera properly.

I always wonder what the security people think about them. Buy/rent a house across from a politician, military bod etc etc, and you can basically monitor their movements and who comes and goes totally 'innocently'. I wonder how many folk have sold their password to the Sun/Daily Mail.......

 

[Sm5]

The "OK Google", "Hey Siri" or "Alexa" is done on the device and isn't sent anywhere. Of course you may well not trust that, which is fair enough, but if the devices do operate as billed the only time they're sending anything anywhere is after that phrase has been used to activate it.

You can configure Alexa devices to bleep when they recognise that word. Sometimes they do seem to erroneously respond to something else, which is how I think people end up with whole conversations recorded.

many years ago, the sorting office might have private rooms for sorting certain mail.

Never stopped people sending mail.
Blackboxes do exist in server rooms with network splitters.
Doesnt stop people using the internet.

People have an obsession with themselves and their importance. Its a surprise to learn, but the authorities arent interested in average joe, medium joe, or even superstar joe full of himself. Indeed I suspect they hope most joes just stay out of the way, to let them get on with the day job, which is those criminals taking from all those joes

 

[Meerkat]

many years ago, the sorting office might have private rooms for sorting certain mail.

Never stopped people sending mail.
Blackboxes do exist in server rooms with network splitters.
Doesnt stop people using the internet.

People have an obsession with themselves and their importance. Its a surprise to learn, but the authorities arent interested in average joe, medium joe, or even superstar joe full of himself. Indeed I suspect they hope most joes just stay out of the way, to let them get on with the day job, which is those criminals taking from all those joes

You may be right about the authorities at this moment, but what happens if that changes and we have given away all our freedoms?
Look at all the fuss about police/MI-5 penetration of various organisations over the years - what if they are going after the unions again, looking for the agitators and ways to break them?

And anyway, the things you mention might not stop people using the internet but they could stop if they thought it mattered, and there are ways around it. You can't stop leaving your house.