What Did The Cereal Box Say To The BMW?

This family had just come out of Costco loaded with groceries. 

They are heading to the garage to pack it into their car. 

A BMW comes racing through the garage and runs over one of these mega Costco cereal boxes. 

The car keeps going with the cereal box being dragged underneath.

The family runs through the garage and cuts off the BMW waving and yelling for him to stop. 

He skids across the double-yellow line and stops blocking both sides of the road.

The man who lost his cereal bends under the front of the BMW to try to extricate the cereal. 

The box is so Costco big, it barely can come out. 

The man's family looks on from the side. 

Finally, he wiggles the box this way and that and gets the cereal box out from under the BMW. 

The driver is standing there sort of bewildered by the whole thing.

If the cereal box could talk, I think it'd beg for a better ending than this. 

Too often, as we go through life, we mow other people down who are in our way.

Thank G-d, this was just a box of cereal and not the man's child or wife that had been run over and dragged. 

I wondered how degrading it must have felt for this poor guy to be bending down in the street to get the box out, while the driver simply looks on in an uncaring disdain. 

I almost thought for a moment, the driver was going to either just keep going or when he got out wallop the other guy for hassling him to get his cereal. 

People can be strange that way and you never know what is going to happen next. 

It is good that other people can be around with smartphone cameras and video, so that people don't feel that they can just behave indiscriminately and obscurely. 

In the end, no one should think they are all that--and have the right to uncaringly run over others' persons or things. 

We are all frail humans and G-d is always there with a very big, high megapixel smartphone recording it all for judgement day. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

What Did The Cereal Box Say To The BMW?

Emperor Titus and The Micro-Drones

The Talmud tells of how the wicked Roman Emperor Titus who destroyed Jerusalem and the Holy Temple in 70 AD was punished with a small insect that flew into his nose and gnawed at his brain for seven years.

By the time Titus died, they opened his skull and found the insect had grown to the size of a bird--the lesson was that Titus thought that he was so powerful with his legions, but G-d showed him that even a little insect sent by G-d could defeat him. 

Now when I watch this amazing video from the Air Force about micro-drones, I see this story come to life all over again. 

With Micro Air Vehicles, little drones the size of insects can carry out missions from surveillance to lethal targeting of enemy forces. 

They can fly, hover, perch, power up, sneak up, sense, communicate, and attack. 

With these micro-drones, especially in swarms, these small packages of sensors and weapons can bring a big wallop for our warfighters. 

And like with Emperor Titus, you would not want these buzzing around and giving you big headaches--because these little buggers will be able to take down the mightiest of foes. ;-)

Emperor Titus and The Micro-Drones

The Anti-Drone Drone

Last week Fox News reported on how the British were deploying tiny drones that can now fit in the palm of one's hand. The Black Hornet Nano is only 4 inches long, weighs about half an ounce, and carries a camera that can take stills and video and transmit them back to a remote terminal. 

Drones are becoming ubiquitous weapons of war, homeland security, law enforcement and more. 

As other nations advance their drone programs, our efforts must not only be offensively, but also defensive--The Guardian reported (22 April 2012) that Iran has already claimed to have reverse engineered the Sentinel drone they captured in 2011 and are making a copy of it--lending some credence to this perhaps, this past week, they also showed surveillance footage that they claim came from the captured drone. 

So how do you protect against drones-big and small?

While you can lock on and shoot down a big Predator drone out of the sky, drones as small as tiny bugs are going to be a lot harder to defend against. 

The bug-like drones may not only carry surveillance equipment in the future, but could even carry a lethal injection, chemical or biological agents to disable or kill, or perhaps even weapons of mass destruction. 

Moreover, they may not attack onsies-twosies, but in mass swarms like locusts ready to swoop down and destroy our crops, our lines of communications, and all sort of critical infrastructure. 

The Atlantic (6 Feb. 2013) describes the idea for a "Drone-Proof City" of the future that someone came up with for an extreme architecture class. 

Like cities in World War II that camouflaged entire sections with green military netting and other subterfuges, the idea here would be to create a "sanctuary" or "compound" that would provide a safe-zone from drones. 

Whether using tall Minarets, cooling towers, other high-rise buildings and even window grills to obstruct the drones, or a "latticed roof" to create distracting shade patterns, or a climate-controlled city interior that could confuse heat-seeking missiles--all good ideas are welcome. 

Of course, their are other options too such as anti-drone laser system that could shoot them down, electronic countermeasures that could confuse, self-destruct, or other take control of them, or even anti-drone drones--that would be specialized drones that could seek and destroy enemy drones in waiting or about to attack. 

Drones everywhere--and nowhere to hide--we will need some extreme architecture to take out these buggers. ;-)

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Ars Electronica)

The Anti-Drone Drone

A Seeing Eye

This video from NOVA is an amazing display of the surveillance capabilities we have at our disposal.

ARGUS-IS Stands for Automated Real-Time Ground Ubiquitous Surveillance Imaging System.

Like a "Persistent Stare," ARGUS provides continuous monitoring and tracking over a entire city, but also it has the ability to simply click on an area (or multilple areas--up to 65 at a time) to zoom in and see cars, people, and even in detail what individuals are wearing or see them even waving their arms!

Created by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), ARGUS uses 368 imaging chips and provides a streaming video of 1.8 gigapixels (that is 1.8 billion pixels) of resolution and attaches to the belly of a unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) drone. 

ARGUS captures 1 million terabytes of a data a day, which is 5,000 hours of high-definition footage that can be stored and returned to as needed for searching events or people. 

The Atlantic (1 February 2013) points out how using this over an American city could on one hand, be an amazing law enforcement tool for catching criminals, but on the other hand raise serious privacy concerns like when used by government to collect data on individuals or by corporations to market and sell to consumers. 

What is amazing to me is not just the bird's eye view that this technology provides from the skies above, but that like little ants, we are all part of the mosaic of life on Earth.  We all play a part in the theater of the loving, the funny, the witty, and sometimes the insane. 

My Oma used to say in German that G-d see everything, but now people are seeing virtually everything...our actions for good or for shame are visible, archived, and searchable. ;-)

A Seeing Eye

This Tape Will Self Destruct In Five Seconds

Ever since the 1960's airing of Mission Impossible, where each episode started with the instructions for a dangerous mission on a tape recording, which ended with "This tape will self-destruct in five seconds," have we all recognized the need for self-destructing devices to safeguard information. 

This message has been honed over the last three decades with compromising security incidents:

1979: Iranian demonstrators stormed the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and according to UMBC "the incinerator broke" as personnel tried to destroy sensitive documents and they had to revert to shredding. 

2001: A Chinese J-8 fighter aircraft collided with a EP-3 U.S. Intel aircraft which according to CNN was "likely equipped with highly sensitive equipment" and landed on the Chinese island of Hainan providing China the opportunity to board, disassemble, and study the equipment before it was returned three months later. 

2011: Iran captured an RQ-170 Sentinel Drone and USA Todayreported on Iran's claims that "all files and boards of the drone were copied and used to improve Iran's unmanned aircraft." Also in 2011 in the assault on Osama Bin Laden, a secret stealth helicopter that took a hard-landing had to be destroyed before special forces pulled out--however according to the New York Times, "a surviving tail section reveal modifications to muffle noise and reduce the chances of detection by radar" was left behind providing others the opportunity to learn about our sensitive technologies.

Additionally, as ever more advanced technology continues to enter the battlefield the threat of its capture and exploitation becomes increasingly concerning. 

In this context, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) announced the start up of a new program on 28 January 2013 called Vanishing Programmable Resources (VAPR).

VAPR is intent on developing technologies for "transient electronics...capable of dissolving into the environment around them."

The goal is that "once triggered to dissolve, the electronics would be useless to any enemy that comes across them."

According to Armed Forces International, along with the destruction of the electronics would be "taking classified data with it." Thereby preventing the enemy from using captured information to develop countermeasures or reverse engineer their finds. 

Transient electronics are intended to be rugged on the battlefield but able to be destroyed on command, perhaps by biomedical implants that release "a few droplets of [a self-destruct] liquid" or other means. 

Whether self-destructing in five seconds or slightly more, the need to preserve our sensitive battlefield technologies and the intelligence they contain has never been more vital. ;-)

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Mike Licht)

This Tape Will Self Destruct In Five Seconds

Hiding Yourself In Plain Sight

I remember hearing that sometimes the best way to hide is in plain sight--just where no one would think to look.

Now there is a new clothing line being introduced by Adam Harvey for Stealth Wear that hides you using your own clothes. 

According to Slate (11 January 2013), the clothing line is envisioned to have:

- Anti-drone hoodies and scarfs:  These will be made with special metalized material that can shield you from things like drone thermal imaging technology, and I would imagine could also help against facial recognition along the lines of a prior project CVDazzle that uses face-painting and hair styling for concealment. 

- XX-shirts: These cover your upper body and can shield you from x-rays. I wonder how this will impact TSA scanning at airports?

- Pocket-blocks: A cell phone pouch made from "signal attenuating material" to prevent tracking and interception. 

Don't confuse this stealth wear clothing line with a Canadian company called StealthWear that makes a different type of protective clothing--padding for jackets, forearms, shoulders, torso, and so on for those working in "aggressive educational environments."

The new Stealth Wear, however, is a concept for a high-tech fashion line designed to provide counter surveillance and more personal privacy--in this sense, it's really the anti Big Brother. 

With more and more cameras, imaging machines, facial recognition, drones, and other surveillance tools out there--I suppose it is not surprising to see a cultural backlash in terms of everyday surveillance protection clothing coming to the fore. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Hiding Yourself In Plain Sight

Under The Beautiful Sea

The Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA) is looking for a place to stash some new military capabilities.

In a DARPA news release (11 January 2013) it states they are looking to support the navy by placing hibernated deep-sea capsules with payloads at under water locations and at the seafloor strategically around the globe--"almost half of the world's oceans are more than four kilometers deep" providing "cheap stealth".

The capsules with carry non-lethal payloads for "operational support and situational awareness"--such as command, control, communication, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (C4ISR). 

Examples of pre-deployed payloads could be unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and probably, unmanned underwater vehicles (UUVs). The release specifically states that this is "not a weapons program," but you could imagine future evolutions of this.

The initial capabilities sought are for "situational awareness, disruption, deception, networking, rescue, or any mission that benefits from being pre-distributed and hidden." 

The deep-sea capsules will need to survive under extreme pressure and be able to communicate at vast ocean depths to be remotely awoken and recalled when needed. 

Having capabilities available when and where needed--from the bottom of the sea to forward deployment--potentially mitigating some use of costly and non-stealth land bases.

I think this is an exciting idea especially since China was able to demonstrate its anti-satellite missiles in January 2007 in shooting down its own satellite, and I would think that these new underwater pods being sought may be able to provide some alternatives for sensing and communicating in conflicts where satellites are destroyed or disabled and/or other military muscle in not readily available. 

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Rakel SdPC)

Under The Beautiful Sea

I'm Looking At You Looking At Me Looking At You

Almax, the Italian maker of mannequins has a new high-tech version that does more than stand around and look pretty.

The EyeSee Mannequin has a camera built into its eye that watches you while you shop. 

According to Bloomberg BusinessWeek (6 December 2012), the EyeSee Mannequin sells for about $5,130 and it conducts consumer profiling--using technology to identify criminals--it determines your age, gender, and race and tracks your shopping patterns. 

Newer versions of EyeSee will likely have a sensor for hearing you as well, so it can "eavesdrop on what shoppers say about the mannequin's attire."

Next to these mannequins, you have to consider who are the real dummies, when everything you do and say can be monitored. 

Next time, you're peering at that mannequin, be careful, it may be peering right back at you--and when it says something be ready to jump. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

I'm Looking At You Looking At Me Looking At You

Flying Gizmo At Brookstone

I took this video of a flying drone at Brookstone at Avetura Mall in Miami. 

The drone is flying among the crowds and actually goes right over my head a couple of times--I literally had to duck (as I think the salesperson was having some fun with me recording)!

The device is called the Parrot AR.Drone 2.0 and sells for $299.

The drone is being controlled via wi-fi by a iPhone and also works with iPads and Droid devices.

The controlled flying as well as the stunts seemed easy to do. 

It has a front facing camera (and I think the salesperson said it has a rear-facing one too). 

You can capture the flight imagery and post the recorded video and still photos online. 

The quadricopter has stabilization controls and hull protection to keep the device safe and in the air. 

If you appreciate this technology and likes to have some fun, you may want to take this for a little spin around the yard, park, and beach. 

Also, watch out at the mall--this flying gizmo may be coming right at you. ;-)

(Source Video: Andy Blumenthal)

Flying Gizmo At Brookstone

The Privacy Slope

I read with interest Ronald Bailey's book review of Privacy by Garet Keizer in the Wall Street Journal ( 16 August 2012). 

In a nutshell, privacy is founded in the Constitution's 4th Amendment: "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated."

I would define privacy as the freedom--to think, to feel, and to act as ourselves (within ethical boundaries) without fear of intrusion, revelation, or reprisal. 

In other words, it should only be our business who we love, what we are interested or believe in, who we vote for, what we choose to do with our lives, and more. 

I think in grade school, the children generally sum it up well when they playfully chant: "Mind your own BI," where BI is used for business (or biziness). :-)

According to Keizer, the danger to privacy come into play from two main sources: 
- Commerce--who want to sell you something and
- Government--that needs to surveil for security and law enforcement purposes 

After 9/11, their was a perceived need for greater surveillance to enhance homeland security, and with advances in technology and communications (smartphones, Internet, social media, etc.), the ability to snoop became far easier.

In 2002, the DoD program for Total Information Awareness (TIA) was an attempt to know everything (i.e. total) about those who would do us harm, but fears about this capability being used against the innocent, quickly required a rethinking or perhaps, just a rebranding. 

Some say that the new NSA mega data center in Utah is the fulfillment of the TIA dream--according to the Washington Post, already in 2010 NSA intercepted and stored "1.7 billion emails, phone calls, and other types of communications." Further, law enforcement demanded records from cellphone carriers on 1.3 million subscribers "including text messages and caller locations" over just the last year's time. 

Keizer cautions that "the ultimate check on government as a whole is its inability to know everything about those it governs"--i.e. without the people holding the cards, there is the risk of spiraling into a Big Brother totalitarian society--goodbye democracy!

I think Keizer perhaps oversells the fear of government surveillance and underemphasizes intrusion from business--his thinking is that "If consumers are annoyed with a merchant's monitoring, they can buy elsewhere." 

But what Keizer misses is that industry as a whole has moved toward the use of technology--from club cards and promotions to use of Internet cookies, RFID, and more--to systematically track consumers and their buying behavior and that information is readily captured, packaged, used, and sold for marketing and sales--as well as to the government!

As a common practice now, where is a consumer to go that will shield them from hungry business looking to capture market share and earn nice profits?

At the same time, while government surveillance can certainly be misused and abused with terrible consequences for individuals society---there are potentially a lot of people looking over the shoulder of those carrying out public programs--and this "sunlight"--where and when it shines--can help to prevent bad things happening. 

The problem is that the system is not perfect, and there are always those program people who act of out of bounds and those watchers who are ineffective and/or dishonest.

Overall, it's a zero sum game, where those that hype up security and capitalism, can tramp down on privacy, and vice versa.
In totality, we can never just assume everything will be okay when it comes to privacy and how information is used, but we have to be active citizens helping ensure that right things are done, the right way. 

For regular, hardworking, decent citizens, there is a definite need to safeguard privacy--and technology can be helpful here with anonymizers, encryptors, and other shielding tools.

For the bad guys, I would imagine, no question, that the government will continue to develop the means to thwart their secrecy and planning to inflict harm on the American people. 

For business, it's okay to capture consumer information and sell, but pour it on to thick and people will think twice about your company's ethics and brand--and even a lawsuit may be in the making. 

Yes, privacy is a slippery slope, and not only can a person's self be revealed or used inappropriately, but the voyeur can get burned too if they overdo it. 

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

The Privacy Slope

We're In It Together

This is a cool vision by Tom Clancy of the "future soldier" from the Ghost Recon game series. 

The mixture of advanced weaponry, high-tech reconnaissance and surveillance, drones and robotics, future combat uniforms, and cloaking technology is just super.

If you have time and interest, there is another longer video here with footage that is particularly good starting at about the 3:40 marker. 

Like Star Trek paving the way for real-life advances in technology and space exploration, Clancy's future soldier will be another example of life imitating art.  

When we marry the vision and creativity of our entertainment industry, with the technical skills of our scientists and engineers, and the risk-taking of our entrepreneurs, we can do truly awesome things. 

"No one can do everything, but everyone can do something"--we're in it together! 

We're In It Together

Preparing For All Hell To Break Loose--The "Doomsday Plane"

Diane Sawyer from ABC News has a great piece here on the Flying Fortress, our Airborne Command Center, for the President and a 50-member entourage including the DefSec and the Joint Chiefs, to manage the United States response and retaliation should a worst-case situation happen--such as a nuclear, chemical, or biological attack. 

The plane has been referred to as The Doomsday Plane, Flying Fortress, Airborne White House, Airborne Arc, and The E-4B Nightwatch.

Located at Offutt Air Force Base in Omaha, Nebraska, this plane is on constant high-alert and ready 24 x 7 x 365--it is airborne within 5 minutes notice!  

According to Ideas and Discovery Magazine, there are actually 4 planes--the most-technologically advanced 747s in the world.

Built based on more than $2 billion in research, these planes are the most expensive in the world, fly 40 miles per hour faster than regular 747s, can stay in the air for about 3 days straight with in-air refueling, and are shielded from thermo-nuclear radiation and electromagnetic pulses.  

The planes are protected by 60 Air Force special forces troops, have their own on-board maintenance teams, and precision technical communication specialists. 

The planes have an area for battle staff to assess the situation and draw up action plans and a technical control facility for managing surveillance and command, control, and communications to issue encrypted commands on "virtually all frequencies" through 67 satellite dishes and antennas on the roof.

They can even communicate with submarines by dropping a 5 mile rope with a transceiver into the ocean below. 

These planes stand ready to evacuate the President and his staff in the case of a national emergency.

"The commander-in-chief can then send orders to troops and personnel, communicate with allied governments, or update the American people on the situation."

While it has far less amenities than Air Force One, this high-tech doomsday plane is very cool indeed. 

What I admire the most about this plane is not even the technology per se, but the planning and risk management that go into preparation for something "really bad" happening. 

While some people think emotionally that preparing for disaster is almost tantamount to pushing for one to actually occur, really that is an emotional reaction and denial of reality anchored in fear.   

Like insurance, you hope you never need it, but are really glad you have it, when all hell breaks loose! 

Perhaps, we can all learn something for ourselves here as well, that (disaster) preparedness can be scary and expensive, but we all need to have a plan and make it a good one.

Preparing For All Hell To Break Loose--The "Doomsday Plane"

Don't Throw Out The Pre-Crime With the Bathwater

The Atlantic (17 April 2012) has an article this week called " Homeland Security's 'Pre-Crime' Screening Will Never Work." 

The Atlantic mocks the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) Future Attribute Screening Technology (FAST) for attempting to screen terrorists based on physiological and behavioral cues to analyze and detect people demonstrating abnormal or dangerous indicators.

The article calls this "pre-crime detection" similar to that in Tom Cruise's movie Minority Report, and labels it a  "super creepy invasion of privacy" and of "little to no marginal security" benefit.

They base this on a 70% success rate in "first round of field tests" and the "false-positive paradox," whereby there would be a large number of innocent false positives and that distinguishing these would be a "non-trivial and invasive task." 

However, I do not agree that they are correct for a number of reasons: 

1) Accuracy Rates Will Improve--the current accuracy rate is no predictor of future accuracy rates. With additional research and development and testing, there is no reason to believe that over time we cannot significantly improve the accuracy rates to screen for such common things as "elevated heart rate, eye movement, body temperature, facial patterns, and body language" to help us weed out friend from foe. 

2) False-Positives Can Be Managed--Just as in disease detection and medical diagnosis, there can be false-positives, and we manage these by validating the results through repeating the tests or performing additional corroborating tests; so too with pre-crime screening, false-positives can be managed with validation testing, such as through interviews, matching against terrorist watch lists, biometric screening tools, scans and searches, and more. In other words, pre-crime detection through observable cues are only a single layer of a comprehensive, multilayer screening strategy.

Contrary to what The Atlantic states that pre-crime screening is "doomed from the word go by a preponderance of false-positives," terrorist screening is actually is vital and necessary part of a defense-in-depth strategy and is based on risk management principles. To secure the homeland with finite resources, we must continuously narrow in on the terrorist target by screening and refining results through validation testing, so that we can safeguard the nation as well as protect privacy and civil liberties of those who are not a threat to others. 

Additionally, The Atlantic questions whether subjects used in experimental screening will be able to accurately mimic the cues that real terrorist would have in the field. However, with the wealth of surveillance that we have gathered of terrorists planning or conducting attacks, especially in the last decade in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as with reams of scientific study of the mind and body, we should be able to distinguish the difference between someone about to commit mass murder from someone simply visiting their grandmother in Miami. 

The Atlantic's position is that  terrorist screening's "(possible) gain is not worth the cost"; However, this is ridiculous since the only alternative to pre-crime detection is post-crime analysis--where rather than try and prevent terrorist attacks, we let the terrorists commit their deadly deeds--and clean up the mess afterwards. 

In an age, when terrorists will stop at nothing to hit their target and hit it hard and shoe and underwear bombs are serious issues and not late night comedy, we must invest in the technology tools like pre-crime screening to help us identify those who would do us harm, and continuously work to filter them out before they attack. 

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Dan and Eric Sweeney)

Don't Throw Out The Pre-Crime With the Bathwater

Which Big Brother

About a decade ago, after the events of 9/11, there was a program called Total Information Awareness (TIA) run out the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).

The intent was develop and use technology to capture data (lots of it), decipher it, link it, mine it, and present and use it effectively to protect us from terrorists and other national security threats. 

Due to concerns about privacy--i.e. people's fear of "Big Brother"--the program was officially moth-balled, but the projects went forward under other names.  

This month Wired (April 2012) reports that the National Security Agency (NSA) has almost achieved the TIA dream--"a massive surveillance center" capable of analyzing yottabytes (10 to the 24th bytes) of data that is being completed in the Utah desert. 

According to the article, the new $2 billion Utah Data (Spy) Center is being built by 10,000 construction workers and is expected to be operational in a little over a year (September 2013), and will capture phone calls, emails, and web posts and process them by a "supercomputer of almost unimaginable speed to look for patterns and unscramble codes."

While DOD is most interested in "deepnet"--"data beyond the reach of the public" such as password protected data, governmental communications, and other "high value" information, the article goes on to describe "electronic monitoring rooms in major US telecom facilities" to collect information at the switch level, monitor phone calls, and conduct deep packet inspection of Internet traffic using systems (like Narus).

Despite accusations of massive domestic surveillance at this center, Fox News (28 March 2012) this week reported that those allegations have been dismissed by NSA. The NSA Director himself, General Keith Alexander provided such assurances at congressional hearings the prior week that the center was not for domestic surveillance purposes, but rather "to protect the nation's cyber security," a topic that he is deeply passionate about. 

Certainly new technologies (especially potentially invasive ones) can be scary from the perspective of civil liberties and privacy concerns.

However, with the terrorists agenda very clear, there is no alternative, but to use all legitimate innovation and technology to our advantage when it comes to national security--to understand our enemies, their networks, their methods, their plans, to stop them, and take them down before they do us harm.

While, it is true that the same technologies that can be used against our enemies, can also be turned against us, we must through protective laws and ample layers of oversight ensure that this doesn't happen. 

Adequate checks and balances in government are essential to ensure that "bad apples" don't take root and potentially abuse the system, even if that is the exception and not the rule. 

There is a difference between the big brother who is there to defend his siblings from the schoolyard bully or pulls his wounded brother in arms off the battlefield, and the one who takes advantage of them.

Not every big brother is the Big Brother from George Orwell's "1984" totalitarian state, but if someone is abusing the system, we need to hold them accountable. 

Protecting national security and civil liberties is a dual responsibility that we cannot wish away, but which we must deal with with common sense and vigilance.  

(Source Photo: here)

Which Big Brother

Keeping All Our Balls In The Air

This is the throwable panoramic ball camera.

It has 36 cameras and when thrown in the air, takes 360-degree pictures of it's surroundings as it reaches it's apex (i.e. the highest point in the air).

You can see behind you, above you, all around you even things that you didn't even know where there.

And you can pan, zoom, and scroll to get the precise view you want.

The pictures are amazing--instantly, you have a birds eye view, but only better, because even a bird can't see behind it's head, but you can.

The implications for artists, photo hobbyists, and outdoor enthusiasts is one thing, but then there are the possibilities for improved surveillance and reconnaissance for homeland and national security.

Watch for camera balls to be used not only for throwing in beautiful and/or dangerous environments, but also for posting at security checkpoints, critical infrastructure, transportation hubs and more.

One question I have is, whether the camera ball become a one-time use device, if you don't catch it and it ends up smashing into the ground.

Situational awareness is about to get a real bounce out of this one.

Keeping All Our Balls In The Air

Facial Recognition Goes Mainstream

Facial recognition applications are no longer just for the military and law enforcement to identify hostiles or criminals, but rather is going mainstream.

The Wall Street Journal (5 August 2011) reports from the bar scene to the television and from vampire gaming to celebrity match-ups, facial recognition software is now part of our everyday technology mix.

Facial recognition is "at a tipping point where some of these face-recognition technologies are not just gimicks, but are becoming useful." Moreover, the technology has become quite good with "frontal face images, the error rate of rejecting a legitimate claim--when the face image and name match-decreased to 0.29% in 2010 from a rate of 79% in 1993."

So here are some examples of how facial recognition is being used:

- SceneTap: Free app for iPhone and Droid "displays real time stats on the local bar scene...shows the number of people at the bar, the male-to-female ratio, and the average age of the patron"--all from facial recognition--this is not bad except for the bartender on a slow night.

- TVs with Viewdle: TV set-top boxes with facial recongition can "identify who is sitting in front of the TV then customize programming accordingly...displaying most recently watched or recorded shows"--can anyone say America's Got Talent!

- Third Eye: Facebook game that based on facial recognition identifies people as either vampires or slayers. Even without the app, I'd bet I'm one of the slayers :-)

- FaceR Celebrity: This iPhone app uses a picture and facial recognition software to determine which celebrities you most closely resemble. For me, it's Sylvester Stallone, all the way--I'm sure of it.

A lot of people are concerned about the privacy implications of facial recognition--collecting and storing images of faces and using it for surveillance and tracking and getting into your business...like knowing what bars or whereever else you are going to.

But apps like SceneTap say they don't collect personal information, nobody sees the video feed, and they don't match the images to photos on the web or Facebook to identify exactly who is entering the bar. This is sounding a little like TSA and the body imaging scanners they use--i.e. don't worry nobody sees your privates! :-)

But perhaps, whether or not they do or don't isn't the point, they could and that is a privacy concern.

Facial recognition technology, even though it is used in gaming, it is not kid's play, and it should be regulated to avoid a society where Internet "big brother" has virtually unlimited capability to track and match each and every facial you!

(Source Photo: here)

Facial Recognition Goes Mainstream

Sensors, Sensors Everywhere

Sensors will soon be everywhere--waiting, watching, and working to capture information about you and the environment we inhabit.

Every sensor is an opportunity to collect data and use that data for making better decisions.

Of course, we see sensors deployed first and foremost from our military overseas, in Iraq and Afghanistan, which uses drones to spy on and strike on our adversaries. The drones are really flying platforms of sensors and in some cases with weapons at ready. According to the New York Times (20 June 2011) "From blimps to bugs, an explosion in aerial drones is transforming the way America fights and thinks about its wars..the pentagon now has some 7,000 aerial drones...[and] has asked for nearly $5 billion for drones for next year." These drones are providing "a Tsunami of data" from intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance. The change to drones is so significant in our military that the Times reports that "already the Air Force is training more remote pilots, 350 this year alone, than fighter and bomber pilots combined."

Similarly, the Wall Street Journal (5 July 2011) reports that another type of sensor--surveillance cameras--are being deployed big time in China with a new surveillance network in Chongqing of 500,000 cameras (Beijing already has 280,000 cameras in its system) "that officials says will prevent crime but that human-rights advocates warn could target political dissent." While this project is significantly larger and more aggressive than other cities have deployed, China is certainly not alone in deploying surveillance cameras in their cities--Chicago has 10,000, New York has 8,000, and London has over 10,000. According to the WSJ, the overall market last year for surveillance-equiptments sales, not including networking gear or software totaled $1.7 billion! So smile, you are on camera--and it's candid, indeed.

A third article ran in Government Computer News (July 2011) on a more innocuous type of sensors to be used--this being the mass deployment of mobile sensors for the National Weather Service (NWS) on vehicle fleets such as Greyhound buses etc. Beginning in October, "2,000 commercial vehicles will be equipped with sensors...and will be sending data to NWS in near real time. We will be rolling out coverage on the national level." The mobile sensors will be taking 100,000 observations daily--every 10 seconds, about every 300 meters--measuring temperature, humidity, dew, precipitation, and solar information." In the future, we are looking at the potential of a "a sensing probe in every car"--for collecting information on hazardous roads, traffic patterns, and preventing accidents. Other applications for mobile sensors could be for "monitoring chemical and biological agents," nuclear and radiological ones, or CO2 and Ozone and more.

While sensors can collect data that can be used to analyze situations early and often to help people; certainly, they can also be misused to spy on one's citizens and suppress freedom. It can be a slippery slope. Perhaps that why Wired Magazine recently ask (July 2011) who's "Watching the Watchers" making the distinction between:

1) Surveillance--the monitoring of events by those above, the authorities--with CCTV etc. and monitoring events from control rooms, potentially from anywhere around the world.

2) Sousveillance--the monitoring of events by those below, the citizens--with everyday smartphones, cameras, and videocams and posting the digital images and sound bytes to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, and so on for the world to see.

With IPV6 providing enough Internet address for attaching sensors to every atom on the surface of the earth and sensors becoming smaller and more imperceptible, we can soon monitor and report on everything, everywhere all the time. Some of the biggest challenges remain ensuring the information monitored is kept secure, private, and used legally and ethically and sifting through all the data to identify the truly meaningful information from what's just noise.

(Source Photo: here)

Sensors, Sensors Everywhere

Meet ATLAS

This is amazing (watch the whole thing)!

Meet the latest and greatest military humanoid robot from Boston Dynamics--Atlas (aka PETMAN).

(Boston Dynamics is the same company that makes BigDog, the 4 legged, ground transport robot, that looks like a mule--called the Legged Squad Support System, LS3)

Watch the movement of the Atlas robot--it is JUST like a person: heel to toe walking.

See what happens when you push it--Atlas reacts/recovers like a human would.

The built up version has hands that help it balance and squeeze through tight spaces.

BusinessWeek (March 7-13, 2011) explains that this robot will be used initially for surveillance and emergency rescue missions.

I'm thinking Atlas should be pronounced like "at last" to recognize the amazing leap forward in robotics.

This is great stuff--and it demonstrates our growing understanding of not only computers and robotics, but also of the physical and behavioral sciences.

Meet ATLAS

A Boss that Looks Like a Vacuum Cleaner

This is too much…an article and picture in MIT Technology Review (September/October 2010) of a robotic boss, called Anybot—but this boss looks like a vacuum cleaner, costs $15,000, and is controlled remotely from a keyboard by your manager.



So much for the personal touch—does this count toward getting some face time with your superiors in the office?


With a robotic boss rolling up to check on employees, I guess we can forget about the chit-chat, going out for a Starbucks together, or seriously working through the issues. 

Unless of course, you can see yourself looking into the “eyes” of the vacuum cleaner and getting some meaningful dialogue going.


This is an example of technology divorced from the human reality and going in absolutely the wrong direction!

A Boss that Looks Like a Vacuum Cleaner

Balancing Freedom and Security

There is a new vision for security technology that blends high-tech with behavioral psychology, so that we can seemingly read people’s minds as to their intentions to do harm or not.

There was a fascinating article (8 January 2010) by AP via Fox News called “Mind-Reading Systems Could Change Air Security.”

One Israeli-based company, WeCU (Read as we see you) Technologies “projects images onto airport screen, such as symbols associated with a certain terrorist group or some other image only a would be terrorist would recognize.”

Then hidden cameras and sensors monitoring the airport pickup on human reactions such as “darting eyes, increased heartbeats, nervous twitches, faster breathing,” or rising body temperature.

According to the article, a more subtle version of this technology called Future Attribute Screening Technology (FAST) is being tested by The Department of Homeland Security—either travelers can be passively scanned as they walk through security or when they are pulled aside for additional screening are subjected to “a battery of tests, including scans of facial movements and pupil dilation, for signs of deception. Small platforms similar to balancing boards…would help detect fidgeting.”

The new security technology combined with behavioral psychology aims to detect those who harbor ill will through the “display of involuntary physiological reactions that others—such as those stressed out for ordinary reasons, such as being late for a plane—don’t.”

While the technology married to psychology is potentially a potent mix for detecting terrorists or criminals, there are various concerns about the trend with this, such as:

1) Becoming Big Brother—As we tighten up the monitoring of people, are we becoming an Orwellian society, where surveillance is ubiquitious?

2) Targeting “Precrimes”—Are we moving toward a future like the movie Minority Report, where people are under fire just thinking about breaking the law?

3) Profiling—How do we protect against discriminatory profiling, but ensure reasonable scanning?

4) Hardships—Will additional security scanning, searches, and interrogations cause delays and inconvenience to travelers?

5) Privacy—At what point are we infringing on people’s privacy and being overly intrusive?

As a society, we are learning to balance the need for security with safeguarding our freedoms and fundamental rights. Certainly, we don’t want to trade our democratic ideals and the value we place on our core humanity for a totalitarianism state with rigid social controls. Yet, at the same time, we want to live in peace and security, and must commit to stopping those with bad intentions from doing us harm.

The duality of security and freedom that we value and desire for ourselves and our children will no doubt arouse continued angst as we must balance the two. However, with high-technology solutions supported by sound behavioral psychology and maybe most importantly, good common sense, we can continue to advance our ability to live in a free and secure world—where “we have our cake and eat it too.”

Balancing Freedom and Security