Back to the articleNot to start a a fanboy war or anything.. #
Posted Monday 9th February 2009 14:29 GMT
But wouldn't a phone with a decent camera be better for this?
US spooks want 'stand off' biometrics-harvesting iPhones
Only one problem... #
Posted Monday 9th February 2009 14:29 GMT
...the iPhone camera is crap. What's the point in all this genius-tech if the original image is pants?
The Animetrics blurb also reads disturbingly like Apple hype.
Yours, an iPhone user.
x
they're joking, surely... #
Posted Monday 9th February 2009 14:29 GMT
"operators are able to quickly and easily capture high quality images of people"...
Obviously whoever wrote that has never actually used an iPhone - the image quality is appaling and invariably all you get is a picture of the floor!
Its a good thing that the iPhone isn't powerful enough.. #
Posted Monday 9th February 2009 14:30 GMT
While yeah, you can record voices, you can take pictures on your iPhone, it doesn't have enough power to easily and quickly isolate a face or a voice from the background noise. (Maybe if you have one person talking and you're in a silent sound proof room...
There's no reason why using a 4G (WiMax) connection that you couldn't take the shot, crop it and send the cropped (uncompressed) image and or a voice file to a larger computer and let it do the heavy lifting.
Better be good at removing motion blur #
Posted Monday 9th February 2009 14:30 GMT
Wait - "quickly and easily capture high quality images"?!
Have these guys actually used the camera in the iPhone?
Haven't they seen Spooks? #
Posted Monday 9th February 2009 14:30 GMT
Err.. sounds like they still have to take a photo of you to do it. Taking a photo with an iPhone ain't exactly a subtle thing to do. Plus there's no reason they couldn't do the same thing with a windows mobile phone, if some bothers to write an app for it.
In fact, why are they mucking about with phones at all? Given the prevalance of CCTV in our new shiny 'enhanced freedom' Britain, why not just grab the photos off CCTV feeds from nice warm offices without having to go out and mix with the surly proletariat?
Jon
Are they mad? #
Posted Monday 9th February 2009 14:30 GMT
"quickly and easily capture high quality images of people for identification purposes"
Have they ever tried taking a photo with an iPhone? 'Quick', 'Easy' and 'High Quality' are attributes I would NOT apply!
I take it they'll be using some kind of external face-grabbing gadget. And then... er... emailing it to the iPhone, given it's lack of bluetooth or wired data transfer potential?
I'm wondering if these geniuses have seen an iPhone firsthand, or just noticed that all the cool kids have them nowadays.
Once upon a Time, in a Land of Plenty and Rot ..... #
Posted Monday 9th February 2009 14:40 GMT
But does it stop Central Intelligence Agencies from running around as effectively as a Headless Chicken?
I don't think so. In fact, it will probably result in a plague of chaotic non-effective action/dead end action . Although that all depends on whether they can get their Act together with a Write to Maximum Utility Script which Captures the Colourful Vital and Virile XXXXStreams Flooding into the MainStream WhiteWash.
this is a title #
Posted Monday 9th February 2009 15:50 GMT
Well.... better dust off my trusty old anti camara hammer then.
Apple barstewards #
Posted Monday 9th February 2009 15:50 GMT
And iPhoto '09 intergrates a face recognition system as well. Boycott all Mac products before we're all doomed. Doomed I say.
Also, on a similar note, welcome IARPA, our evil face-grabbing new overlords.
I was.. #
Posted Monday 9th February 2009 15:50 GMT
.. going to point out how utterly shyte the iPhone camera is, but, well, many have got there first.
yours truly
a happy iphoner
Biometric evasion technology #
Posted Monday 9th February 2009 15:50 GMT
Biometrics from photographs only work if the picture actually includes a few biometric reference points. For me, most of the reference points in the lower half of my face are hidden by my Biometric Entropy And Randomness Device ... which I have been wearing, in various configurations, since 1979.
Waht utter bollocks #
Posted Monday 9th February 2009 15:50 GMT
No other way to descibe super hi tech surveillance equipment defeated by a crap pair of sunglasses and a peak cap.
false positive #
Posted Monday 9th February 2009 21:44 GMT
As the purpose for doing this is probably to authorize a hellfire missle strike from an orbiting predator drone, it's gonna put a whole new layer of meaning on "eliminating false positives".
The future is blindingly bright! #
Posted Monday 9th February 2009 21:44 GMT
Simply create a new iTunes store application named iDossier.
Mine's the one with cosh in the pocket.
How long? #
Posted Monday 9th February 2009 21:44 GMT
It's only a matter of time before they're sampling DNA from pheromones and body odor. Not only will they know where you were, they'll know who you were doing at the time too! McCarthy never had it so good.
I, for one... #
Posted Monday 9th February 2009 21:44 GMT
...welcome our new hip and fashionable overlords
Apple drinks the kool-aid #
Posted Monday 9th February 2009 21:53 GMT
Not only is the Jesus phone helping them but iPhoto 09 has face recognition too. A dubious feature for users but great for spooks !!
Couple pics with the faces recognized to the serial number that the camera stamps in the image file (metadata) and the spooks (or anyone really) can link YOU the picture taker to the people in the pictures.
Now how many pictures have you uploaded to the Free Spook Biometrics Library er... I mean Flikr, Facebook, MySpace etc ????
Wh do the editiong in the field? #
Posted Tuesday 10th February 2009 05:17 GMT
Send the raw piccy back to an office where a desk-jockey can edit/biomteritise the image on a PC with better editing tools.
Don't need an iphone for that.
They're trying to justify ubying iphones for their field spooks #
Posted Tuesday 10th February 2009 05:18 GMT
It's clear that this is an attempt by some folks in the Agency to try and justify spending a bunch of $$$ on iPhones for the spooks in the field. They want all that lovely goodness that the civilian have. So they've invented this twaddle.
All the managers and higher-ups have them, this is a lame excuse for them to have them too.
MacBook, etc... #
Posted Tuesday 10th February 2009 10:58 GMT
My nice little MacBook has a nice little camera built into the lid, pointing at my face all the time! I have just ordered iLife09. Should I be worried? Would a lump of BluTack keep me out of The Database? Help!
What's next, fingerprint-sensing keyboards?
Posting anonymously because - well, you know!
CCTV Face Regonition #
Posted Tuesday 10th February 2009 10:58 GMT
The technology is already available and in use to perform real-time face recognition from CCTV. This could easily track you as you walk about the streets of London. The only thing preventing it's wider-scale use is the fact that most CCTVs (currently) have crap quality.
Shh... #
Posted Tuesday 10th February 2009 13:03 GMT
Shh... don't mention the Data Protection Act requires informed consent...
@Tom #
Posted Tuesday 10th February 2009 14:26 GMT
The DPA requires informed consent, unless the government has given that particular data gathering exercise an opt-out. Such as the number plate cameras in the London congestion charge zone, and your Oyster travel records.
But wait, there's more #
Posted Tuesday 17th February 2009 13:04 GMT
When I read the headline of this article, I thought "They're talking about taking pictures of you, using your own cellphone, whenever you use it to make a video call, or even by remotely activating it."
Though the article doesn't mention these possibilities, they're still possible, or likely. It's already been revealed lately, that the "intelligence" communities record ALL electronic communications of every sort. They're able to get amazing compliance for their surveillance goals, from governments, communications companies, etc.--and, no doubt, from manufacturers too. It's the old "In Russia, TV watches YOU!" bit.
As for retina scanning from a high-flying surveillance drone, don't count on it--too high up--it will be done from the ground. Though if an individual wants to foil a retina scanner, it's likely that a contact lens could be developed (if it doesn't already exist) that prevents it, while still allowing the user to see through the lens quite well. Though if they detect anyone wearing these contacts, that would probably automatically trigger action for more direct observation.
@Eddy Ito:
"It's only a matter of time before they're sampling DNA from pheromones and body odor."
No, there's no DNA in pheromones and body odor, but it might be possible to grab a few skin cells you shed as you walk past a collection/analysis device.
