.foXinternet

Wednesday, September 22, 2004 :

Big Brother

According to this article, they’ve invented some intelligent CCTV cameras which can tell when a crime is about to be committed and alert the authoritities:

People’s movements are then reduced to a series of pixels and compared to a pre–defined set of patterns, or algorithms. As soon as the computer identifies someone’s behaviour as “unusual”, such as wandering aimlessly near a potential target building — perhaps a royal palace — the computer alerts CCTV operators or staff”.

Riiiiiiiight. 1984, Big Brother, intrusive surveillance issues aside, it seems to me that there is an obvious practical difficulty, if a person “wandering aimlessly” is one of the criteria for paging the S.W.A.T team. The guys who came up with this obviously haven’t attempted, say, to jog past the Houses of Parliament recently; an impossible feat due to the flocks of morons “wandering aimlessly”. Maybe someone “walking purposefully” near a public building would be a better trigger for the 999 call? Perhaps we could propose a few more:

  1. wearing a mean/determined expression (where public building ≠ City institution)
  2. wearing an expression of religious fervour (where public building ≠ church)
  3. wearing fancy dress (where time ≥ 21.00)
  4. sweating profusely (where suspected perp ≠ jogger)

Any other ideas?



Comments:
I think it would be better to have 3 freaks in a bath who predict the crimes using unexplained supernatural powers, then send Tom Cruise around to arrest the criminals...
 
Well, only a moron would attempt to jog past the House of Parliament - try a park ;-)
 
I see we have immediately widened out remit from improved algorithms for CCTV computers to fighting crime generally, which is great. One possible problem with your suggestion is that if people in fact control their own destinies and remain free to away back away from any decision not yet made, your crime predictions may give rise to imprisonment of the innocent. Also, we would need to be alive to the danger that your bathing freaks end up only being able to foresee homicides because "there's nothing more destructive to the metaphysical fabric that binds us than the untimely murder of one human being by another" (say) and would not therefore be of much assistance in dealing with the more minor public order offences that David Blunkett has stated he is keen to crack down on.
 
What would you do in an instance where just two of the three freaks in a bath were in agreement about the person responsible for the upcoming destruction to the metaphysical fabric that binds us?

You're just worried Tucola, that the parameters may include, scaling the scaffolding surrounding tall buildings or wandering purposefully and at pace into the descending fog.
 
Post a Comment

« Home

want more?
Any views expressed here are, at best, those of the author and are not necessarily shared by the author’s employer.

Home
Archives
Mail Me
RSS

Emailsafe
Mail Hughesie
Spamusement

Poetry

Newness Dance
5K2002 Entry

AA Route Planner
A List Apart
Dictionary
Gmail
HTML Keyboard
iStockphoto
Weather
Webmonkey
Yahoomail

Grammalogue
JamonInternet
Tumblage
Virtual Traveller

Into You
Living Image
Lucky Fish
Steve Herring
Sunset Strip

L.A Times
London Times
New York Times

Toggle Blogroll


originalwork
new style