Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.misc > #73 > unrolled thread

NYPD Beta-Testing Google Glass

Back to article view | Back to comp.misc

Contents

  NYPD Beta-Testing Google Glass xyzzy <stalkers-suck@grr.la> - 2014-02-07 01:16 -0800
    Re: NYPD Beta-Testing Google Glass "I'm Batman, Dammit" <batman@thecave.invalid> - 2014-02-07 09:55 +0000
      Re: NYPD Beta-Testing Google Glass Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-02-07 16:10 -0800
        Re: NYPD Beta-Testing Google Glass RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-02-08 19:55 +0000
          Re: NYPD Beta-Testing Google Glass Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-02-08 15:19 -0800
            Re: NYPD Beta-Testing Google Glass RS Wood <rswood@therandymon.com> - 2014-02-09 15:19 +0000
        Re: NYPD Beta-Testing Google Glass Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-02-20 17:27 +0000
      Re: NYPD Beta-Testing Google Glass Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-02-20 17:24 +0000
    Re: NYPD Beta-Testing Google Glass wjwlsn <ibillwilson@gmail.com> - 2014-02-10 09:04 -0800
      Re: NYPD Beta-Testing Google Glass RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-02-19 17:17 +0000

#73 — NYPD Beta-Testing Google Glass

Key snippets from 
http://venturebeat.com/2014/02/05/nypd-google-glass/

Google Glass may soon become a favored tool for law enforcement agencies in 
the United States.

The New York City Police Department's massive and controversial intelligence 
and analytics unit is evaluating whether Google Glass is a decent fit for 
investigating terrorists and helping cops lock up bad guys. The department 
recently received several pairs of the modernist-looking specs to test out. 

A spokesman for Google said the company was not working with law enforcement 
agencies on the project and that the NYPD likely acquired the glasses 
through the Google Glass Explorer program.

[The San Francisco PD chief CIO officer] says the applications for law 
enforcement are potentially huge...wireless facial recognition software is 
one potential use.  Asked about [potential civil rights] issues, Merritt 
deferred answering. “Call us back in six months!”

“Its use for law enforcement and intelligence agencies is doubtful,” said 
Vincent Cannistraro, a former ranking clandestine operator with the CIA... 
“But I’ve been wrong before.”

[/end key snippets]

I admit I'm in the crowd of people that *really* doesn't like the idea of 
being recognized or recorded covertly by strangers, and I trust the cops 
even less after growing up with a neighbor & an uncle that were cops. Having 
students I barely know follow me around campus and try to follow me home was 
creepy enough; having armed police be able to know my name, address, phone 
number, etc. at a glance would really worry me.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#75

On Fri, 07 Feb 2014 01:16:44 -0800
xyzzy <stalkers-suck@grr.la> wrote:

> A spokesman for Google said the company was not working with law enforcement 
> agencies on the project and that the NYPD likely acquired the glasses 
> through the Google Glass Explorer program.
> 
> [The San Francisco PD chief CIO officer] says the applications for law 
> enforcement are potentially huge...wireless facial recognition software is 
> one potential use.  Asked about [potential civil rights] issues, Merritt 
> deferred answering. “Call us back in six months!”


I think this was going to be a given.  The potential applications for law enforcement are huge.  If I weren't such a cynic I'd say it's got lots of upsides for enforcing whether cops are toeing the line when they make arrests, etc.  But the cynic says they'll want that aspect locked down.

How about us, the people?  Do we get to wear our Google Glass when we're being pulled over for a traffic violation?  Because at present it doesn't look like the knife cuts both ways, so to speak.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#93

On 2014-02-07 09:55:58 +0000, I'm Batman, Dammit said:

> On Fri, 07 Feb 2014 01:16:44 -0800
> xyzzy <stalkers-suck@grr.la> wrote:
> 
>> A spokesman for Google said the company was not working with law enforcement
>> agencies on the project and that the NYPD likely acquired the glasses
>> through the Google Glass Explorer program.
>> 
>> [The San Francisco PD chief CIO officer] says the applications for law
>> enforcement are potentially huge...wireless facial recognition software is
>> one potential use.  Asked about [potential civil rights] issues, Merritt
>> deferred answering. “Call us back in six months!”
> 
> 
> I think this was going to be a given.  The potential applications for 
> law enforcement are huge.  If I weren't such a cynic I'd say it's got 
> lots of upsides for enforcing whether cops are toeing the line when 
> they make arrests, etc.  But the cynic says they'll want that aspect 
> locked down.
> 
> How about us, the people?  Do we get to wear our Google Glass when 
> we're being pulled over for a traffic violation?  Because at present it 
> doesn't look like the knife cuts both ways, so to speak.

I think the best way is to have a surreptitious camera / mic on one's 
person, in the states where this won't automatically send you to jail.  
Another thing to think about is the idea of having cameras with 
automatic facial recognition everywhere ALREADY.  Law enforcement 
officers often use dirty tricks, but I trust Google itself even less.  
In my opinion every cell phone / tablet / computer with cameras and 
mics should be treated as if it were recording everything in the 
vicinity and uploading it when convenient.  The foolish might even feel 
comforted by this, or likely ambivalent at least - after all if you 
don't have anything to hide you don't have anything to fear!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#123

On 2014-02-08, Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I think the best way is to have a surreptitious camera / mic on one's
> person, in the states where this won't automatically send you to jail.
> Another thing to think about is the idea of having cameras with
> automatic facial recognition everywhere ALREADY.  Law enforcement
> officers often use dirty tricks, but I trust Google itself even less.
> In my opinion every cell phone / tablet / computer with cameras and
> mics should be treated as if it were recording everything in the
> vicinity and uploading it when convenient.  The foolish might even
> feel comforted by this, or likely ambivalent at least - after all if
> you don't have anything to hide you don't have anything to fear!
>

Does anyone remember that dystopian movie from around '96 where people
are recording their sensory perceptions using this kind of device, and
the crazier tapes are being traded on the black market for people who
want to experience something particular (like robbing a bank) for
themselves?

At one point there's a (nasty) scene where this guy is raping or
attacking or at least preparing to rape some woman, and he plugs the
output of his device into hers to torture her more by allowing her to
experience the pleasure he's getting from raping her.

Can't remember the movie, but I'd like to see it again.  This whole
Google Glass thing reminds me of it, even if it's not quite the same.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#133

On 2014-02-08 19:55:50 +0000, RS Wood said:

> On 2014-02-08, Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> I think the best way is to have a surreptitious camera / mic on one's
>> person, in the states where this won't automatically send you to jail.
>> Another thing to think about is the idea of having cameras with
>> automatic facial recognition everywhere ALREADY.  Law enforcement
>> officers often use dirty tricks, but I trust Google itself even less.
>> In my opinion every cell phone / tablet / computer with cameras and
>> mics should be treated as if it were recording everything in the
>> vicinity and uploading it when convenient.  The foolish might even
>> feel comforted by this, or likely ambivalent at least - after all if
>> you don't have anything to hide you don't have anything to fear!
>> 
> 
> Does anyone remember that dystopian movie from around '96 where people
> are recording their sensory perceptions using this kind of device, and
> the crazier tapes are being traded on the black market for people who
> want to experience something particular (like robbing a bank) for
> themselves?
> 
> At one point there's a (nasty) scene where this guy is raping or
> attacking or at least preparing to rape some woman, and he plugs the
> output of his device into hers to torture her more by allowing her to
> experience the pleasure he's getting from raping her.
> 
> Can't remember the movie, but I'd like to see it again.  This whole
> Google Glass thing reminds me of it, even if it's not quite the same.

I do remember it:  It was called Strange Days 
("http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114558/") and while the plot and acting 
both left something to be desired, it was quite prescient, and still is 
I feel.

My sister is a Google Glass Explorer but I don't get it.  Then again I 
don't even carry a cell phone.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154

> I do remember it:  It was called Strange Days 
> ("http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114558/") and while the plot and acting 
> both left something to be desired, it was quite prescient, and still is 
> I feel.
> 
> My sister is a Google Glass Explorer but I don't get it.  Then again I 
> don't even carry a cell phone.

That's the one - it was so scary back then I still scenes from it today.  
Thanks for the link - I might have to try to find it again.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#627

In message <ld3sl1$qv4$1@dont-email.me> 
  Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 2014-02-07 09:55:58 +0000, I'm Batman, Dammit said:

>> On Fri, 07 Feb 2014 01:16:44 -0800
>> xyzzy <stalkers-suck@grr.la> wrote:
>> 
>>> A spokesman for Google said the company was not working with law enforcement
>>> agencies on the project and that the NYPD likely acquired the glasses
>>> through the Google Glass Explorer program.
>>> 
>>> [The San Francisco PD chief CIO officer] says the applications for law
>>> enforcement are potentially huge...wireless facial recognition software is
>>> one potential use.  Asked about [potential civil rights] issues, Merritt
>>> deferred answering. “Call us back in six months!”
>> 
>> 
>> I think this was going to be a given.  The potential applications for 
>> law enforcement are huge.  If I weren't such a cynic I'd say it's got 
>> lots of upsides for enforcing whether cops are toeing the line when 
>> they make arrests, etc.  But the cynic says they'll want that aspect 
>> locked down.
>> 
>> How about us, the people?  Do we get to wear our Google Glass when 
>> we're being pulled over for a traffic violation?  Because at present it 
>> doesn't look like the knife cuts both ways, so to speak.

> I think the best way is to have a surreptitious camera / mic on one's 
> person, in the states where this won't automatically send you to jail.  
> Another thing to think about is the idea of having cameras with 
> automatic facial recognition everywhere ALREADY.  Law enforcement 
> officers often use dirty tricks, but I trust Google itself even less.  

Really? I trust nearly anyone more than I trust the police. The police
are systematic liars, even more so than the criminals. In my opinion,
when a police officer lies in the prosecution of an innocent person,
that officer should have to serve the entirety of the original sentence
the innocent person was sentenced to.

> In my opinion every cell phone / tablet / computer with cameras and 
> mics should be treated as if it were recording everything in the 
> vicinity and uploading it when convenient.  The foolish might even feel 
> comforted by this, or likely ambivalent at least - after all if you 
> don't have anything to hide you don't have anything to fear!

-- 
I don't have a solution but I admire the problem.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#626

In message <20140207095558.f4440d20.batman@thecave.invalid> 
  I'm Batman, Dammit <batman@thecave.invalid> wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Feb 2014 01:16:44 -0800
> xyzzy <stalkers-suck@grr.la> wrote:

>> A spokesman for Google said the company was not working with law enforcement 
>> agencies on the project and that the NYPD likely acquired the glasses 
>> through the Google Glass Explorer program.
>> 
>> [The San Francisco PD chief CIO officer] says the applications for law 
>> enforcement are potentially huge...wireless facial recognition software is 
>> one potential use.  Asked about [potential civil rights] issues, Merritt 
>> deferred answering. “Call us back in six months!”


> I think this was going to be a given.  The potential applications for
> law enforcement are huge.  If I weren't such a cynic I'd say it's got
> lots of upsides for enforcing whether cops are toeing the line when
> they make arrests, etc.  But the cynic says they'll want that aspect
> locked down.

> How about us, the people?  Do we get to wear our Google Glass when
> we're being pulled over for a traffic violation?  Because at present
> it doesn't look like the knife cuts both ways, so to speak.

Despite many court rulings against them, cops continue to insist you
cannot record them, to the point that they will destroy (or seize)
equipment used to record their actions.

See, the police do not think the laws apply to them, and since they are
the ones that enforce the law, they are right in nearly all cases.

-- 
Train Station: where the train stops.  Work Station: ...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#208

On Friday, February 7, 2014 4:16:44 AM UTC-5, xyzzy wrote:
> I admit I'm in the crowd of people that *really* doesn't like the idea of being recognized or recorded covertly by strangers, and I trust the cops even less after growing up with a neighbor & an uncle that were cops. Having students I barely know follow me around campus and try to follow me home was creepy enough; having armed police be able to know my name, address, phone number, etc. at a glance would really worry me.

How would you feel if your next major medical intervention was going to be performed by a Glass-wearing surgeon?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/how-google-glass-could-revolutionize-surgery-1.2527414

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#581

wjwlsn wrote:
> On Friday, February 7, 2014 4:16:44 AM UTC-5, xyzzy wrote:
>> I admit I'm in the crowd of people that *really* doesn't like the
>> idea of being recognized or recorded covertly by strangers, and I
>> trust the cops even less after growing up with a neighbor&  an
>> uncle that were cops. Having students I barely know follow me
>> around campus and try to follow me home was creepy enough; having
>> armed police be able to know my name, address, phone number, etc.
>> at a glance would really worry me.
>
> How would you feel if your next major medical intervention was going
> to be performed by a Glass-wearing surgeon?
>
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/how-google-glass-could-revolutionize-surgery-1.2527414

Google
>
responds with advice on how not to become a Glasshole:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7261558

Pretty funny stuff.  "Try not to be creepy."
"OK, Sergey, no problem."

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.misc

csiph-web