DVRs for Cop Cars 368
AEton writes "News.com is reporting that IBM is developing digital video recorders for cop cars. The systems involve a digital video camera and reusable hard drives which police officers will take with them on their shifts; centralized servers with up to 3.5 TB of storage will hold recordings. The cameras continuously record and cache old video in a "Tivo-like" fashion; tapes will start from three to five minutes before the cop turned on the recorder. Unbiased, high-quality recording could have a compelling social effect; and at the very least, we're headed for HDTV Cops."
Einstein would be impressed. (Score:3, Funny)
"The cameras continuously record and cache old video in a Tivo-like fashion; tapes will start from three to five minutes before the cop turned on the recorder."
Not sure I understand, this means that after you press "record", the DVR travels three to five minutes backward in time and catches you in the loo a few minutes prior? Surely the video would spool to disk 3 to 5 minutes after it was recorded. Maybe I can use one of these after I get pulled over for speeding to travel back in time and brake in advance...
Re:Einstein would be impressed. (Score:5, Informative)
Gaming the Recorder and Black Boxes (Score:5, Interesting)
I wonder what will happen when they put REALLY big drives in these things that record the whole shift. More police cars unfortunately running off the road and exploding in flames, I suppose (with the drivers miraculously saved.)
Another thing that came to mind - this device could be the equivalent of a 'black box' on an airplane - you could have BlueTooth enabled guns / batons, health montoring devices in the uniform... this could bring a whole new level of evidence to bear in a Rodney-King style event. What if the police could show from a EKG strip that the cop really was scared for his life? Interesting stuff...
Re:Gaming the Recorder and Black Boxes (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm pretty pro-poli
Re:Gaming the Recorder and Black Boxes (Score:3, Informative)
I sure don't want an electronic/gun mechanism like that in my house...
Burglar enters my home at night, pulls gun on me
ME: Hey, oops...wait, lemme find my watch, I took it off when I had a shower...just a minute...got my gun, but, need that watch..where did I put that darned thing...OH, you already stole it? Well hell, take the gun...its a set....
Nope...ne
Re:Usefulness of a gun in the house (Score:4, Informative)
I'm single, and have no kids...so, no problems there, but, I was raised in a house with a gun, and I was taught by my Dad a respect for firearms, and how to use them..etc. I knew where they were, and never touched it except for once, when I was about 13 or so...home alone during the summer, and some bum came knocking on the front door,wanting some water...I had the gun in my hand safety off...told him to leave. He finally left...I put the gun back, and told my folks.
I guess it depends on your kids, and how your raise them around fire arms. I grew up in the southern part of the US, and guns down here are part of life...lots of hunting..target practice...etc. Most everyone I knew, had guns in their houses, and my friends and I all knew where they were...but had been taught they were not toys...and would have had hell to pay if we got one and it wasn't an emergency.
I actually did not purchase a gun for myself till I was well out of college...I partied a lot, and just didn't want to risk having a party and one getting pulled out..etc. But, I grew up, and when I felt responsible enough to own one...I started buying. I have had carry concealed licenses in the past...don't have one now since a move..but, may get one. If I have kids, I'll be more cautious about them and all, but, will also teach my children gun safety, and how to respect them, much as my parents and my friends' parents did....
But, all that being said...not everyone should be a gun owner. It is a major responsibility...if you can't trust your kids..don't have them...if you have ANY doubts that if you have to pull a gun that you will shoot and shoot to kill...you do not need to have one. I've thought long and hard about this, and have taken safety courses, and regularly practice shooting...I like to think I'll know what I'll do if faced with the decision. You never know, but, I've mentally drilled myself on what I need to do. If someone is in my house, and threatening me, my friends, or someday, my family, I have no moral problem at all and emptying 16 shots into the assailent (sp?), and not checking the body till I've slapped another clip in....
It definitely is an individual decision, and not one to be taken lightly.
Did this where I worked (Score:4, Interesting)
As for the duration of recording... wouldn't it be nice if the recordings weren't viewable by the officers on duty. That way, it could be juggled to a little over 5 minutes (or a lot over), and anyone trying to "wait out" before pressing record would be S.O.L.
Re:Einstein would be impressed. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Einstein would be impressed. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Einstein would be impressed. (Score:2)
Re:Einstein would be impressed. (Score:2)
Could 5 minutes be stored in RAM? Less wear and tear on the hard drive if you only use it for actual recordings.
Re:Einstein would be impressed. (Score:2, Insightful)
Why not keep more on the spool? Probably they will decide at some point to do so if five minutes or three minutes or whatever is deemed insufficient. But you don't really want to run your disk at always-maxed-out, I don't think. Especially since the amount of space available for spooling would grow smaller as you recorded. That's just a whole set of bugs waiting to find their way into code. Your code would have to account for the changing
Re:Very simple. (Score:3, Insightful)
So they hit "record" at the end of five minutes. Later, when they are being charged, the tapes is reviewed and the recording starts with a guy in cuffs. The very fact that the process leading up to that was not recorded would make the entire recording suspect. In fact, not recording from the moment the suspect is pulled over or approached - i.e. as the cop gets out of the car - would be highly suspect.
Sure, a dirty cop could try scripting what goes on for those five minutes before he hits "record", but
Re:Tivo Like? (Score:3, Funny)
Wow...Tivo for cops, sounds like fun. Wonder if it comes with a monthly fee or if you can buy the service for a one time fee?
Re:Sorry to dissapoint. (Score:3, Interesting)
There are likely other ways to get around this (the fact that the cop has physical control of the hard drive sounds promising) but dirty cops will have to have an entirely new level of sophisticati
Re:Einstein would be impressed. (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't really think this is a keep-the-cop-honest feature, because there are much better ways to go about it than that. I think it's just to help establish the context in which the cop used the recorder.
Xentax
Re:Einstein would be impressed. (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Einstein would be impressed. (Score:5, Insightful)
Makes sense. You're only going to hit "record" after figuring out something interesting is going on, and you can't hit the button immediately.
Re:Einstein would be impressed. (Score:3, Informative)
Basically the box will be continually recording into a looped buffer. When you hit the record button it will retrive the last 5 minutes from the buffer and
Excellent idea... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Excellent idea... (Score:4, Insightful)
No... (Score:2)
I think you meant it would make the above situation difficult...
I want one. (Score:2)
Although I could fabricate evidence on my own! Hmmm.....
Re:I want one. (Score:3, Interesting)
I know there's one guy in New York who rides a bike with cameras fore and aft, but I think they're on a conventional portable VTR.
Sweet. (Score:2, Funny)
There'll be a black market for geeks to hack these things so the cops can switch them off and not be caught hitting on hookers for "favours".
Re:Sweet. (Score:2)
Yeah, well, if the system is built in such a way as there's a checksum value for the recording sent and stored at a separate location, this could be impossible to do. Modifying a tape signature is one thing, making it match an unknown quantity at a verification/validation site, which logs hits, could make such a thing beyond possibility. More like, "Clancy, now did
Re:Sweet. (Score:2)
er, and how is this a downside? video of people at their utter worst is great entertainment. cops is the most enjoyable when the people are most insane. Psychoanalyze if you must, but I like it.
Re:Sweet. (Score:3, Funny)
What? Some smart person would make them leave it on, so the boys in blue get a new revenue source. Internet pr0n generates lots of cash...
Come to think of it, there's lots of way they could reduce the tax burden that way.
- www.Rate-A-Ho.com
- www.Catch-your-hubby-in-the-act.org
- www.How-does-my-college-age-daughter-get-her-$BLI N G$.biz
- www.Hugh-Grant-up-close-and-
Will this be used fairly... (Score:4, Insightful)
Nope, cops wouild lose in that case (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Nope, cops wouild lose in that case (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Will this be used fairly... (Score:2)
Also, our police chase shows will have much better quality, which can only be an improvement.
We Need Good Watermarking (Score:5, Insightful)
A.M.
Re:We Need Good Watermarking (Score:5, Interesting)
It would be pretty damn hard to 'edit in' the person striking first, but there is an easier way. The cops can just carry a bulk tape eraser and a power inverter for the cig lighter, then wipe out the hard drive after they get midevil on someone's ass. Or a 5# speaker magnet. That should cook the hard drive if used properly. Then just say "I dunno what happened to the system, it should be there to prove I didn't do anything".
Re:We Need Good Watermarking (Score:2)
Re:We Need Good Watermarking (Score:2)
Re:We Need Good Watermarking (Score:4, Interesting)
I have managed to use magnets to wipe a hard drive. It took a damned powerful magnet and a LOT of time. It's not as easy as everyone thinks it it is.
Re:We Need Good Watermarking (Score:3, Informative)
Re:We Need Good Watermarking (Score:5, Interesting)
Paranoid.
First off, if you do the math, it's about 700 megs per hour of footage, as opposed the 13 gig it'd take to losslessly compress it. In order to edit somebody in, the video'd have to be recompressed, and that would be noticable upon analysis.
Secondly, it is *very* hard to digitally add/replace somebody in a video. Professional studios have difficulty doing thing, it's inconcievable that the police could cover something up that way. They wouldn't have the talent on their own and the money needed to do it enough to not raise eyebrows would raise eyebrows.
It'd actually be easier to pull that off with plain old VHS camcorders. You can duplicate them without too much quality loss. (Or at least noticable.) The video's lower res and fuzzier so it'd be easy to mask effects. The higher the resolution and color accuracy of video, the harder it is to satisfactorally match it.
I wouldn't worry.
Re:We Need Good Watermarking (Score:2)
Re:A few comments (Score:3, Interesting)
They said 3.5 terabytes of storage held 5,000 hours of footage. Doing the math I arrived at 700 megs per hour. I am not a mathematician so if I messed up a decimal point then somebody please correct me. Assuming my math is right, then the only possible way they're storing the footage is to use a codec, likely of MPEG4 relation. (DivX maybe?)
"Second: 13 gigs/hour at 720x480 (DVD quality) is not uncompressed. It's compresse
Re:We Need Good Watermarking (Score:2)
I hope we never become so reliant on technology like this we refuse to use common sense. Many unforseen dangers may lye ahead for us.
At the same time, perhaps this video will show some of the
Re:We Need Good Watermarking (Score:2)
Wouldn't it be easier for the cops to simply not record the offending event in the first place? In the case of Rodney King, it was a third party recording that got them into trouble. Though on
Re:We Need Good Watermarking (Score:2)
Re:We Need Good Watermarking (Score:2)
Re:We Need Good Watermarking (Score:2)
Or good DRM.
Re:We Need Good Watermarking (Score:2)
Re:We Need Good Watermarking (Score:3, Informative)
30-second skip? (Score:5, Funny)
Awesome! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Awesome! (Score:2)
"Sir, please turn off the vacuum..."
Re:Awesome! (Score:5, Funny)
In Soviet Russia, YOU record COPS. (huh?)
1. Film prostitutes
2. ?????
3. Profit!
Did I leave any out?</troll>
I can see it now. (Score:5, Funny)
excellent! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:excellent! (Score:5, Funny)
The cool part is with 5 channel audio, when they bust a skull with a night stick, it will sound JUST like they are in your living room!
Gives "Reality TV" new meaning.
Re:excellent! (Score:4, Funny)
Wait! They are in my living room!
Ow! Ow! Ow! Ow! stupid homeland security Ow! Ow! Ow! Ow!
Re:excellent! (Score:4, Funny)
Will this really work? (Score:2)
Somewhat Worthless... (Score:2)
About Time (Score:3, Informative)
Re:About Time (Score:2)
Also, the Lacresha Murray was broken by the New York Times, and we all know what kind of reporting they're capable of.
I knew I should have patented that! (Score:2)
Re:I knew I should have patented that! (Score:5, Funny)
"I was planing to use Freevo or simular, a notebook some webcams and wireless lan"
" I was also trying to figure out how to get a finger print scanner hidden in an unsuspecting place, like the gear shift."
Batman, you should really start posting anonymously.
Re:I knew I should have patented that! (Score:2)
Me, too! I was planning on using a conical mirror to record 360 degrees. My reason for using it would be to:
Re:I knew I should have patented that! (Score:2)
The nice thing about recording it yourself:
If it doesn't benefit you, you don't have to volunteer the evidence.
Re:I knew I should have patented that! (Score:2)
Re:I knew I should have patented that! (Score:2)
Speed trapping isn't legal in most states (hidden out of view)
Two wrongs doesn't make a right but you might be able squirell your way out of a fine with it. That and having a video record of someone side swiping me was slightly more important.
Re:I knew I should have patented that! (Score:2)
HUH!?!? Please provide a link, source, additional info on which states etc. I can't believe this, but I'm hoping it's true, so please back up this claim.
Already on Motorcycles (Score:5, Informative)
The system works just as described: The system is always recording to a programmable-length buffer; once the officer cuts his disco lights on, the buffer becomes a permanent file and current events are appended to it.
I didn't ask any questions about how easy it was to erase files off the system, but I remember seeing a keypad on the unit and the guy I brought the bike to did enter a code before he got into any of the menus. It would be easy enough give those codes to the station chiefs, but not the patrol officers.
Lights, Camera,... (Score:3, Insightful)
Unfortunatly, I somewhat doubt these will be available to the public w/o editing.
Re:Lights, Camera,... (Score:3, Insightful)
Unfortunately? Sure would violate the privacy of anybody pulled over, esp. anybody who wasn't actually guilty. The police officer should be accountable, but the detainees, who may be completely innocent, should be protected too.
New tactic (Score:2)
"You're under arrest! Please step behind the cop car, away from the cam... er, the headlights."
A See a Loophole (Score:2)
The cop should not have to do anything for it to record: there should be some automatic method, like the car door opening.
Yes, they'll get a lot of donut shop footage, but heck, otherwise, the cop could just not turn the thing on, nightstick the hell out of someone, then just drive off.
Re:A See a Loophole (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't think the primary purpose of this camera is to keep cops honest. I think it may occasionally have that effect, but the cops can always find some way to disable or destroy it. But that's OK, because really, the majority of cops are pretty clean. The cameras will be most useful as evidence against people the cops arrest.
I'm one of those pathetic losers who watches all the police chase shows, and in one a
Tonight on "COPS:DE (digitally edited)" (Score:4, Funny)
You...doing shit you didn't.
FINALLY! (Score:2)
/me ponders... (Score:2)
Personal recording technology to become ubiquitous (Score:2)
This kind of technology will also be extended
I don't like where this is headed (Score:3, Insightful)
I will tell you a secret: people goof off sometimes when they work. One example: I bet at least a third of comments posted here during the day were written by people "on the clock." If you think there is something "wrong" with that, screw you. In western countries, we do enough work, goofing off and all.
It pisses me off that it's exactly the public servants who absolutely need to be competent who are eating the brunt of our "accountability on the job" insanity. Public school teachers and cops are perfect examples: We don't pay either very well, and both are losing more and more flexibility each year. It seems like in the USA, you are probably "down-and-out" with a liberal arts degree if you become a school teacher, and to become a cop, you are probably a complete asshole who trips on power because nobody liked you in high school. That's because no one in their right minds would work these jobs with "purer" motivations.
This is not how it should be! We should be making these public professions attractive to reasonable, intelligent people! Instead, it seems we just make them crappier every year with new restrictions and new Orwellian "accountability" measures.
If this doesn't bother you, ask yourself this: how would you feel about your job if every single thing you do were recorded on digital video, and then reviewed? We might be heading to a world like that in our constant obsession with economic growth. We will have paid video reviewers who are themselves videoed and reviewed by other reviewers.
Re:I don't like where this is headed (Score:2)
If a cop goofs off, people could be hurt or in certain cases die.
There is a huge difference in the line of work that most of "us" do and being a cop, and I would think that it takes a certain kind of person to dedicate their lives to serving and protecting the innocent.
Ill stop holding them to orwellian accountabily (Score:4, Insightful)
I dont like being watched by camera all the time either.
Scenarios (Score:2, Insightful)
1) broadcasting the video.
These are public officials. As long as you've got their activites on video, why not broadcast them in the same way their radio signals are?
The same reason cops are using encrypted channels: "Safety". Supposedly being able to monitor the activities of a public official puts their life at risk. The alternative, however, is an unaccountable public official. Which is worse?
If my tax dollars are paying for these cameras, then they're paying for
here's one problem (Score:2)
The cop should never "turn on the recorder". In a world with growing police abuse, this recorder should always be on, making a record that accurately records what happened at all times, not just when the cop turns on the recorder. Current video technology and hard drive size certainly could allow for a 24 hour capture and a download to the central server (that 3.4 terabyte does seem small for video for a fleet of cars though
Re:here's one problem (Score:2)
Yes cops are in a unique position as public servants, but they're still people and they still deserve the right there of.
Storage Advances (Score:2, Funny)
The systems involve a digital video camera and reusable hard drives which police officers will take with them on their shifts
Where can I get one of these new-fangled reusable hard drives? Image a Beowulf...
HDTV Cops (Score:2, Funny)
Constant recording and the effects of downtime (Score:3, Interesting)
Then it will be mighty suspicious if a cop's video "suddenly breaks." Perhaps two independent recorders would be called for?
My wife was visiting a friend in Brazil recently, and they were staying at a hotel. Her friend was accosted one night by a security guard who had red eyes and was acting funny (likely he smoked pot), and hit on her and put his arm against the wall, blocking her path. He followed her up to her room.
She has a friend who is a cop, and he was with her that night just prior to dropping her off; he has the receipt from the restaurant they ate at, marking the exact time they left, and they went directly to the hotel. Strangely, ALL VIDEO stopped working that night.
Which is actually better for my wife's friend: now the hotel has broken two laws, a sexual harassment as well as a federal law of destroying evidence. I hope she wins.
We're entering the strage era of having no privacy outside the home (and little privacy inside, as cops use thermal imaging to detect tomato growers). If we're going to record, I think it best that we record everything, especially all government employees -- including politicians, police, and military. As others have said, these recordings will reduce police corruption.
And if we recorded politicians 24/7, we'd end the era of "big oil" deals, and RIAA/MPAA-mandated legislation, and all sorts of crap that goes on in back rooms that nobody ever hears about.
Cool but very dangerous. (Score:5, Insightful)
This could mean the officer get's handed a clipboard and "signs out" a drive, like he does a gun or any other piece of equipment. For evidence that can be so damaging (to both victim and jerk (whichever they may be)) the standard must come up to a whole new level. Anything less than outstandingly modern security will allow the tired mystery novel scenario to occur:
Officer A switches tivos with officer B; Officer A checks out drive 1 while signing for drive 2. Officer B checks out drive 2 while signing for drive 1. Officer A goes out to do something bad. Officer B drives a rush our traffic route so there are no tickets to hand out. That night they check in their drives, but Officer A has wiped his. Later Officer A is accused of a crime and has video to prove that he was somewhere else at the time. The fact that Officer B's drive crashed that day is not compelling evidence of anything.
The device that checks out the hard drive should be a black box digital time clock that puts it's own signature in the data of the drive. The vending company should make the public keys available to verify the signature, but keep the private keys out of the reach of law enforcement altogether. The officer that checks out a drive should type his pass-phrase into the checkout terminal so that it can generate a second signature that cannot be replicated without the pass-phrase. The Tivo-like computer should, in addition to other features, keep a running log of which hard drives (by signature) have been inserted into it and when, and these logs (up to the last say 100 insertions) should be included and signed on each new hard drive that goes into the Tivo. So any hard disk mucking about would be distributed over all the hard disks in the pool, and they would therefore have to destroy them all to successfully cover this stuff up. With the addition of signed GPS location/timestamps swapping/editing could be pretty tough especially if the tivo device derived it's signature from an unremovable factory issued SIM.
It's worth noting that I've never seen an episode of "Cops: A night of police screw ups."
Censoring the things they don't want seen is already the norm, and it will continue to be unless we legislate it otherwise.
COPS 2004 (Score:3, Insightful)
Is this admissable as evidence? (Score:3, Interesting)
I want one! (Score:3, Interesting)
Not an invasion (Score:5, Insightful)
If you are then set loose, they wont keep the recording as it serves no value. they already recorded the transaction of your name/time/location.
it helps keep the whole incident straight, for BOTH sides..
Re:Not an invasion (Score:2)
If you are then set loose, they wont keep the recording as it serves no value. they already recorded the transaction of your name/time/location.
it helps keep the whole incident straight, for BOTH sides..
Doesn't matter. The courts have found you don't have an expectation of privacy while driving down the road. They already tape
Re:Not an invasion (Score:2)
Re:Not an invasion (Score:2)
Offtopic sig response:
What part of the second amendment would you prefer to omit?
Re:Ridiculous invasion of privacy (Score:2)
Unless the police car is located in your living room (at which point, you have bigger problems) it has nothing to do with privacy.
Re:Ridiculous invasion of privacy (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm guessing that within ten years it will be impossible to prosecute anyone in court unless the entire arrest is recorded.
Re:How long will the hard drives last (Score:2)
Re:How long will the hard drives last (Score:2)
I saw a demo of a military-grade pc at a trade show once. They had a nice little display showing drive seeks, reads and writes. The guy set up some big file copy, so the display was going nuts, then calmly climbed up on the desk and kicked the thing off. Three foot drop to the cement floor and a loud crash (this thing was heavy). The drive just didn't care.
Re:IBM drives? (Score:4, Funny)
Rumor has it that the IBM solution was choosen for just this reason.