Baltimore Police Took 1 Million Surveillance Photos of City (go.com) 74
An anonymous reader quotes a report from ABC News: Baltimore Police on Friday released data showing that a surveillance plane secretly flew over the city roughly 100 times, taking more than 1 million snapshots of the streets below. Police held a news conference where they released logs tracking flights of the plane owned and operated by Persistent Surveillance Systems, which is promoting the aerial technology as a cutting-edge crime-fighting tool. The logs show the plane spent about 314 hours over eight months creating the chronological visual record. The program began in January and was not initially disclosed to Baltimore's mayor, city council or other elected officials. Now that it's public, police say the plane will fly over the city again as a terrorism prevention tool when Fleet Week gets underway on Monday, as well as during the Baltimore Marathon on Oct. 15. The logs show that the plane made flights ranging between one and five hours long in January and February, June, July and August. The flights stopped on Aug. 7, shortly before the program's existence was revealed in an article by Bloomberg Businessweek. "We have a real opportunity to police smarter," Commissioner Kevin Davis said. "The old days of looking at a spike in violence, and marching orders to stop everyone that moves in hoping of identifying a suspect or a witness -- we have to move away from that type of policing. I just believe that taking advantage of this technology opportunity was a prudent thing to do."
11 hours of video (Score:2)
1 FPS huge megapixels. Rewnd/Ffwd to see where car (Score:2)
It's 1 frame per second with enough resolution to watch a 25 square mile area and follow a car as it drives away from a crime scene, as well as rewind to see where the car came from. When a crime occurs, you can rewind to see the bad guy drive up, then watch to see where they go. I want one! :)
PS the decided they can't zoom closer than a car (Score:2)
PS the company decided that they will not build a system with resolution better than enough to follow a car, which will be about six pixels or so.They won't build something that can see a face. Of course another company might.
Along with crime/security for something like the Super Bowl, they can assist with wide-area real time views of natural disasters, they've done traffic flow analysis to watch traffic jams form in real time, etc.
"Mayor didn't know" (Score:2)
Re: "Mayor didn't know" (Score:1)
The wire was based on facts. Sad part is, ain't shit changed.
Re: (Score:2)
You clearly aren't familiar with Baltimore...
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
if ideal was to turn the land of the free to land of the herd, home to irresponsible(how could they be responsible? they are not free) welfare junkies immersed in an ignorant, superficial, culture of death, it is nearing full realization in usa.
Good work guys! (Score:5, Insightful)
Solving crimes is nice; but what people really like is when your 'deterrents' cause them to just not happen in the first place. You might be able to justify some concealment of the fine details in order to frustrate attempts to circumvent the measure; but keeping the existence of the entire program secret massively reduces its potential as a deterrent, which is effectively choosing to have more crime in the hopes of closing more cases rather than increasing the perceived risk of engaging in crime.
There are, of course, other reasons for secrecy; but they aren't very flattering.
Re:Good work guys! (Score:5, Insightful)
Personally I think the thousands of separate police forces run by local governments across the USA just do not individually have the scale to be run like the best of professional law enforcement elsewhere.
Re:Good work guys! (Score:4, Insightful)
Same as telling schools/teachers their funding depends on grades. Same as telling a wage slave that Metric XYZ is gospel in your house. Same as every oversimplified impetus.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. Which is why it's a mess to have so many tiny little police forces at the beck and call of small local governments instead of forces large enough to be more professional.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I've read that criticism with regard to police shootings -- there's so many police forces and so many of them are small, use of force training has no chance of being uniform across all departments nor does the quantity and quality of training have a chance of being the same.
In the Minneapolis/St Paul metro area there are maybe three dozen suburbs plus the core cities, almost all with their own police departments not to mention 3-4 county sheriff departments (depending on how far out you want to measure the
They *can* get the same training at the same schoo (Score:2)
> -- there's so many police forces and so many of them are small, use of force training has no chance of being uniform across all departments nor does the quantity and quality of training have a chance of being the same.
The use-of-force training can be exactly the same, taught by the same instructor, with cops from different departments in the same class if you prefer. Each department doesn't have to run their own training school, and shouldn't, for most things.
In Texas there's a place called TEEX - you
Clarify perhaps? 10% cost to Texas taxpayers (Score:2)
I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say. Perhaps you could clarify. You mentioned "tax payers can float the bill", so I'll give you a bit of information about that.
With the TEEX model, about 10% of the TEEX budget comes from the state of Texas - from Texas taxpayers, but actually about zero percent because TEEX sends money back to the state at the end of the year. A large percentage of funding comes from training first responders from other countries; Mexico and Canada spend a lot at TEEX having thei
Re: (Score:2)
When your metric of success is arrest numbers and not reduction in crime a deterrent does not matter.
Neither of those are important metrics. The metric that matters to most PDs is the number of civil forfeitures.
Re: (Score:3)
Think of the command center sized GUI on the wall. Rent on or no bid heat maps, wifi tracking, voice print upgrades, p2p tracking, onion routing ip finder.
What once the clandestine services had is now within the budget of a city or state task force.
Re: (Score:1)
It's not about crime reduction. It's about control. These "photos" are videos with a one second framerate. They are stored FOREVER. So if you threaten to gain political influence that the guys controlling these videos dislike, well you and everyone you know or rely upon will have their history rewound in a search for any leverage against you. That's what is being sold. The first contract for this company was in Mexico. You know, the Mexico where if your gang becomes dominant then it's members are then made
Re: (Score:1)
What you said is no less offensive or racist or whatever than what the parent AC said, FYI. You're no better than them.
Re: (Score:2)
Voyeurism at it's best (Score:1)
So taking over a million secret aerial photographs is supposed to stop crime and terrorism?
If another person or organization did this I suppose they could plead that they did this for the good of the community. I'm sure the police would believe them.
Re: (Score:2)
Old school vs. Technology (Score:5, Insightful)
"The old days of looking at a spike in violence, and marching orders to stop everyone that moves in hoping of identifying a suspect or a witness -- we have to move away from that type of policing..."
Ah, so the method of blanketing a particular area for a specific amount of time as a justified response to criminal activity isn't good enough at generating enough arrests, so the answer is to use technology to perform mass surveillance against thousands of innocent people for months, even when there is no justified cause to do so, in order to generate arrests and revenue.
Believe me, you don't have to offer up pathetic excuses about the "old days". We get why the fuck you're really doing this. And not only is it disgusting, it's unconstitutional and should be illegal.
I propose anyone still wanting to claim we have Freedom in the United States be charged with criminal ignorance. It's quite obvious the police state we now live under mandates otherwise.
Re: (Score:3)
I propose anyone still wanting to claim we have Freedom in the United States be charged with criminal ignorance.
We can't do that, that would be unconstitutional. ;)
Re: (Score:1)
"Unconstitutional" *is* "illegal", dumbass.
Your government isn't of or from you, it's a bunch of elites gone fully self aware and fucking you down into slavery and loving every minute of it.
Fuck the government.
Rise up.
Re: (Score:2)
I propose anyone still wanting to claim we have Freedom in the United States be charged with criminal ignorance.
This was the funniest part about people claiming that only the US should control ICANN because we are the only ones with "freedom".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I kinda understand your concern here, but are you cool with Google maps?
Taxpayers aren't footing the bill for Google maps.
And since consumers voluntarily give up their GPS-tracked privacy when using Google maps, it's highly unlikely that anyone would label it as unconstitutional either.
Oh, and speaking of voluntary, this form of mass surveillance didn't exactly start with EULAs mailed to every taxpayer in the city. It was carried out in complete secrecy.
Perhaps when Google maps starts filling courtrooms with cases built on parallel construction, I'll have more of a concern ov
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm talking about the fact that there's are satellites overhead taking pictures of the planet daily. More than likely those satellites were paid for, at least partially, with tax dollars.
In a theoretically perfect government with proper oversight from the associated accountability office, they should be charging any third party enough money to at least cover project costs and protect the taxpayer investment.
Radiolab covered this (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.radiolab.org/story/... [radiolab.org]
There's a stream link at the top. If you want to save the mp3 for later, open in vlc and find the source url in 'codec info'.
Tl;dr version- This type of surveillance is mind-bogglingly useful in very high-crime areas, but if abused will quickly degrade into the worst 1984 scenario I can imagine.
For now I'm not too worried unless the system scales down to fit easily on a drone or something. Modern aircraft are still at least possible to spot visually or on low-end radar.
Uhh.... (Score:2)
Donut hunt
Imagine, by Lenin (Score:2)
Eye in the Sky [radiolab.org]
Another Big Brother tool for China and Russia to use to continue stamping on a human face, forever. No more "imagine" needed.
Is it any wonder? (Score:5, Interesting)
In-depth look at Persistent Surveillance Systems (Score:4, Informative)
New police state (Score:2)