“…hearing “this god-like voice out of nowhere” is generally effective, said Kopczynski; since the system is two-way, staff can also monitor the teen covertly.” - Read more at https://qz.com/1482833/parents-are-putting-gps-ankle-monitors-on-their-teenage-kids/
The City of Perth, Western Australia website ( https://www.perth.wa.gov.au) details how my visit using the Internet is logged in relation to my navigation or inquiry;
“...When you visit our website, the web content management system and our Internet Service Provider automatically records your visit and logs the following information for content personalisation and statistical purposes:
Your IP address
Your top level domain name (e.g. .com, .net, .gov etc)
The date and time of your visit to the site
The pages accessed and documents downloaded
Time spent on individual pages
Time spent overall on the site
Browser type and version
Referring site and media asset (eg search engine or display advertisement)...
Using the search function provided in the City of Perth, Western Australia website I was unable to locate any public records, policy articles nor public statements defining or confirming the use of ‘body worn camera’ technologies or ‘BWC’ using the following parameters:
‘body worn camera’
‘parking inspectors body cams’
‘body cameras promote safer community’
‘perth parking inspectors fitted with body cameras’
Using the same search parameters I located eleven (11) Internet accessible articles and podcasts dating back to early 2017 on this topic by Internet search engine, Google.
I rang the City of Perth main contact line at 11:45 AM on Thursday 6th December which automatically via a voice recording informed me that my call would be recorded for training and quality assurance purposes. After selecting option ‘5’ to speak with an ‘other inquiries’ Officer, I clearly stated that I wished to speak with the most relevant person who could inform my questions relating to ‘body worn camera technologies that the City of Perth Traffic Infringement or other Officers now wear in their line of public duty’.
I was placed on hold and the phone was answered by an individual who identified themself by their first name only and again I was asked what the nature of my inquiry was, within which I identified that my inquiry was relating to research related to ‘the use of body worn camera technologies that City of Perth has issued it’s parking inspectors and other officers with’.
I was again placed on hold and shortly after by a third person I was informed that ‘Kylie XXXXXX, Business Operations Officer’ could answer my inquiry however that person was ‘on leave’ until 10 December, 2018.
I asked for Kylie’s email address but was not provided that contact. I then left my own personal email address and mobile phone number and was assured that ‘Kylie’ would respond to my inquiry. The purpose of this correspondence and recount is to inform myself and others as to the socio-ethical implications on society that emanate by examination of the purpose and deployment by the City of Perth of ‘body worn camera’ technologies, systems and associated services.
The City of Perth ‘Terms & Conditions’ page clearly states it will record my interaction with the City Of Perth website and will be used to inform my inquiry and ‘to improve its service and quality assurance in relation to my inquiry’.
My inquiry remains as follows.
As surveillance cameras in the area will detail, on Thursday 6th December 2018 at around 10:00 AM I parked my vehicle close to the junction of Gooderich and Hill Street in Perth, Western Australia. I purchased a parking ticket, placed it visibly in the vehicle and walked to the Royal Perth Hospital a short distance away. Shortly after, at 10:40 AM I returned to the vehicle where I observed a City of Perth Parking Infringement Officer in close proximity.
I approached the Officer slowly, walking and indicating audibly that I wished to speak with them politely. I introduced myself as a ‘researcher with an interest in body worn cameras’ that the officer wore on the left hand chest / shoulder.
The camera I noted was Cadmium red in colour and body mounted on a high visibility vest. I was careful to stand a distance away from the Officer and to ask the questions in a quiet and inquiring manner.
My first question of the Officer was why the Officer was required to wear a body camera whilst performing in the line of their public duty. I was informed by the Officer that the camera was ‘for your personal safety and for my personal safety’.
I questioned what danger I was being protected from and the Officer stated that in their line of duty they sometimes encounter ‘heated discussions’ and that these had in the past led to violent encounters ‘so the cameras are a deterrent from those situations occurring’. I asked whether I was being recorded by the camera or by any other device the Officer was wearing which included a Bluetooth hands-free headset in one ear.
The Officer indicated that they were required to inform those in their contact at the point of recording that they would be recording by means of the body worn camera. The Officer also pointed to a small ‘patch’ on their high visibility jacket that stated that the Officer was wearing a body worn camera.
The Officer unprompted then indicated that at the point of recording they would also ‘radio’ or ‘signal’ to a ‘back-to-base’ contact who would ‘trigger’ CCTV cameras in the near vicinity to the ‘location of the target’. The Officer indicated with a hand gesture that this occurred via their wearable radio contact device and pointed with the other hand at surveillance cameras on private buildings opposite our location and also at ‘gimbal’ cameras close by on the street corner power poles.
I then inquired whether the Officer considered themself therefore to be ‘with due respect a mobile CCTV unit’ acknowledging their capacity to ‘trigger’ additional surveillance from their given geolocation as an extension of their own capacity to record. The Officer indicated that ‘yes, we are here to keep everyone safe in the city’.
My last question of the Officer was to inquire whether it was permissible to photograph the Officer wearing the body worn camera. The Officer indicated that I was not permitted to take a photograph nor record the Officer in their line of duty because ‘I do not want my personal details nor features distributed by social media over the Internet’.
I then thanked the officer for their time and responses and returned to my car. I note that at no time was I asked to identify myself by name or by any other identification during our point of discussion.
I consider the response by the Officer as courteous and polite without any element of threat nor untoward issue.
My inquiry, as a member of the public and as an interested researcher in this field, is composed as questions seeking answers as follows;
Why is there currently little or no access to accessible information from the City of Perth website detailing use, type, intent, governance of this technology now visibly deployed on City of Perth Officers?
In addition to video and audio recording, do these technologies also capture, process and inform Officers by facial recognition, ANPR or other artificial intelligence enabled means, data to inform the Officer’s response to those members of the public they come in contact with?
What privacy provisions does the City of Perth observe in relation to the use of these technologies as Officers move between public, municipal and private place?
Where are the publicly accessible use cases, public relations statements and records of stakeholder consultations that inform the public's awareness and capacity for comment regarding claims that BWC ensure ‘safety’?
Which cultural and social welfare organisations has the City of Perth involved in the decision making to deploy this technology as a means of surveillance to act in a form of deterrence for behaviours deemed as inappropriate within the City of Perth precinct?
This inquiry has been sent to the City of Perth main contact and has been published through my personal Uberveillance.com website as a means through which to inform those who respond to my inquiry.
"...China has turned the northwestern region of Xinjiang into a vast experiment in domestic surveillance. WSJ investigated what life is like in a place where one's every move can be monitored with cutting-edge technology."
"Yahoo has filed a patent for a type of smart billboard that would collect people's information and use it to deliver targeted ad content in real-time."
It goes on to explain in the application:
"The Philadelphia Police Department admitted today that a mysterious unmarked license plate surveillance truck disguised as a Google Maps vehicle is its own.
“We have been informed that this unmarked vehicle belongs to the police department; however, the placing of any particular decal on the vehicle was not approved through any chain of command. With that being said, once this was brought to our attention, it was ordered that the decals be removed immediately.”
Brandon Worf, who for three years worked at Busch and Associates, a sales group that specializes in public safety technology, described the ALPR gear installed on the vehicle as “scary efficient” after reviewing yesterday’s photos.
Worf says that this particular model, called the ELSAG MPH-900, “is based on the use of infrared cameras to find plate numbers and letters via temperature differentials between those characters and the surrounding background through optical character recognition.”
The cameras are able to read and process “several plates simultaneously” and “in a fraction of a second.” All plates swept up in such a dragnet fashion “are logged with the time/date of the read, GPS latitude/longitude coordinates of where the read occurred, and a photo of the plate and surrounding vehicle,” he added."
"The Intercept has obtained a secret, internal U.S. government catalogue of dozens of cellphone surveillance devices used by the military and by intelligence agencies. The document, thick with previously undisclosed information, also offers rare insight into the spying capabilities of federal law enforcement and local police inside the United States.
The catalogue includes details on the Stingray, a well-known brand of surveillance gear, as well as Boeing “dirt boxes” and dozens of more obscure devices that can be mounted on vehicles, drones, and piloted aircraft. Some are designed to be used at static locations, while others can be discreetly carried by an individual. They have names like Cyberhawk, Yellowstone, Blackfin, Maximus, Cyclone, and Spartacus. Within the catalogue, the NSA is listed as the vendor of one device, while another was developed for use by the CIA, and another was developed for a special forces requirement. Nearly a third of the entries focus on equipment that seems to have never been described in public before."
Tomorrow marks the 35th anniversary of Food Not Bombs---the name given to autonomous groups and independent collectives that serve free vegan and vegetarian food in opposition of poverty and hunger, and also in protest of economic disparity and rapacious militarism. But, "despite seemingly the non-controversial nature of the activist group's titular three-word mission statement, FBI files released earlier this week show that serving up home-cooked vegan moussaka is apparently enough to warrant suspicions of terrorism.
The files, which begin in the early aughts, appear to be focused on one particular FNB chapter based out of Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond, Virginia. The bulk of the records concern the organization's rather obvious opposition to the Iraq war.
In fact, the release included a CD comprised of extensive surveillance footage from an anti-war protest in Richmond on July 3rd, 2003."
Axon creates connected technologies for truth in public safety.
"....TASER and Microsoft have formed a unique partnership that brings together two powerful technology platforms to meet the unique needs of law enforcement today. With unmatched technology innovation and industry-leading security, the partnership is enabling transformation in public safety practices while also promoting greater transparency and trust between law enforcement and private citizens."
This man knows a lot about what is happening in this area - https://ccj.asu.edu/content/michael-white
The wearable, non-irritating sensor tattoo can detect glucose in the fluid just under the skin. It is based on integrating glucose extraction and electrochemical biosensing. Testing on seven volunteers showed that it was able to accurately determine glucose levels. The sensor response correlated with that of a commercial glucose monitor.
I talked about a future like this at the QSymposium this year and many of the international relations scholars looked at me like I was from another planet! It took about 48 hours for people to realise that what I was saying was not just the stuff of science fiction, though I admit to watching every episode of Dr Who by the time I was 10 years old. I graduated with a Masters of Transnational Crime Prevention in the Faculty of Law in 2009- this is exactly what I studied, especially with respect to the notion of "hot pursuit" and separately intelligence-led policing (although now it's a lot more fashionable to talk about evidence-based policing. See my panel chairing at this Human Rights and Policing conference. A small part of my own presentation on proactive criminalisation is here.
Is this the future we want?
Is it just me, or can't you see where we're headed with this stuff?
I'd like to think that the data being collected by this BOT was going to be used just for peace and security but that would be a pipedream!
C'mon people "startup of the year"? Do we give prizes for novelty and innovation without thinking what it all might mean in the future?
And please don't give me the rhetoric about a knife being used to butter bread or to kill someone... this ain't the same thing! This is abhorrent!
One day autonomous data collection, the next a packed mule! Anyone remember this article? But then the way these things are marketed you'd think they weren't real! Well think again... I had the great pleasure of entering Boston Dynamics in June of this year and was greeted by the monstrosities at the front door. The packed mules DO exist, they just haven't been unleashed en mass!
Thanks for the link KMA- interesting these Knightscope guys were given airtime at PII this year. Correct me if I'm wrong- but aren't these the guys PII is raising awareness against? What a smokescreen confusing mess!
Darlek: "I was made to take orders..."
Dr Who: "What does that mean?"
Darlek: "I am a solider, I was made to receive orders."
Katina: "My point exactly."
Now compare to the narrative clip.
"Today, when doctors suspect that a patient has a cardiac arrhythmia that could lead to a heart attack, they can implant a tiny cardiac monitor smaller than a AAA battery in the patient's chest, directly over the heart. The company that makes that monitor, Medtronic, thinks the day will come when perfectly healthy people will be clamoring to have that gear inside them as well.
At a Medical Design & Manufacturing conference today, Medtronic program director Mark Phelps described his company's successful efforts to miniaturize its cardiac technologies. In February, the company began a clinical trial of its pill-sized pacemaker, which is implanted inside the heart. While Phelps presented that tiny pacemaker as a remarkable feat of engineering, he saved his real excitement for the tiny Linq cardiac monitor, which went on sale this year. Phelps declared that the device heralded "the beginning of a new industry" in diagnostic and monitoring implants.
Phelps argued that such an implant could be enhanced with more sensors to give people reams of biometric information, which would improve their healthcare throughout their lives. Young healthy people could use the sensors to track heart rate and calories burned, the kind of information that quantified selfers get today from wearable gadgets like the Fitbit. Later, the sensors would help with disease management, as they could be programmed to monitor particular organs or systems. Finally, they could enable independent living for the elderly by allowing doctors to keep watch over their patients remotely. "I would argue that it will eventually be seen as negligent not to have these sensors," Phelps said. "It's like driving without any gauges of your feedback systems."
The data generated by these implants would be provided to both the patient and the physician, Phelps said, and would allow both to see how lifestyle changes affect the patient's health over time, or how his or her body reacts to certain pharmaceuticals. This Big Data approach could enable a shift from reactive, symptom-based medicine to a preventative care model.
Such a medical system would be intrusive in two senses, Phelps admitted: Not only would doctors be physically cutting into a patient's body, they would also be exposing a great deal of the patient's biometric data. Yet Phelps believes that people will embrace the sensor-enabled lifestyle. "You'll get so used to having that feedback and information, you won't be able to imagine life without it," he said. "
Read more here
“We are going to have a lot of fun around the information management aspects of body worn video – let alone the more prosaic problem of how am I going to get this stuff from the field to a central repository with as few moving parts as possible."
Read more: http://www.itnews.com.au/News/387109,nsw-police-cio-prepares-for-copper-cam-data-deluge.aspx#ixzz33S4pamm6
"The NSW Government has announced a $4 million rollout of military-style "body cams" - lightweight, miniature video cameras clipped to uniforms, helmets or vehicles - to record evidence during incidents.
A spokeswoman for WA Police Commissioner Karl O'Callaghan said cameras were already used in WA by motorcycle patrol officers, who often worked alone, and in advance-traffic management vehicles. She said Mr O'Callaghan had considered body cameras being used more broadly by WA Police officers but hinted at a cost-benefit analysis before any final decision.
"The value of using body cams for more routine police work has to be weighed against the cost of maintaining a system for recording, storage and retrieval of thousands of gigabytes of data and the complexity of maintaining security protocols around access," she said."
Read more here
"US researchers have built a wirelessly powered pacemaker the size of a grain of rice and implanted it in a rabbit.
They were able to hold a metal plate a few centimetres above the rabbit's chest and use it to regulate the animal's heartbeat.
If such medical implants could be made to work in humans, it could lead to smaller devices that are safer to fit."
Read more here
Source of article in this academic paper here
"...What do you get when you mix Google Glass and EEG? That’s the question that the people at Ottawa-based Personal Neuro are on their way to answering. Given the buzz around how Google Glass can be used in healthcare, and our longstanding interest in brain-computer interface, we took the opportunity to speak with Personal Neuro’s CEO, Steve Denison, about his company and what they’re building."