Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Would You Wear a Camcorder on Your Ear?

gadgetwise.blogs.nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 36 posts

Re: Would You Wear a Camcorder on Your Ear?

#21

Post by icey »

motters wrote: post #8
patio11 wrote: post #6

A few iterations on this and it would be excellent for law enforcement. (See "Halting State" for a future Britain in which cops are required to wear them.) It is also one of the easiest protections against police abuse of authority which you can actually sell to good cops.

Small helmet or hat mounted cameras have been available to the police in the UK for the last few years. I don't think they're ubiquitous yet, but it seems like only a matter of time before they are. A ubiquitous sousveillance situation seems like the best possible outcome for all concerned, and we seem to be already some way along that trajectory.

"Sousveillance": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sousveillance (it looked like an interesting word so I had to look it up)

Re: Would You Wear a Camcorder on Your Ear?

#22

Post by sasmith »

I wish I had been. I heard a car crash last night, and when I got downstairs, it became clear that someone had hit a parked car (hard) and was fleeing the scene. I actively tried to catch the license plate, but could only pick up the first three characters, and even those I'm not confident of. Not sure if 15fps on 480x320 would have helped (especially in bad lighting), but I'd love to have that footage and find out.

Re: Would You Wear a Camcorder on Your Ear?

#23

Post by smackay »

hugh3 wrote: post #2

A neat device, for which I personally have no use. The idea of wearing it around all the time just in case you happen to see something interesting seems pretty terrible... how often do you see something so interesting that you really want everybody to see it in a grainy 15fps video? Folks who might like it: 1. Model rocket types (or remote-controlled planes, helicopters etc) 2. Perverts

4. Birders. Being able to positively identify that Acrocephalus warbler, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrocephalus, that just disappeared into that bush destined never to return would be a blessing to just about everyone I know. Digital cameras are already fulfilling this role to a certain extent, but being able to record everything just in case you need to go back and double-check would be an enormous benefit.

Having said that, "the one that got away" is a big part of the culture and being able to definitely identify everything (as least much as it is possible with the technology) would probably end up diminishing the experience and generally take the fun out of it.

Re: Would You Wear a Camcorder on Your Ear?

#24

Post by elai »

splat wrote: post #15
yummyfajitas wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be excellent for law enforcement, provided cops are punished for dead time, and suspects always have access to the records. I suspect the cops will be strongly against it.

I think many cops are in favor of it. If someone you give a ticket to files a bogus complaint against you, you can turn to the video to exonerate yourself. Nevertheless, there is a substantial fraction of police who are strongly against it. Here's an interview by Radley Balko with three law enforcement officials who are opposed to video recording of cops: http://reason.com/archives/2010/08/09/police-officers-dont-c..…

If done right, they no longer have to go to ticket disputes!

Re: Would You Wear a Camcorder on Your Ear?

#25

Post by patio11 »

splat wrote: post #15
yummyfajitas wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be excellent for law enforcement, provided cops are punished for dead time, and suspects always have access to the records. I suspect the cops will be strongly against it.

I think many cops are in favor of it. If someone you give a ticket to files a bogus complaint against you, you can turn to the video to exonerate yourself. Nevertheless, there is a substantial fraction of police who are strongly against it. Here's an interview by Radley Balko with three law enforcement officials who are opposed to video recording of cops: http://reason.com/archives/2010/08/09/police-officers-dont-c..…

I think you can sell it to the cops as something which is in their control and which can't be used to witchhunt them. It will not actually be in their control and will certainly cost some cops their jobs, but as long as it feels like it is in their control, I think you can make that sale. (Compare: wiretapping versus ubiquitous phone records made of all employees at BigCorp.)

Re: Would You Wear a Camcorder on Your Ear?

#26

Post by awakeasleep »

I've been thinking about this concept ever since microsoft debuted a pendant 'life recorder' a few years ago.

I don't know if you've ever read 'The Stars, My Destination", but it's an old science fiction book based on the idea of a change in our abilities that completely destabilizes the current manner of human life.

I believe ubiquitous recording would be an equivalent change. It may be my warped perspective, but I believe an incredible amount of our society is build upon lies and untruths. This sort of technology will create an enormous, disruptive amount of accountability to every single person affected by it.

Re: Would You Wear a Camcorder on Your Ear?

#30

Post by AngryParsley »

hugh3 wrote: post #2

A neat device, for which I personally have no use. The idea of wearing it around all the time just in case you happen to see something interesting seems pretty terrible... how often do you see something so interesting that you really want everybody to see it in a grainy 15fps video? Folks who might like it: 1. Model rocket types (or remote-controlled planes, helicopters etc) 2. Perverts

I've heard of one lifelogger who has video of the first time he met his wife. He didn't know it would be an important occasion until much later.

I don't understand complaints about resolution/storage/etc. Those will only get better with time. So instead of objecting to the idea itself you're basically saying, "I'm going to start using this 18 months after people who think it's worthwhile now."

Post reply on HN