71–80 of 117 posts
"The radars work like finely tuned motion detectors, using radio waves to zero in on movements as slight as human breathing from a distance of more than 50 feet. They can detect whether anyone is inside of a house, where they are and whether they are moving."
My first reaction is that Anne Frank's diary would have been much shorter had this technology existed then.
The problem with that line of thinking is that you're really arguing that an entire technology is 'uninvented' because it could be used for evil. Suggesting that we ought to give up doppler radar entirely, with all its benefits like detecting victims in natural disasters, finding people trapped in fires, detecting criminal suspects, etc because it might be used by the next evil dictator is ridiculous. It's a complete…
Any examples of the display output of the radar device?
The posted pdf to the manual shows a little bit of the device. But here's another larger and more advanced device (linked in the article). It is doing the same but with an more elaborated output visualization. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bt3ecnqdUCo You can clearly see the output in the video.
As disturbing as the police use is, I am more disturbed by the possibility (inevitability?) of devices like these, and similar audio devices, becoming so cheap and readily available that even basic privacy from strangers while in your home becomes a thing of the past. It seems to me that before too long anyone could pick up audio and video devices for a couple hundred bucks that would allow them to see you in your ow…
Bouncing lasers off window panes to detect audio is a worrisome development. The counter-measure is to install dual pane windows equipped with acoustic transducers that vibrate the panes with white noise. For the device mentioned in the article, when the technology becomes available to consumers and/or is open-sourced, anyone will be able to count the occupants of any location near to them. The question again becomes…
So does using these new devices mean they will be using the flash bangs less? They should be able to see who all is inside and realize a child or person that is not the suspect?
My first reaction is that Anne Frank's diary would have been much shorter had this technology existed then.
The problem with that line of thinking is that you're really arguing that an entire technology is 'uninvented' because it could be used for evil. Suggesting that we ought to give up doppler radar entirely, with all its benefits like detecting victims in natural disasters, finding people trapped in fires, detecting criminal suspects, etc because it might be used by the next evil dictator is ridiculous. It's a complete…
That device is more useful for firefighters than for cops. Firefighters need to find people inside burning buildings. Looking for trapped people is one of the more dangerous jobs in firefighting. The fact that it's being sold more to cops than firefighters indicates that cops are getting too much money for tactical gear. The device is a fairly basic Doppler radar, although the sensitivity is impressive. Someone might…
This is for seizure of property without proof of a crime. They want it expanded because the money goes to them. If ever a law needed to be passed it is to revert the whole idea of civil seizure and the idea that any monies obtained by the police go to them, if at all money seized by police through tickets or any other means should go anywhere but them
As disturbing as the police use is, I am more disturbed by the possibility (inevitability?) of devices like these, and similar audio devices, becoming so cheap and readily available that even basic privacy from strangers while in your home becomes a thing of the past. It seems to me that before too long anyone could pick up audio and video devices for a couple hundred bucks that would allow them to see you in your ow…
During a typical 2nd Amendment[1] debate ("flame war", really) a common argument was raised about how various "big, modern weapons" required a different set of rules. Regardless of how one felt about people having "small" (i.e. traditional arms with which society has experience), surely it must be obvious that "big" (new, unknown) things like nerve gases or atomic bombs are so dangerous they must be kept from civilia…
I feel like information just sort of succumbs to entropy and it will always "try" to leak out of containment like some fleeting gas.
Is that due to human nature? Or due to the nature of information itself? Would other intelligent beings with a different psychology/ social structure also spread information like a wildfire?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you elaborate?
This is covered in the Range-R FAQ: http://www.range-r.com/FAQ/index.htm The RF bands they're using apparently don't go through metal so well.
Maybe in houses with wooden walls but not in buildings with thick brick or concrete steal enhanced walls. They even recommend to press the device against the wall/floor to get the best results. This means that the device can be used to see if somebody is behind a specific wall but not just somewhere in the house a couple of rooms away.