Sounds a lot like William Gibson's idea of The Ugliest T-shirt in the World from his novel 'Zero History' [See: http://www.viceland.com/blogs/en/2010/09/03/william-gibson/2... ]. In it, a certain object triggers all cameras to stop recording normally, but its only implemented by a gentleman's agreement among security equipment manufacturers.
Apple's infrared 'camera kill switch' patent application hits a nerve
31–40 of 75 posts
Re: Apple's infrared 'camera kill switch' patent application hits a nerve
#32Absolutely the thought of this kind of "feature" used to actively cripple a democratic tool by big gov is chilling. i.e. "What if cops used it to mask abuses?"
But somehow it's the more banal applications I can imagine that would deliver a more real sense of oppression. Stores turning it on so that nobody could photograph their displays, meaning you couldn't take a picture with your mom if you were out shopping. Or buildings broadcasting the "don't film" signal such that photographers wouldn't be able to take pictures (i don't know why they like to do this, but this activity has been consistently upheld by courts). Lots of entrepreneurs have ideas that inevitably revolve around the utility of ubiquitous cameras which would be nullified by ubiquitous camera-canceling signals. And so on.
The chilling effect could become commonplace. And then in the event of a real crisis when you do want photos, people can't take them because of a stupid IR signal. What you do then? Oh crap! There's a guy getting beaten in front of me. Nobody move; let me run to Walgreens and get an IR filter!
Re: Apple's infrared 'camera kill switch' patent application hits a nerve
#33Re: Apple's infrared 'camera kill switch' patent application hits a nerve
#34If you want to see if your CCD picks up infrared light (it does), just point a remote control (from a tv) at it and press a couple of buttons.
A trick I learned about a few years ago.
Re: Apple's infrared 'camera kill switch' patent application hits a nerve
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
If 'blockable-by-IR' technology made it into the iPhone camera, it'd be a week before an IR filter exactly as you describe emerged as a Kickstarter project. It would probably be titled 'Decensored' and accompanied by a spoof of the famous 1984 Super Bowl ad. Or, failing that, a guy in a shed with some IR filters, a pair of scissors, some Pritt Stick, and a dream.
If I were Apple I would make the IR processing happen at hardware level (so no jailbreak) and I would make sure the hardware would stop working unless a physiological level of background IR light is picked up. That means that an IR filter physically placed in front of the objective would stop the secret signal but make the camera useless as well.
the hardware would stop working unless a physiological level of background IR light is picked up.
It would also make the camera useless in situations with low light or lit by e.g. fluorescent lights. I don't think that would fly.
Re: Apple's infrared 'camera kill switch' patent application hits a nerve
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
If 'blockable-by-IR' technology made it into the iPhone camera, it'd be a week before an IR filter exactly as you describe emerged as a Kickstarter project. It would probably be titled 'Decensored' and accompanied by a spoof of the famous 1984 Super Bowl ad. Or, failing that, a guy in a shed with some IR filters, a pair of scissors, some Pritt Stick, and a dream.
If I were Apple I would make the IR processing happen at hardware level (so no jailbreak) and I would make sure the hardware would stop working unless a physiological level of background IR light is picked up. That means that an IR filter physically placed in front of the objective would stop the secret signal but make the camera useless as well.
Even that could be circumvented:
---------IR Filter----------
------IR Light Ring-------
---------Camera----------
Besides which, when Apple adds features, they traditionally do so to benefit their users. I'd suggest that, even though they cite concert censorship as an example of use in the patent, that's probably a cover-all-bases addition; we're more likely to see an iPhone IR sensor that enhances the user experience rather than one that impedes it.
Re: Apple's infrared 'camera kill switch' patent application hits a nerve
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ugh. I hate it when any of my devices make sounds without me explicitly allowing it to, both in principle and on a practical level. (Dear Macbook, please shut the fuck up forever so I don't wake up my girlfriend at night when I boot you up.)
http://hints.macworld.com/article.php?story=2003122015465176...
Thanks!
It's kind of ridiculous that I have to dig through a Japanese-language-only website to find a Beta software to simply control the fact that my computer moos like a cow with intestinal distress every time it boots up.
Re: Apple's infrared 'camera kill switch' patent application hits a nerve
#38Absolutely the thought of this kind of "feature" used to actively cripple a democratic tool by big gov is chilling. i.e. "What if cops used it to mask abuses?" But somehow it's the more banal applications I can imagine that would deliver a more real sense of oppression. Stores turning it on so that nobody could photograph their displays, meaning you couldn't take a picture with your mom if you were out shopping. Or b…
Reality check: at least at first, this would likely only exist on the iPhone.
Re: Apple's infrared 'camera kill switch' patent application hits a nerve
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but all these examples are about technologies that introduce freedom , not restrictions . The thing about more freedom, is that you have the right, not the obligation, to exercise it. You can choose not to use the phones if you don't trust whoever's running the network. In contrast, the idea behind restrictions is that they are obligatory, not optional.
True, this is a good point. I don't know why any consumer would willingly purchase a device with such limitations.
Because that consumer has a different set of motives than you do.
Every piece of technology you own has limitations, you simply decided that that particular trade-off was worth it in that case. Would your mom care that the police can turn off her camera? Or would she be intrigued that when she goes to Cancun for vacation, she can opt to send you a photo-postcard with CANCUN: WISH YOU WERE HERE! automatically superimposed over the top?
Re: Apple's infrared 'camera kill switch' patent application hits a nerve
#40If you want to see if your CCD picks up infrared light (it does), just point a remote control (from a tv) at it and press a couple of buttons. A trick I learned about a few years ago.
It's a great trick for checking if your remote's batteries are dead, or whether the problem is something else.