Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

U.S. cities focus on spy cameras

The striking images of London subway bombers captured by the city's extensive video surveillance system and a rising sense that similar attacks could happen in the U.S. are renewing interest in expanding police camera surveillance of America's public places.

In the aftermath of the London bombings, Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.), a liberal with a strongly pragmatic bent, called for installing more cameras to monitor passengers in the New York City subway system.

Washington Mayor Anthony Williams cited the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks to press for broader use of cameras, but his efforts to build a video surveillance system for downtown areas were curtailed by resistance from the D.C. City Council and some members of Congress.

Meanwhile, Chicago, which has the largest public video surveillance system in the country, is proceeding to expand its 2,000-camera network and is beginning to encourage businesses to provide the city live feeds from their surveillance cameras.

The London bombings showcased the capabilities of a digital video surveillance system. After the July 7 and July 21 attacks, authorities quickly produced relatively high-resolution images of the suspected bombers that benefited fast-moving investigations.

But to critics, whose reservations are based primarily on privacy concerns, the London attacks also highlighted the limitations of camera surveillance. London has one of the world's largest surveillance systems--the average person there is photographed by 300 cameras in the course of a day, according to a 1999 calculation by two British academics--yet that did not prevent terrorist bombings in the heart of the city.

"It's very difficult to make a case that the cameras are a deterrent to the most determined terrorists, those who intend to give up their life," said Brian Jenkins, a terrorism expert for RAND Corp.

But even with suicide bombers, camera surveillance can help with the hunt for the terrorist cells that provide them crucial logistical support. Clues captured on video might assist in rapidly tracing a bomber's movements, possibly putting authorities on the trail of a previously undiscovered cell.

How cameras can help

"How did they come in? How were they dressed? What were they carrying? What did they look like?" Jenkins said, citing details cameras can reveal.

Even before the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, technological advances were driving a rapid expansion in camera surveillance.

Digital cameras provide better-quality images. They are smaller and can be made less obvious. They cost less too, so authorities can buy more.

Cheaper computer capacity, more sophisticated software, fiber optic cable and wireless broadband combine to allow easier monitoring at remote locations, more extensive storage of images and rapid retrieval of crucial video images.

Looking to the future

Emerging technologies offer even greater promise, while advocates of camera surveillance argue that people have no legitimate expectation of privacy in a public place, civil libertarians raise concerns about possible abuses.

Critics contend that surveillance that can secretly store images of people creates a new potential for abuse, such as intimidation of political dissenters or blackmail of people caught stealing a kiss from the wrong person or entering a gay club.

"You have essentially imbued the police with Superman's powers," said Barry Steinhardt, director of the Technology & Liberty Program at the American Civil Liberties Union. "You have the problem that police officers who have access to this data inevitably abuse it."

At a minimum, there should be tight legal controls on camera systems monitoring the public, Steinhardt argues.

"We've got to put some chains on these surveillance monsters," he said.

Taken from a story by Mike Dorning for the Chicago Tribune.

More in Tux Machines

Debian-Based Distribution Updated With KDE 3.5 Forked Desktop

Q4OS 1.2 "Orion" is the new release that is re-based on Debian Jessie, focused on shipping its own desktop utilities and customizations, and designed to run on both old and new hardware. Read more

Atom Shell is now Electron

Atom Shell is now called Electron. You can learn more about Electron and what people are building with it at its new home electron.atom.io. Read more Also: C++ Daddy Bjarne Stroustrup outlines directions for v17

A Fedora 22 beta walk-through

The new Fedora, with its GNOME 3.16 interface, is an interesting, powerful Linux desktop. Read more Also: Web software center for Fedora Red Hat's Cross-Selling and Product Development Will Power Long-Term Growth Red Hat Updates Open Source Developer and Admin Tools

Unix and Personal Computers: Reinterpreting the Origins of Linux

So, to sum up: What Linus Torvalds, along with plenty of other hackers in the 1980s and early 1990s, wanted was a Unix-like operating system that was free to use on the affordable personal computers they owned. Access to source code was not the issue, because that was already available—through platforms such as Minix or, if they really had cash to shell out, by obtaining a source license for AT&T Unix. Therefore, the notion that early Linux programmers were motivated primarily by the ideology that software source code should be open because that is a better way to write it, or because it is simply the right thing to do, is false. Read more Also: Anti-Systemd People