Camera Surveillance at HSL

[Short Tie]

So the thread on internet surveillance has forked. I am just making a new home for the discussion of cameras at HSL here.

To catch others up.....

There are people who are concerned about being under camera all the time at HSL, but the ones that participate in the physical location find their interaction more important than their concerns.

Some people don't care, and or think that the cameras are a good part. (I can't say I understand that point so I will let others defend it.)

Robert Bell made a tool, that some people liked and others objected to, that I can't seem to get to work to see what it does.

Let the discussion continue!

tieshort

[James Britt]

Short Tie wrote:
> So the thread on internet surveillance has forked. I am just making a
> new home for the discussion of cameras at HSL here.

What was to goal of having the camera in the first place?


Is it still accomplishing that goal?


Is that goal still worthwhile?


Is it interfering with other goals?




James


--

jamesbritt.com - Live curious
justthebestparts.com - Feed your head
neurogami.com - Hack your world

[Luis Montes]

As someone that spends most of the week in front of the camera, I can't say it's ever been a problem.

I'm assuming people that stalk the camera are just creepers into late 30s overweight dudes and not the NSA.  But either way, enjoy the show I guess.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HeatSync Labs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to heatsynclabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[Robert Bell]

http://tradica.com/hslblocky/

http://tradica.com/hslblocky/details.html

It's a sequence of imagemagic commands.

Don't run it in a web directory, add a PATH.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HeatSync Labs" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to heatsynclabs...@googlegroups.com.

[Bob Bushman]

Sweet, nice imagemagic-fu! Thanks for sharing!

> <mailto:heatsynclabs%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>.

[Zachary Giles]

Awesome! Good job RB!

--
Zach Giles
zgi...@gmail.com

[James Brooks]

I personally like the cameras.  I've used the cameras in the past when I want to see if there's someone in the lab who might be able to help me solve a particular problem I've run into.  It's also nice to get a gauge of how busy the lab is (especially if I'm planning on using the laser cutter.)  Back before I had card access, I'd use the cameras to see if there was someone there who might let me come in and play (this was really important on the weekends.)

I might be wrong on this, but I feel that they also give some sort of security protection.  The lab is very valuable, and the camera's make it seem more secure from theft.

I think they're worthwhile tools that we should keep.

[Jacob Rosenthal]

Original goal was to show that we were an active, safe, clean hackerspace that was open often even when we weren't open according to the calendar.

--

[Ryan Mcdermott]

That's exactly what they're there for, James.  I also use them for this purpose all the time.

I would be really sad if we didn't have cameras.  Probably sad enough to put new cameras up.

On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:08 PM, James Brooks <pyrob...@gmail.com> wrote:

--

[Will Bradley]

I don't think anyone's proposing getting rid of the cameras, and especially not getting rid of the technology that fulfills the original goal (showing that we're open.)

I think the real proposal is "should we replace the current camera feed with a censored one like Robert's?"

To James and Ryan's point, if you want to announce your presence you can sign up for our other method of surveillance, the MAC database, which puts your name right there in a list so people can see you're around even if you happen to be in the bathroom or something. This is opt-in, whereas the cameras are neither opt-in nor opt-out, which I think is a big difference.

[Will Bradley]

Oh and bringing a topic in from the last thread: I know a few people who have specifically mentioned avoiding something (coming in, sitting somewhere, having conversations, etc) because of the cameras. Some concerns are a bit overblown (I'm not aware of any likelihood of audio being recorded) while others are scarily real ("if ____ can see me right now, there's going to be trouble.")

I think Eric hit it on the head: the cameras have been around so long that anyone uncomfortable with them has simply dropped out of the community. Our orientation even says "no expectation of privacy" because that's the legal disclaimer for this kind of stuff. Overall, that's pretty shitty, and I'd be happy to achieve the basic goals ("hey we're here, come on down!") without the shitty "we live in public" effect.

[Jasper Nance]

What the hell did I just watch and why doesn't that happen more often at HSL?

----------------------------------------------
Jasper Nance - KE7PHI
Creative and Scientific Imagery
http://www.nebarnix.com/

[Will Bradley]

Watch the whole movie :)

Probably because the implications are terrifying and I prefer to think of you all as people with free will and human rights :P

[Will Bradley]

Oh and the only other people who are into this stuff are even more privacy-conscious than I am, I think. Dystopian cyberpunk futures are fun to play in but I'm not sure I like living in one...

[Robert Bell]

So?

On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 6:28 PM, Chad Stearns <chadst...@gmail.com> wrote:

I dont understand this thread. All the comments Ive read so far have either been totally supportive of our surveillance, or ambiguously spooky social commentary. There seems to be nothing to dispute, and thus, no discussion.

-ChadTech

On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 9:08:55 AM UTC-7, Short Tie wrote:

--

[Erik Wilson]

I think the Bell obfuscation would provide functionality for people who use the camera to look for activity at the lab but would allow some privacy for those concerned about it. I feel we should still keep a record of un-obfuscated footage for security reasons though. Discuss?

On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 6:28:26 PM UTC-7, Chad Stearns wrote:

I dont understand this thread. All the comments Ive read so far have either been totally supportive of our surveillance, or ambiguously spooky social commentary. There seems to be nothing to dispute, and thus, no discussion.

-ChadTech

On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 9:08:55 AM UTC-7, Short Tie wrote:

[Corey Renner]

I really like being able to see who's in the lab, but agree that it's surprising that we've given up so much privacy willingly.  What if the stream was pixelated as RB demonstrated, but if you login you get the unpixelated stream.  That way, it's tit-for-tat.  You can see who's in the lab, but only if the people in the lab know who's watching.

cheers,

c

Blog:

http://coreyrenner.tumblr.com/

 

YouTube Channel:

http://www.youtube.com/user/vandal968

On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 7:02 PM, Chad Stearns <chadst...@gmail.com> wrote:

iunno

[Zachary Giles]

"The Bell Obfuscation" TM


On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 9:02 PM, Chad Stearns <chadst...@gmail.com> wrote:
> iunno

>
>
> On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 6:38:56 PM UTC-7, Robert Bell wrote:
>>

--
Zach Giles
zgi...@gmail.com

[Eric Ose]

-Eric Ose
Robot Ambassador

[Will Bradley]

I also like Corey's compromise.

Chad: the spooky innuendo is ambiguous partly because it's scary and partly because if I got into details it would injure the privacy of the individuals involved. So when I'm making a vague statement like "a few people have said things like" please take that seriously so we don't have to drag potential victims into a public debate about exactly how victimized they feel.

[Eric Ose]

I'd like to see a discussion about the security and privacy implications only. It's not going to change the fact that any decisions on live video feeds would need a discussion of both sides.

I think the perception that this discussion is in any way about removing the cameras or changing the way they function is cutting off the actual privacy and security discussion. However the fact that people have to discard their privacy on this forum already kicks out those most interested in the discussion. Even if you use a pseudonym google will almost certainly know who you are anyway.

Basically I'm asking for people to please discuss the privacy and security perspectives. There are advantages and disadvantages for both.

-Eric Ose
Robot Ambassador

[Chad Stearns]

Im sorry, I regret posting that. My comment was detracting from this thread. I dont want to obstruct whats going on in here even, I feel this thread isnt purposeful (which I implied in my now deleted comment). With that said I dont think Will Bradley has a very good grasp on what I meant by 'ambiguously spooky political commentary', but Ill avoid arguing about it.

-ChadTech

[Chad Stearns]

here, even if I feel***

[Mike Bushroe]

I think I understand why some people have the vague, creepy feeling of big brother knowing too much from the publicly offered streaming video. I agree that if some government agency, private detective, or even insurance adjusters tied in to the feed and ran a 24/7 person recognition package (assume for the moment that some software exists that can either identify everyone by body parametrics only, or occasional facial recognition with body following in between), we come to the second point, what can they 'learn' about each of us?

Assuming a perfect system, they could know how much time you spend in the lab, and when. I am not sure how knowing my time spent in the lab could benefit anyone. but knowing the exact times could be used to exclude you from being somewhere else. That could remotely be useful to police, but more likely to exonerate you from suspicion in a crime because you were somewhere else, namely Heatsync. On the other hand, if you were filing a disability or workmen's comp claim, they might use that time in the lab to show that you were not that disabled.

They might also be able to tell what tools or equipment you used. Once again, I am not sure how this would help anyone, unless a lawsuit needed to prove that you have the skills to use a particular tool. But then again, we are all assumed to know how to use basic hand tools, and register those who are certified to use special power tools, so that information is at least potentially already out there.

If they had really good software, they could identify when you were using a tool unsafely, or at least flag specific images for human review. But that would more be a case of the other members of Heatsync being upset with you for the unsafe behavior, not any legal authority. I doubt that anything seen by the once every ten seconds cameras could find any evidence of antisocial behavior that could be used in child custody cases. For those who currently have kids living with them.

As for catching you in the act of a crime, few crimes inside the lab would be of concern to anyone outside the lab. All I can think of would be net based. I can't imagine anyone going to the lab to surf the web looking for child porn, and even if you were hacking into the Defense Department's covert operations main frame, there is no way that the web cams could tell, or in any way contribute to a conviction. If they could tell which of several people who have open laptops at any one time was the one actually hacking in, they wouldn't need the web cam. And if they can't narrow it down any further, then they would fail the reasonable doubt clause in any court case. Unless you were the only person in the whole lab while trying to hack the Defense Department. And once again I think that is a very low probability of occurrence in the lab.

The one thing that someone could conceivably do is prove lack of taste in clothing styles. But I think few members would care, and even fewer would be surprised, so that wouldn't help anyone else either.

The greatest use currently would be advertising companies trying to microfocus their advertising on a per-person basis. And while most of us can be recorded hourly, day by day and never trip a filter, if anything happens in your life that makes you stand out to some group or individual that has access to records of past data, then it is always scary how the least important details can be blown up, taken out of context, or just plain grossly miss-represented, but with photo imagery to back it up, it can seem far more credible than before when people accusing you of something, whether lawyers or malcontents, had nothing bad hot air and hand waving.

So basically I agree that as more and more cameras linked to the net watch us, more and more of our daily loves and activities can be tracked, recorded, and analyzed. But I don't see how the specific knowledge that anyone could gain from the cameras in Heatsync could be of any real value to anyone else, or a significant, credible threat to the people in the lab.

Mike

[Will Bradley]

Mike, is it possible to summarize this in perhaps 5-10 sentences? Many of your posts are long enough that they get skipped over even though I really want to hear what you have to say...

--

[Bob Bushman]

On 02/12/2014 08:33 PM, Mike Bushroe wrote:
>
> I agree that if some government agency, private detective, or even
> insurance adjusters tied in to the feed and ran a 24/7 person
> recognition package (assume for the moment that some software exists
> that can either identify everyone by body parametrics only, or
> occasional facial recognition with body following in between), we come
> to the second point, what can they 'learn' about each of us?
>

> ... But I don't see how the specific

> knowledge that anyone could gain from the cameras in Heatsync could be
> of any real value to anyone else, or a significant, credible threat to
> the people in the lab.

I think the cameras at the lab are worth it and a
minimal to nonexistent threat in a practical sense,
but you don't get a tinfoil hat collection like mine
without being able to construct theoretically credible
scenarios of authoritarian overreach. I think I can
do so with your hypothetical facial recognition
system.

The Snowden trove has shown that one of the methods
the NSA uses to provide legal cover for warrantless
metadata analysis for broad swaths of the US public
is the notion of being 3 hops(*) from a legitimate
target. If they can show that a person is within 3
hops of someone under reasonable suspicion, they
believe they are authorized to process that person's
metadata without a warrant.

Some of the people who frequent HSL also go to
Defcon. Good chance that gets you within 3 hops of a
reasonable suspect, if they can show you were at HSL
at the same time as a Defcon attendee.

Not saying I think this is happening, and especially
not through facial recognition using HSL's cams. And
I think there are easier ways to establish who was
at HSL when. This is just an example of how a
hypothetical face recognition system could be used
against HSL visitors.

* since the backlash arose they have said that they
are now voluntarily limiting the dragnet to 2 hops

[Mike Bushroe]

Ah, you know me too well!

Giving the general public, and unknown groups or individuals who may not mean us well, free access to additional information about us that they can watch, analyze, or even record forever is scary. But looking at the types of information that can be derived from Heatsync's webcams (see above long winded post) it is hard to find anything that is isn't either not very harmful to Heatsync members or highly unlikely that they would do in front of the cameras, or both. So while I agree that too much previously private information about each of us is being placed on the web and possibly analyzed or recorded or both, I don't think that the Heatsync webcams represent much of an addition to that risk.

One for keeping the webcams, and not bothering to pixelate the moving (people) parts.

Mike

(I think that is about the briefest I can be, and possibly have been!)

[James Britt]

Erik Wilson wrote:
>
> I think the Bell obfuscation would provide functionality for people who
> use the camera to look for activity at the lab but would allow some
> privacy for those concerned about it. I feel we should still keep a
> record of un-obfuscated footage for security reasons though. Discuss?

There's an interesting/weird social commentary aspect to that.

Also practical.


I like it.


James
--

jamesbritt.com - Live curious
justthebestparts.com - Feed your head
neurogami.com - Hack your world

[Short Tie]

Not all poeple who avoid public broadcasts have to do with avoiding big brother or government watchmen. There are real concerns about people who do bad things to other people. People who have to change their entire life because of someone else's negative actions. There is a valid concern for safety. Again, it is nice that most of us can only think about these things on a theortical level, and don't have to live with what can be crippling fear of what could be. Nice that most of us are so sheltered that our biggest concern is that some nameless faceless government body or group of spooks are possibly watching what you might be up to. You might see things differently if that 'ambigious spooky' thing had a name and a face and was really out to cause you personal harm.

Unfortunately, not everyone is excellent to each other, and there are valid concerns. Writing off those concerns because you don't see them as valid isn't helpful.

TieShort

[Erik Wilson]

Agreed, the purpose of Bellifying the feed isn't to hinder big brother as much as the casual observer. If the government is that interested most of us are likely carrying personal recording devices or they have other means of obtaining information. There have been people at heatsync who use aliases over stalking concerns though, and I don't really see the point of making member information more public than is necessary. May main concern is that there would be some expectation of privacy that isn't met (bad person gets access to raw feed or there is an exploited bug in the system), but something is probably better than nothing. 

[Will Bradley]

What about just locking down camera access to current members? Or doing the hybrid censored-uncensored approach advocated earlier? I know a number of able-bodied white men who have commented about how their wives are going to throw a fit if they notice them on a webcam, and that's probably the most benign privacy issue we can bring up in this thread. Shouldn't this be a "safe place" away from overly-prying eyes?

--

[Mike Bushroe]

@ Bob, it is clearly that I am not sufficiently paranoid of the NSA! I stand corrected


@ShortTie, sorry didn't mean to offend. I was just trying to put an upper bound on the vague and disquieting. Obviously, if someone already has a name (or more) a grudge from them against you and some idea what they are going to do to you about it,specific knowledge trumps guessing everything! I guess I thought that the chance of such aberrant persons being focused on a person at Heatsync seemed unlikely.

For a bully that wants to get even with you, watching you from home, seeing you have fun with others, and not being able to DO anything about would seem frustrating, but a trip down Main street to stop and 'glare'  through the windows would be more satisfying. But since they can't hurt you through the web camera and there is not much useful they can learn bout you there.

On the other hand, there are sick people out these who become stalkers who DO want very much to see your every waking moment, and then use that information to learn ever more of the details of you life so that they can be more invasive. That is why we have such things as restraining orders.A nd here the cameras are not equivalent to looking in the front windos.He or she would already have a restraining order, so they could not stalk close up, but could from the comfort of their own living room.

So yes, two ares there are two modes where more sepciific details which I didn't consider and makes it much worse than my original rough bounding of the risk, and they

 
On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 11:38:21 PM UTC-7, Short Tie wrote:

[Karl Kammerzell]

What if we put anti facial recognition makeup kits http://cvdazzle.com/#looks 

and Heatsync branded bandannas an balaclavas by the door? http://www.ufunk.net/en/techno/pixelhead/

--

[Prescott Ogden]

How about you have to log in to view the cameras, and while you're viewing, a giant image of your prying eye and/or face is projected on the wall about the molding.

[Luis Montes]

^THIS

Could be done with some simple WebRTC capture.  HSL gets an image, HSL sends an image.

[Prescott Ogden]

I was thinking a photo on record in members.hsl.org, since not all devices have webcams, or good ones, and then you have issues with abusive fake webcam images (or abusive real ones for that matter), there are also bandwidth concerns. The images on record should of course be animated, however.

[Prescott Ogden]

Let's also keep in mind that a lot of the value provided by the camera is to members of the community but not the organization. These people use live to see whether or not someone might let them in, or if there's a public event, or if the person who helped them with their project last week is there. This kind of information can be provided in ways that aren't the camera, however, like the MAC based list we have now, but that has the problem that few people register their devices because you have to know about it, and specifically log in/create an account to do so.

[Mike Bushroe]

Yes, after I got another one of those "FBI has determined that you have been making illegal software and/or media downloads, your computer is locked and you must send us money" browser viruses, and one of them had tapped my laptop's web cam to take a picture of me sitting in front of the laptop to add a personal touch and make you think the Feds have your name and photo to convict you with if you don't pay them the money. So now I keep a piece of paper folded over the webcam so that the next time the browser virus strikes, at least I'll know that I messed with them messing with me.

So putting my giant eyeball on the wall when I login to eyeball everyone through the web cams, mine will be boring.

[Luis Montes]

So how about, turning on the camera during open hours?

Other hours require logging in. Then we can at least see who's account is viewing the cameras even if we don't require a stream of their face.

If the camera is used to check if I'll open the door outside of public hours without emailing or twittering or messaging me or whatever then I'd just as soon not have it.

Get involved.  Meet people.  Communicate.  Cover open hours.

Just sitting there watching the cam, and hoping you can knock on the door at the right time is silly.

[Prescott Ogden]

That's a cool idea, but I don't think it does anything for the privacy concerns, since the cameras will still capture visitors during public hours, and members who come in off hours are explicitly registering their presence and real identity by swiping in.

[Prescott Ogden]

Oh and the only other people who are into this stuff are even more privacy-conscious than I am, I think. Dystopian cyberpunk futures are fun to play in but I'm not sure I like living in one...

I agree with this idea, but I think HSL is a place of play, and also a place to try out all these wacky ideas to see what happens, rather than being a typical conservative nonprofit. I can see it now: "Heatsync Lab's: Arizona's cyberpunk dystopian playground since 2009.

On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 5:59 PM, Will Bradley <bradle...@gmail.com> wrote:

Oh and the only other people who are into this stuff are even more privacy-conscious than I am, I think. Dystopian cyberpunk futures are fun to play in but I'm not sure I like living in one...

On Feb 12, 2014 5:55 PM, "Will Bradley" <bradle...@gmail.com> wrote:

Watch the whole movie :)

Probably because the implications are terrifying and I prefer to think of you all as people with free will and human rights :P

On Feb 12, 2014 5:00 PM, "Jasper Nance" <nebar...@gmail.com> wrote:

What the hell did I just watch and why doesn't that happen more often at HSL?

On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Will Bradley <bradle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Oh and bringing a topic in from the last thread: I know a few people who
> have specifically mentioned avoiding something (coming in, sitting
> somewhere, having conversations, etc) because of the cameras. Some concerns
> are a bit overblown (I'm not aware of any likelihood of audio being
> recorded) while others are scarily real ("if ____ can see me right now,
> there's going to be trouble.")
>
> I think Eric hit it on the head: the cameras have been around so long that
> anyone uncomfortable with them has simply dropped out of the community. Our
> orientation even says "no expectation of privacy" because that's the legal
> disclaimer for this kind of stuff. Overall, that's pretty shitty, and I'd be
> happy to achieve the basic goals ("hey we're here, come on down!") without
> the shitty "we live in public" effect.
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Will Bradley <bradle...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> I don't think anyone's proposing getting rid of the cameras, and
>> especially not getting rid of the technology that fulfills the original goal
>> (showing that we're open.)
>>
>> I think the real proposal is "should we replace the current camera feed
>> with a censored one like Robert's?"
>>
>> To James and Ryan's point, if you want to announce your presence you can
>> sign up for our other method of surveillance, the MAC database, which puts
>> your name right there in a list so people can see you're around even if you
>> happen to be in the bathroom or something. This is opt-in, whereas the
>> cameras are neither opt-in nor opt-out, which I think is a big difference.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:15 PM, Ryan Mcdermott <blh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> That's exactly what they're there for, James.  I also use them for this
>>> purpose all the time.
>>>
>>> I would be really sad if we didn't have cameras.  Probably sad enough to
>>> put new cameras up.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:08 PM, James Brooks <pyrob...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I personally like the cameras.  I've used the cameras in the past when I
>>>> want to see if there's someone in the lab who might be able to help me solve
>>>> a particular problem I've run into.  It's also nice to get a gauge of how
>>>> busy the lab is (especially if I'm planning on using the laser cutter.)
>>>> Back before I had card access, I'd use the cameras to see if there was
>>>> someone there who might let me come in and play (this was really important
>>>> on the weekends.)
>>>>
>>>> I might be wrong on this, but I feel that they also give some sort of
>>>> security protection.  The lab is very valuable, and the camera's make it
>>>> seem more secure from theft.
>>>>
>>>> I think they're worthwhile tools that we should keep.

>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 9:08:55 AM UTC-7, Short Tie wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> So the thread on internet surveillance has forked. I am just making a
>>>>> new home for the discussion of cameras at HSL here.
>>>>>
>>>>> To catch others up.....
>>>>>
>>>>> There are people who are concerned about being under camera all the
>>>>> time at HSL, but the ones that participate in the physical location find
>>>>> their interaction more important than their concerns.
>>>>>
>>>>> Some people don't care, and or think that the cameras are a good part.
>>>>> (I can't say I understand that point so I will let others defend it.)
>>>>>
>>>>> Robert Bell made a tool, that some people liked and others objected to,
>>>>> that I can't seem to get to work to see what it does.
>>>>>
>>>>> Let the discussion continue!
>>>>>
>>>>> tieshort
>>>>

>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "HeatSync Labs" group.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>>> an email to heatsynclabs...@googlegroups.com.
>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>>> "HeatSync Labs" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>>> email to heatsynclabs...@googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>
>>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "HeatSync Labs" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to heatsynclabs...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.



--

----------------------------------------------
Jasper Nance - KE7PHI
Creative and Scientific Imagery
http://www.nebarnix.com/

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HeatSync Labs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to heatsynclabs...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[Will Bradley]

I love this. Part of the idea behind this stuff was always a status screen in the lab, showing who's here, what we're working on, what skills we have, our smiling face, to help people connect with each other.

It'd be trivial and also a step in that direction to add a "these users / IPs are currently watching the webcam" dashboard. I've been interested in this also, solely because I wonder if there's some info there: how else would we know if a "nonexistent" IP coming from Northern Virginia is pulling down every single image? ;)

Does anyone object to censoring webcam images to all non-logged-in-and-oriented users, and providing a status screen of who is currently watching the cams?

[James Britt]

Luis Montes wrote:
> ^THIS

The problem with top-posting. :)


James

[Karl Kammerzell]

Is the robot eye from hackphx still in the window? Could we hook that up to scan back and forth when someone is watching?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HeatSync Labs" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to heatsynclabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Ryan Mcdermott]

I objected to that.

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 10:52 AM, James Britt <james...@gmail.com> wrote:

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HeatSync Labs" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to heatsynclabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Ryan Mcdermott]

I don't know why I made that past tense:

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to heatsynclabs...@googlegroups.com.

[Will Bradley]

Is this a top-posting joke, or an actual objection to something in the thread?

[Ryan Mcdermott]

>Does anyone object to censoring webcam images to all non-logged-in-and-oriented users, and providing a status screen of who is currently watching the cams?

I object to that.

[Will Bradley]

Ah, k.
By the way, paradoxically, I've been getting flak for asking for objections lately. As opposed to what I usually get flak for, doing things without asking. Kinda funny, I think. Sorry I don't have the energy to make this particular issue democratic, if it's important to the community one way or another I hope we can come to consensus (maybe the consensus is "keep things as they are?")

[Ryan Mcdermott]

There is nothing paradoxical about that.  Non-Will-Bradleys are not homogenous.

[Luis Montes]

It didn't take an HYH vote to put them up, it wont take one to change the way they work.  Do-ocracy.  

Isn't this like everything else?

If another doer wants to stop or undo it, they can put out a proposal to settle the conflict.

[Will Bradley]

As is, maybe I'll put up a fun alternative version of the cameras and let people vote with their clicks.

I'd go full-doocracy on people except that as the only one currently coding or administering our infrastructure I'm LITERALLY THE MAN and so I've gotta think sometimes, what do I wish others would do in these shoes?

Maybe I need to do a Hot Topics on the current and possible capabilities of this stuff...

[Will Bradley]

Oh ironically it didn't take a HYH vote because me putting up cameras (to very minor opposition) preceded me creating HYH (to vocal and bitter opposition). Conclusion: people hate democracy?

On Feb 13, 2014 11:25 AM, "Luis Montes" <mont...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Chad Stearns]

Ill also object to it.

-Chad

[Jasper Nance]

I object to the logging in but not to the "who is watching". Transparency FTW!

[Jasper Nance]

And I actually love the idea of providing Guy Fawkes masks at the door to anyone who wants to remain a secret 

[Erik Wilson]

I wish some of these objections had more substance... like, 'I object because I fear change', or 'I object because privacy is of no value to me and you are hindering my remote monitoring activities'... etc

Otherwise it just looks like joking around and I don't understand  :(

[Jasper Nance]

I feel that the cameras add value to our community and to future members of the community. If there is a valid reason to fear your life if someone sees you in a certain place, then either you need to leave the city or talk to the authorities. 

Otherwise, be calm knowing that someone is most likely already masturbating to your facebook profile image as well as you walking by on the sidewalk and that's just a matter of fact.

If there is a some huge special concern for privacy, like if Edward Snowden wants to show up, he can choose to obfuscate his appearance himself. 

What I'm trying to say is that overall the cameras do the community a huge service, both for current as well as potential members. People can see the diversity of people that we serve as well as the age differences and I think that is really really cool. If we block the cameras, do we also block photography in the space? Can we make the flickr also obfuscate faces? What value would it add to remove the human faces from our very human endeavor?  

[Blaine Bublitz]

First off, let me say that I skimmed almost everything in this thread because it sucks and most things said are too long/boring.

Secondly, I object because I work at hsl over 40 hours a week and have no problem with them. We all live on the Internet anyway and are posting in this public group. I embrace the cameras and tell people that might want to come down during the day to view them to see if I am there before coming down.

In summary, this thread sucks.

[Ryan Mcdermott]

I don't think the objection needs to be that complicated:

I object because I like the cameras.

I also like telling people to check the cameras out while I'm there, especially if they're far remote [like in another state].  Being able to say "check out the cameras, you can see me working on $foo" is fun.

Being able to tell people about the lab, and say "check out live.heatsynclabs.org" is *awesome*.  Having them greeted by odd blocky things feels like we feel like we've got something to hide.

We don't.  I totally agree with Jasper [at least what I think she's saying].  If you're afraid that some entity is stalking you on the heatsync labs webcams, and you are afraid of this, then you should contact the authorities immediately.

If you are going to be doing something that needs to be hidden (building your SO some secret birthday present in the machine shop or something), go ahead and put a postit note over the lens (don't get the adhesive on the glass, though, please!).

In general: the cameras are very useful to me.  I visit live.heatsynclabs.org FAR more than I visit www.

I also just ordered two Guy Fawkes masks.  They should be delivered to the lab in the next few days (gotta love that amazon prime! [Although I just realized, does this mean that THE NSA or possibly OBAMA is going to now know that we're a bunch of political dissenters?!?!])

[Will Bradley]

Thanks for elaborating on the objections, useful feedback!

Jasper I'd like to implement the "who's watching" but without encouraging people to login, or cross-correlating IPs with past logins, it'll just show IP addresses which is kinda boring...

[Jasper Nance]

Can you show a map with IP address physical locations plotted?

[Will Bradley]

Kinda, but it's only accurate to the region. For example HeatSync would supposedly be located near the airport (IO Datacenter) and my old work on Mill Ave would be located in Chandler.

We could do some creepy browser fingerprinting to further cross-correlate users, or just do a chat.meatspac.es style "hey, show your face!" webcam snapshot to encourage transparency...

[Jasper Nance]

I just asked because I thought it would be cool to see how many foreign hackers(paces) were tuning into ours :D

[Eric Ose]

As for me one nice part is I feel a little safer knowing people are hopefully less likely to falsely accuse me of things with the cameras in place and live. Not all of the privacy and security aspects of this fall on the side of them creating problems.

I'll be working on the new bathroom cam. One nice feature of this camera will be the backend code that automatically generates a time-lapse of the whiteboard. Also I will not be letting you know when it was installed. Since this is the same as the main webcams and people don't know about them if they walk in off the street.

And that was not serious for those who get confused easily.

-Eric Ose
Robot Ambassador

[Chad Stearns]

Yeah sure Erik. Thank you for asking.

0) It probably goes without saying, but Robert's technology is really cool.

1) For whatever its worth, I really like the camera, and what it does for the lab. 'What it does for the lab' being a) Its very practical for the many who want to know what is going on in the lab and who is there. The camera is greatly utilized for both of those. And b) In a broader sense, a camera in the lab makes anyone with an internet connection able to get a very intimate sense of what Heatsync is. This is quite different from many other hackerspace websites Ive been to, that can be very out of date, or enigmatic about their activities.

2) A pixelated camera, is an inferior technology with regards to (1)a and (1)b. Our camera facilitates transparency, and pixelation protects privacy, despite 'privacy' and 'transparency' being antonyms. A pixelated camera is just an incoherent way of doing things.

3) I generally prefer to err on the side of simplicity. If we are having a camera in the lab, I would prefer to just have a camera. I think of this in a few ways: a) With any technical baggage like log ins, or members database checking, the cameras have become fatally inconvenient to use. Simplicity generally implies functionality. And secondly, b) The more goofy hacks we add to stuff to the lab, the more maintaining those hacks becomes like a part time job, all the while not actually improving the efficacy of our work environment (the lab). I suppose someone is free to make the unending tech support of goofy hacks their part time job if they wish, but they are doing so as a representative of Heatsync, and its certainly not my hacker values they would be representative of.

-ChadTech

[Brett Warner]

I really like the cameras.

When I first heard about HeatSync it was on a website that looked straight out of the geocities era. I did some googling to find out if it was still around and was brought to a New Times article from 2011 about how HeatSync was looking for a new home. If it weren't for that next second tab containing the home page with a live feed I probably would have assumed this place as a distant memory. It isn't like there is a number I could have called.

After helping me find you guys I started to spend more and more time in the lab and my loving Fiance' became suspicious. She just couldn't understand where I could possibly be going to that would have me staying out into the late evenings and coming home with such a huge smile on my face. One day when she messaged me I sent her the live feed and stood in front of the camera waving. The cameras literally saved my relationship*, and every time I look up at them it brings a smile to my face.

If it matters I've also been working out of HeatSync for at least one day each week and enjoying the warm-fuzzy feeling of the tiny robotic eyes staring at me.

*Entire paragraph may be a gross exaggeration of reality, but I do seriously like the cameras.

[Will Bradley]

I, too, love our Panopticon overlords ;)

Thanks for the anecdotes, everyone. If anything I'll just take careful detailed notes next time someone privately tells me that the cameras (or whatever) freaks them out, so I can better represent those interests when questions like this arise. If your perspective wasn't represented here feel free to contact me privately.

Does this mean the community wants me to do even-more-potentially-invasive things with the data that's capable of being gathered at the lab? Or maybe I should present what's currently possible so you all know what you're getting into.

On one hand it's nice to see what kind of data you're leaking and how it can be correlated, on the other it's kinda doing Evil People's job for them :p

[Jasper Nance]

I... want to know more! always! Information isn't good or evil, its amoral. 

[James Britt]

Will Bradley wrote:
>
> Does this mean the community wants me to do
> even-more-potentially-invasive things with the data that's capable of
> being gathered at the lab?

No.



--

jamesbritt.com - Live curious
justthebestparts.com - Feed your head
neurogami.com - Hack your world

[Jacob Rosenthal]

Yes

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HeatSync Labs" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to heatsynclabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Ryan Rix]

This is what Ace Monster Toys does with their stream FWIW
http://acemonstertoys.org/webcam

On 12.02.2014 18:09, Corey Renner wrote:
> I really like being able to see who's in the lab, but agree that it's
> surprising that we've given up so much privacy willingly.  What if
> the stream was pixelated as RB demonstrated, but if you login you get
> the unpixelated stream.  That way, it's tit-for-tat.  You can see
> who's in the lab, but only if the people in the lab know who's
> watching.
>
> cheers,
> c
>
> Blog:
> http://coreyrenner.tumblr.com/ [2]
>  
> YouTube Channel:
> http://www.youtube.com/user/vandal968 [3]
>
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 7:02 PM, Chad Stearns <chadst...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> iunno
>>
>> On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 6:38:56 PM UTC-7, Robert Bell wrote:
>>
>> So?
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 6:28 PM, Chad Stearns <chadst...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> I dont understand this thread. All the comments Ive read so far have
>> either been totally supportive of our surveillance, or ambiguously
>> spooky social commentary. There seems to be nothing to dispute, and
>> thus, no discussion.
>>
>> -ChadTech
>>
>> On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 9:08:55 AM UTC-7, Short Tie wrote:
>>
>> So the thread on internet surveillance has forked. I am just making
>> a new home for the discussion of cameras at HSL here.
>>
>> To catch others up.....
>>
>> There are people who are concerned about being under camera all the
>> time at HSL, but the ones that participate in the physical location
>> find their interaction more important than their concerns.
>>
>> Some people don't care, and or think that the cameras are a good
>> part. (I can't say I understand that point so I will let others
>> defend it.)
>>
>> Robert Bell made a tool, that some people liked and others objected
>> to, that I can't seem to get to work to see what it does.
>>
>> Let the discussion continue!
>>
>> tieshort

>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups "HeatSync Labs" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,

>> send an email to heatsynclabs...@googlegroups.com.

>>
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out

>> [1].

>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "HeatSync Labs" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,

> send an email to heatsynclabs...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out [1].

>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "HeatSync Labs" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,

> send an email to heatsynclabs...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out [1].
>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1] https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out
> [2] http://coreyrenner.tumblr.com/
> [3] http://www.youtube.com/user/vandal968

--
--
Ryan Rix
http://rix.si

[David Huerta]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

NYC Resistor has a "CreepyCam" which monitors part of the space but is
only accessible to members who know the password. Luckily, Resistor
has it easy and doesn't have to constantly prove it hasn't died yet
like PHX tech communities have to. The cameras at HSL prove that HSL
is doing stuff, so I think they should stay.

I like the idea of limiting the camera coverage of the main space so a
visitor can "hide" in a part of the lab not under camera coverage if
they want that option, maybe with a line of tape on the floor
indicating where sousveillance begins and ends.

Given that our space literally had a stalker incident within the first
few meetings in 2009 (long-resolved long story) there is a
demonstrated historical usefulness for providing privacy-respecting
options and I'm really glad this discussion is happening.

david [.dh] huerta
davidhuerta.me

- -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.18 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
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=mmiq
- -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTADuHAAoJEDXXJr2uCfMooEkH/2o9NzPm+QNDLO9y47ptcB33
+bojgEOR2Qq73tySKQpW6F42ckZEU2fQ59hu35KWSm++P6u40CC908ocCLndCsqN
Q6jXq6AS8D7BatCYulMjtTKenFNIv4mPvHaUan/BeJd5WPYPV3nB7fmNKnH/0SvS
PVZF4wuKlxaKa2S8/3Vkjaj1sNZcN11IdwlTB3oBKneSs5ZmB5v5JiS7vSaHp83L
KAKb1HO0w04LAIXbriiDj+JOuRyIPCA/GbgK3WO6b794qHjkze/DQgbyfbhxSCOm
la3uDzj8e+wvOfqWa6PGF4RnZJ6iiByYyui+i2frclELjk+j/hXeFI3hl7IPM2s=
=YNHI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----