Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Webcam homeland

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • corpsecurity
    replied
    On the mark comments

    Vetting process is right on the mark. This big cadre of observers most likely would get some sort of online training. Of course I don't have any direct knowledge of the proposed training or background checks. With the national security implications the screening process would have to be very strenuous. The number of observers required for this sort of undertaking would be massive.


    Originally posted by wilrobnson
    I personally like it...There's the added bonus that you never know what location you're watching, and it appears to have enough fail-safes (assuming it attracted a large enough number of users). I'd be interested in what type of vetting process they'd use.

    Leave a comment:


  • corpsecurity
    replied
    Trained Observers

    I share many of your concerns. The false alarm issue would be tough to overcome. Even with the various layers of verification, law enforcement would get tired of the goose chase. We have some seasoned CCTV people that have no choice but to dispatch a officer to verify what they have seen on our CCTV. We have good equipment. However, even with good overlapping coverage a officer has to verify.



    Originally posted by Crinsol
    Although this sounds like a good idea, I think there are some issues involved. If you think about it, everytime there is any type of alert, LEO's get thousands of leads-most worthless. (I have no idea what percentages, as I have never been an LEO.) Can you imagine how many false hits it would get? People make poor observers.

    Also, with intelligent video software, there is no need. By the time this thing would get off the ground, the next generation of video analysis software will be doing some amazing things.

    Leave a comment:


  • Crinsol
    replied
    Although this sounds like a good idea, I think there are some issues involved. If you think about it, everytime there is any type of alert, LEO's get thousands of leads-most worthless. (I have no idea what percentages, as I have never been an LEO.) Can you imagine how many false hits it would get? People make poor observers.

    Also, with intelligent video software, there is no need. By the time this thing would get off the ground, the next generation of video analysis software will be doing some amazing things.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lawson
    replied
    On the slideshow, one slide said spotters would be paid 8-10 an hour for their work. Later it says that the program will work because of the VOLUNTEERISM of its members.

    ...time to do some recalculating.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    I personally like it...There's the added bonus that you never know what location you're watching, and it appears to have enough fail-safes (assuming it attracted a large enough number of users). I'd be interested in what type of vetting process they'd use.

    Leave a comment:


  • corpsecurity
    started a topic Webcam homeland

    Webcam homeland

    This is a idea that I guess never did take off. It does appear that the main web site is still active. It is appealing on the surface. I would be interested in forum member input.



    http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/in...homeland_x.htm

    http://www.ushomeguard.org/

Leaderboard

Collapse
Working...
X