Police moving to headcams

Video surveillance cameras that eye supermarkets, car parks and train stations are something many people are used to by now.Continue reading the main story

They can record a crime scene or any interaction with the public, adding to the footage already produced by dashboard cameras in their cars.

On Wednesday a police chief in Salt Lake City, Utah, announced his intention to make wearable cameras mandatory at his police department.

But perhaps the development should not be such a surprise. 

In fact, wearable cameras have been used by officers for some time to document on-the-scene actions.

Supporters of the technology highlight the fact that they are made in such a way that officers cannot edit the footage, helping to ensure transparency.

However, there are concerns about privacy.

The Axon Flex devices the Utah chief talked about are made by US firm Taser, and are an upgrade of its earlier Axon Pro video system.

Continue reading the main story

“

Currently, there are 274 US law enforcement agencies using one or both versions. 

Some have equipped many officers with the cameras, others are just testing a few units.

All of our motor officers are using the most current camera on a daily basis, says Commander Scott Schubert from Pittsburgh Police Department.

Unlike an in-car video that stays positioned in front of the car, the helmet or glasses-mounted cameras go wherever the officer goes and records what the officer observes.

It's a great resource because it provides transparency and helps to ensure accountability, by the officers and the public, during police interaction.

It also provides valuable information that can assist with the successful prosecution of crimes, protect officers from false complaints, and assist with addressing valid complaints involving police conduct.

The main difference between the most recent version and its predecessor is the fact that the new one can clip onto spectacles.

Another one is comfort, says Captain Eric Gieseke from Burnsville Police Department

We are using both versions, started using them in 2010, and officers can wear the first ones as a headband or clip to their hats using a magnetic piece - but the latest version can be clipped onto their eyeglasses.

The cameras allow the officers to record the incidents they were involved with to essentially preserve the truth, and they give them a tool to support their actions, to demonstrate the many difficulties and challenges they encounter.

It's also been a great tool documenting evidence on crime scenes, exactly as it is when we get there.

Taser says law enforcement agencies are also testing its equipment in Australia and New Zealand.

Just like any other data acquired by police, members of the public can usually get access to the footage, if necessary, he adds.

UK forces are also testing similar technology.

Grampian Police Officers in Aberdeen have been using "body cameras" which attach to their helmets and vests since 2010.

The Metropolitan Police has also been trialling the equipment in Sutton in south-west London.

It says that in one incident the technology was used to convince a woman that her friend had not been pushed and shoved by officers by showing her the footage.

The Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) could not immediately say how many were being deployed across the country.

But Nick Pickles, director of the Big Brother Watch campaign group, has heard enough to be concerned.

We're already seeing traffic wardens, bailiffs and council officials using them in Britain and it's a sad indictment of authorities who see every member of the public as a suspect," he says.

What is the problem they are trying to solve? 

Are lots of police officers being assaulted and people getting off because there's no CCTV? 

Of course not, he says.

This is a one-sided tool. 

How would police officers react if members of the public routinely filmed them?"

Katia Moskvitch

Another Black Swan comes into view

Japan cracks seabed 'ice gas' in dramatic leap for global energy

The state-owned oil and gas company JOGMEC said an exploration ship had successfully drilled 300 metres below the seabed into deposits of methane hydrate, an ice-like solid that stores gas molecules but requires great skill to extract safely.

Methane hydrates available within Japan's territorial waters may well be able to supply the nation's natural gas needs for a century, said the company, adding that the waters under exploration also contain large reserves of rare earth metals.

Government officials said it was the world's first off-shore experiment of its kind, though Japan been working closely with the Canadians. The US and China have their own probes underway.

The US Geological Survey said methane hydrates offer an "immense carbon reservoir", twice all other known fossil fuels on earth (illustrated in pie chart below). 

However, it warned that the ecological impact is "very poorly understood".

The immediate discoveries in Japan's Eastern Tankai Trough are thought to hold 40 trillion cubic feet of methane, equal to eleven years gas imports. 

The company described the gas as "burnable ice", saying the trick is free it from a crystaline cage of water molecules by lowering the pressure. 

Tokyo hopes to bring the gas to market on a commercial scale within five years.

^{Projected distribution of methane hydrate in seas around Japan (Source: Jogmec)}

The breakthrough comes after 17 years of research and several hundred million dollars of investment. 

It could be the answer to Japan's prayers, ending its reliance on expensive imports of fuel to meet almost all energy needs.

The country's trade surplus has vanished since the government shut down all but two of its 54 nuclear reactors after the Fukushima disaster in 2011 and switched to other fuels, mostly liquefied natural gas (LNG).

^{Projected distribution of methane hydrate globally (Source: Jogmec)}

It imported a record 87m tonnes of LNG last year at roughly five times the cost of shale gas available to US chemical companies and key industries, putting Japanese firms at a huge disadvantage.

Japan's Institute of Energy Economics said methane hydrate could be the "game-changer" that restores Japan's flagging fortunes, acting as a catalyst for revival much like the shale revolution in the US.

The state oil group plans to drill as deep as 7,000 metres below the sea floor eventually, going out in seas with depth of up to 4,000 metres.

Environmentalists are deeply alarmed by new focus on ice gas, fearing that it will set off a fresh energy race in the fragile eco-systems of the oceans and may cause landslides on the seabed.

The risk of methane leakage into the atmosphere could be a major snag. The US Geological Survey says the gas has ten times the global warming impact of carbon dioxide.

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard

Another thought on GM

It is hard to trust GM (genetic modification) when it is in the grip of a few global giants

Don't believe the hype: 

.

GM is in the grip of a few firms that profit from selling the chemicals they engineer their seeds to resist

.

Thirty years ago, genetic engineers hoped new technology would revolutionise world farming and reduce or even eliminate the need for fertilisers and pesticides. 

.

It was a noble idea that deserved success.

.

But only promises came.

In the 1990s the public was told genetic modification would increase yields enough to feed the world. 

Now in an age of climate change we hear that GM can reduce 

Climate change emissions

Improve drought tolerance

Stimulate growth

And eliminate poverty.

Perhaps all these benefits to society will one day accrue, but my fear, after tens of billions of dollars of public and private research and development money have been spent by some of the world's most powerful companies, is that it has met a dead end.

Only a handful of GM food crops such as maize, soy and oilseed rape are grown widely and mostly in only a few countries.

Instead, the business is in the grip of a few global chemical companies who make their profits mostly from the sale of the chemicals they engineer their seeds to resist. 

After 30 years of public relations and backing by governments, the crops are still not trusted and food safety concerns will not go away.

Advocates say the science is settled after three trillion meals have produced little more than a few, possibly linked, allergic reactions. 

But critics respond that most of the foods are fed to animals, not humans.

And no clinical trial of any genetically modified crop has ever been published.

Instead, the toxicity trials are designed and conducted in semi-secret by the companies themselves.

While the regulators have concentrated on the crops' environmental effects. 

Any reports of serious illnesses are routinely batted away as "bad science".

I fear much of the problem of trust stems from the chemical company Monsanto, which from the start has been the world's largest producer, researcher and distributor of the crops. 

Its fierce use of patents.

Its heavy-handed lobbying of governments to deregulate markets. 

And its buying up of seed companies internationally have scared the public.

Raised concerns among small farmers the world over and denied the public the potential benefits.

In five years' time, it is possible someone will manage to engineer GM crops to "fix" carbon and eliminate the need for pesticides. 

If the crops can then be seen to be without risk and be for the benefit of the public rather than for sheer corporate profit.

Then even organic farmers should not oppose them.

But so far the promoters of the technology have relied on political bullying to give us promises rather than better products.

In fact, advances in conventional farming have at least matched and possibly exceeded anything achieved by GM.

At a time when we desperately need new ideas to grow more food, genetic modification offers,

More chemicals.

More expensive seeds.

And patents to protect corporates.

If the companies had really sought from the start to develop traits useful to people and farmers, rather than to create massive profits for themselves, it might now have become a technology to change the world.

As it is, I fear GM has proved beneficial for the few but held back the real debate on how to grow food without harming the environment or people.

John Vidal

Last laugh

A man asked a girl in a university library: 

"Do you mind if I sit beside you?”

 .

The girl replied with a loud voice: 

"I DON'T WANT TO SPEND THE NIGHT WITH YOU!"
.
All the students in the library started staring at the man; he was truly embarrassed.

 .

After a couple of minutes, the girl walked quietly to the man's table and said: 

"I study psychology and I know what a man is thinking. 

I guess you felt embarrassed, right?”

 .

The guy then responded with a loud voice: 

“£500 FOR ONE NIGHT? 

THAT'S TOO MUCH!”
.
All the people in the library looked at the girl in shock.

 .

The man whispered in her ears: 

"I study law and I know how to make someone feel guilty.”

Understanding engineers

 Understanding Engineers #1 - 

Woman vs. Bicycle 

Two engineering students were walking across campus when one said,

Where did you get such a great bike?"

The second engineer replied, Well, I was walking along yesterday minding my own business when a beautiful woman rode up on this bike. 

She threw the bike to the ground, took off all her clothes and said,

Take what you want.

The second engineer nodded approvingly,

Good choice; the clothes probably wouldn't have fit. 

Understanding Engineers #2 - 

Water in the Glass

To the optimist, the glass is half full.

To the pessimist, the glass is half empty.

To the engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

 Understanding Engineers #3 - 

Blind Golfers

A pastor, a doctor and an engineer were waiting one morning for a particularly slow group of golfers.

The engineer fumed, "What's with these guys?

We must have been waiting for 15 minutes!"

The doctor chimed in, "I don't know, but I've never seen such ineptitude!" 

The pastor said, "Hey, here comes the greens keeper. Let's have a word with him." 

Hi, George. Say, what's with that group ahead of us?

They're rather slow, aren't they?"

The greens keeper replied, "Oh, yes, that's a group of blind firefighters who lost their sight saving our clubhouse from a fire last year, so we always let them play for free anytime."

The group was silent for a moment.

The pastor said, "That's so sad. I think I will say a special prayer for them tonight."

The doctor said, "Good idea. 

And I'm going to contact my ophthalmologist buddy and see if there's anything he can do for them."

The engineer said, "Why can't these guys play at night?"

Understanding Engineers #4 - 

Coming out of Retirement  

There was an engineer who had an exceptional gift for fixing all things mechanical.

After serving his company loyally for over 30 years, he happily retired.

Several years later the company contacted him regarding a seemingly impossible problem they were having with one of their multi-million dollar machines. 

They had tried everything and everyone else to get the machine to work but to no avail.

In desperation, they called on the retired engineer who had solved so many of their problems in the past. 

The engineer reluctantly took the challenge. 

He spent a day studying the huge machine.

Finally, at the end of the day, he marked a small "x" in chalk on a particular component of the machine and said, "This is where your problem is." 

The part was replaced and the machine worked perfectly again.

The company received a bill for $50,000 from the engineer for his service. 

They demanded an itemized accounting of his charges.

The engineer responded briefly: One chalk mark $1; Knowing where to put it $49,999.

It was paid in full and the engineer retired again in peace.

Understanding Engineers #5 - 

Mechanical vs. Civil Engineers

What is the difference between Mechanical Engineers and Civil Engineers?

Mechanical Engineers build weapons. 

Civil Engineers build targets.

Understanding Engineers #6 - Human Anatomy  

Three engineering students were gathered together discussing the possible designers of the human body. 

One said, "It was a mechanical engineer.

Just look at all the joints."

Another said, "No, it was an electrical engineer. 

The nervous system has many thousands of electrical connections."

The last said, "Actually it was a civil engineer. 

Who else would run a toxic waste pipeline through a recreational area?"

Understanding Engineers #7 - If it Ain't Broke  

Normal people believe that if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Engineers believe that if it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features yet."

Scott Adams, The Dilbert Principle.

Understanding Engineers #8 - Wife vs. Mistress  

An architect, an artist and an engineer were discussing whether it was better to spend time with the wife or a mistress.

The architect said he enjoyed time with his wife, building a solid foundation for an enduring relationship.

The artist said he enjoyed time with his mistress, because of the passion and mystery he found there.

The engineer said, "I like both."

"Both?" they asked. Engineer: 

Yeah. If you have a wife and a mistress, they will each assume you are spending time with the other woman, and you can go to the lab and get some work done."

Understanding Engineers #9 - 

The Frog Princess  

An engineer was crossing a road one day when a frog called out to him and said, "If you kiss me, I'll turn into a beautiful princess."

He bent over, picked up the frog and put it in his pocket. 

The frog spoke up again and said, "If you kiss me and turn me back into a beautiful princess, I will stay with you for one week."

The engineer took the frog out of his pocket, smiled at it and returned it to the pocket.

The frog then cried out, "If you kiss me and turn me back into a princess, I'll stay with you and do ANYTHING you want." 

Again the engineer took the frog out, smiled at it and put it back into his pocket.

Finally, the frog asked, "What is the matter? 

I've told you I'm a beautiful princess, that I'll stay with you for a week and do anything you want. 

Why won't you kiss me?"

The engineer said, "Look I'm an engineer. 

I don't have time for a girlfriend, but a talking frog, now that's cool." 

Brave man

The Russian author has publicly stated what many Russians feel

Shishkin initially accepted the invitation to the major world book fair, but has now changed his mind, "not because 'my schedule doesn't permit it', but out of ethical considerations", he has written in a letter to the agency.

Russia's political development, and the events of last year in particular, have created a situation in the country that is absolutely unacceptable and demeaning for its people and its great culture, writes Shishkin. 

What is happening in my country makes me, as a Russian and a citizen of Russia, ashamed. 

By taking part in the book fair as part of the official delegation and taking advantage of the opportunities presented to me as a writer, 

I am simultaneously taking on the obligations of being a representative of a state whose policy I consider ruinous for the country and of an official system I reject.

He wrote that "a country where power has been seized by a corrupt, criminal regime, 

Where the state is a pyramid of thieves, 

Where elections have become farce, 

Where courts serve the authorities, not the law, 

Where there are political prisoners, 

Where state television has become a prostitute, 

Where packs of impostors pass insane laws that are returning everyone to the Middle Ages – 

Such a country cannot be my Russia".

Shishkin wants instead to represent  another Russia, 

My Russia, a country free of impostors, 

A country with a state structure that defends the right of the individual, 

Not the right to corruption 

A country with a free media 

Free elections,

And free people, he wrote in his letter.

Tracking you

Fingerprint scanners that work from 25 feet away.

Cell phones that can identify you by how you walk.

Radars that pick up your heartbeat from behind concrete walls.

Algorithms that can tell identical twins apart.

Eyebrows and earlobes that give you away.

A new generation of technologies is emerging that can identify you by your physiology.

And unlike the old crop of biometric systems, you don't need to be right up close to the 
scanner in order to be identified.

If they work as advertised, they may be able to identify you without you 
ever knowing you've been spotted.

Biometrics had a boom after 9/11.

Gobs of government money poured into face and iris recognition systems.

The Pentagon alone spent nearly $3 billion in five years, and the Defense Department 
was only one of many federal agencies funneling cash in the technologies.

Civil libertarians feared the worst as face-spotters were turned on crowds of citizens 
in the hopes of  catching a single crook.

But while the technologies proved helpful in verifying identities at entry 
points from Iraq to international airports, the hype -- or panic -- 
surrounding biometrics never quite panned out.

Even after all that investment, scanners still aren't particularly 
good at finding a particular face in the crowd.

For example; variable lighting conditions and angles, not to mention hats, 
continue to confound the systems.

Eventually, the biometrics market -- and the government enthusiasm for it -- cooled off.

The technological development has not.

Corporate and academic labs are continuing to find new ways to ID people with more 
accuracy, and from further away.

My, what noticeable ears you have. 

So noticeable in fact that researchers are exploring ways to detect the ears' 
features like they were fingerprints. 

In 2010, a group of British researchers used a process called "image ray transform" 
to shoot light rays at human ears, and then repeat an algorithm to draw an image 
of the tubular-shaped parts of the organ.

The curved edges around the rim of the ear is a characteristic -- and most obvious -- 
example.

Then, the researchers converted the images into a series of numbers marking the 
image as your own.

Finally, it's just a matter of a machine scanning your ears again, and matching 
it up to what's already stored in the system, which the researchers were able 
to do accurately 99.6 percent of the time.

In March of 2012, a pair of New Delhi scientists also tried scanning ears using 
Gabor filters -- a kind of digital image processor similar to human vision -- 
but were accurate to a mere 92 to 96.9 percent, according to a recent survey 
(pdf) of ear biometric research.

It may even be possible to develop ear-scanning in a way that makes 
it more reliable than fingerprints.

The reason is because your fingerprints can callous over when doing a lot of hard work.

But ears, by and large, don't change much over the course of a lifespan.

There's a debate around this, however, and fingerprinting has a much longer 
and established history behind it.

A big question is whether ear-scanning will work given different amounts of light, 
or when covered (even partially) by hair or jewelry.

But if ear-scanners get to the point of being practical, then they could 
possibly work alongside fingerprinting instead of replacing them.

Maybe in the future we'll see more extreme ear modification come 
along as a counter-measure.

Noah Shachtman and Robert Beckhusen.

Stone cold serial killers

They’re cuddly, adorable and the most reliably popular thing on the internet, but it turns out cats are also stone-cold serial killers.

A new study published by the journal Nature Communications has found that domestic cats slaughter billions of birds and small mammals in the US every year.

Scientists from the Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute and the US Fish and Wildlife Service compiled nationwide data from a number of local surveys and pilot studies, to conclude that cats are responsible for the deaths of up to 3.7bn birds and 20.7bn small mammals every 12 months, including mice, voles, rabbits and shrews.

The magnitude of wildlife mortality caused by cats that we report here far exceeds all prior estimates, the study, which set out to estimate the number of animals killed as the result of human activity, concluded.

It positioned felines as the probable top human-linked threat to wildlife in North America. 

More birds and mammals die at the paws of cats than are killed by cars, chemicals or collisions with man-made structures.

The researchers estimated that US cat-owners account for around 84 million cats, which each kill between four and 18 birds per year, and between eight and 21 small mammals. 

However, the death counts racked up by domestic cats pales in comparison with that of feral cats, which the report suggests slay up to 46 birds and 338 small mammals each, annually. 

There are thought to be 30-80million such cats living wild in the US.

During an August 2012 study by the University of Georgia, researchers attached miniature video cameras to 60 cats to monitor their daily routines; they found that the felines typically spent one third of every day killing small animals. 

One of the new report’s authors, Dr Peter Marra of the Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, told NPR that he and his colleagues were stunned by the scale of the slaughter. Cats hunting, he said, “could be causing some wildlife populations to decline in some areas.”

The study recommends “conservation and policy intervention” in order to reduce the environmental impact of the bloodthirsty pets. 

Animal welfare groups advocate so-called trap-neuter-return (TNR) programmes: instead of being euthanized, feral cats are vaccinated, neutered and returned to the streets unable to reproduce. 

But conservationists claim this can exacerbate the problem by encouraging cat-owners to abandon unwanted cats to the growing number of outdoor cat colonies. 

The study found that TNR programmes are “potentially harmful to wildlife populations” because they leave so many murderous felines in the wild.

New Zealand economist and environmentalist Gareth Morgan has proposed more drastic measures. 

On his website garethsworld.com/catstogo, Mr Morgan claims, “That little ball of fluff you own is a natural born killer.” 

He urges cat owners to neuter their pets and resist the temptation to add any more to their households. 

He has also called on his fellow New Zealanders to set cat traps across the country to catch stray felines so they can be put down.

Time Walker