Took some pictures of our store display, and I got this shot of an Axis 211 looking balefull.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Explaining megapixel cameras and rectilinear lenses
Why megapixel cameras?
Manufacturers have been pushing megapixel cameras for a while now. And, let’s be honest, they look super awesome. But is there an actual business case there? When the bean counters come around, can we justify the added expense past “but, look how pretty it is!”?
Some manufacturers have been telling us that you can use megapixel cameras to replace standard cameras. Use one megapixel camera to do the work of six or eight standard cameras, goes the argument, and save money on the installation. How does that work, exactly?
You gotta use rectilinear lenses, that’s how.
Here's the thing. I don't know how big of an area you are trying to cover, but I'm going to hope for the best and assume it's an indoors area with bright, constant lighting, with the camera mounted about 12-15 feet high looking at an open area (no aisles or displays or desks!) about 35 feet by 35 feet square.
Assuming this is the case, or similar, you may be able to get away with a 2MP camera and a 180 degree rectilinear lens (NOT FISHEYE!!!) for your dPTZ (digital PTZ- remember this term for later) camera. Basically, what you are trying to do is get a VERY wide picture, and then blowing up portions of the picture later, like they do on CSI. Unfortunately, on CSI blowing up a picture actually makes the picture sharper, where in the real world blowing up a picture means a loss in detail. Therefore, you need a very sharp camera, a great lens, ideal 24 hour lighting, and wonderful storage and compression protocols. The actual software is pretty simple and your existing DVR could theoretically do it using the zoom feature (if your DVR could handle such detailed pictures without compressing the hell out of them, which it can't of course).
Now since most CCTV or security people are unaware of the very existence of rectilinear lenses (but YOU aren't, are you, because your good buddy the CameraMan linked to the definition earlier in this rant), so most people wanting to set up a dPTZ camera actually use a fish-eye lens (or buy a camera with a fisheye lens already installed) and use fancy, sophisticated software packages such as the ones made by Avigilon, which actually uses a bunch of very sophisticated programs working together to 1) zoom into a sector of the fisheye picture (ie the easy part) and 2) flattening it out (the hard part). This is very cool, except for the fact that it doesn't quite work the way you need it to work because, well, the picture is still distorted, and a distorted picture JUST may give a jury reasonable doubt.
So just buy a rectilinear lens. The best ones are from Theia. They've got a choice of CS mount, auto iris (the SY125A), a CS mount, manual iris (the SY125M), and a C mount, manual iris (the MY125M). Expensive? Sure. The lens alone is nearly the price of a megapixel, non D/N camera... but worth it, if it replaces six or seven cameras.
Now, the other thing you gotta think about is: storage. This camera is going to eat up storage and eat it up fast, and I assume you need to store video for a goodish while because I assume you are a medium to high risk site because otherwise you wouldn't be using so many expensive cameras and such an expensive NVR package. So. Learn about RAID arrays and buy Seagate Baracuda SV35.3 series drives by the case. Have fun, and kiss your budget goodbye.
At this point, assuming you are still reading, you may be wondering why the hell you should get this setup- wouldn't be easier to just get a freaking PTZ and be done with it? The answer is no. Now, a rectilinear lens plus a GOOD 2 megapixel camera plus a boatload of storage is the same or even a little more than a normal PTZ plus a keyboard plus an encoder BUT dPTZ has an enormous advantage over traditional PTZ, and that is: you never miss any of the action.
Remember, if you point the PTZ north, and someone gets stabbed to the south, you are basically screwed (a technical legal term), but with a dPTZ setup, you are looking at EVERYTHING ALL THE TIME.
We usually only use PTZ cameras to supplement fixed, traditional cameras, but even then it is usually not practical to have full coverage. Proper use of dPTZ cameras could make true, full coverage a reality.
dPTZ is an operational concept and a design philosophy, not a product in a cardboard box. It
requires creativity and true understanding of how cameras work and experience in physical security. There will always be a need for true surveillance video experts to explain and implement solutions such as dPTZ.
More about rectilinear lenses here.
Manufacturers have been pushing megapixel cameras for a while now. And, let’s be honest, they look super awesome. But is there an actual business case there? When the bean counters come around, can we justify the added expense past “but, look how pretty it is!”?
Some manufacturers have been telling us that you can use megapixel cameras to replace standard cameras. Use one megapixel camera to do the work of six or eight standard cameras, goes the argument, and save money on the installation. How does that work, exactly?
You gotta use rectilinear lenses, that’s how.
Here's the thing. I don't know how big of an area you are trying to cover, but I'm going to hope for the best and assume it's an indoors area with bright, constant lighting, with the camera mounted about 12-15 feet high looking at an open area (no aisles or displays or desks!) about 35 feet by 35 feet square.
Assuming this is the case, or similar, you may be able to get away with a 2MP camera and a 180 degree rectilinear lens (NOT FISHEYE!!!) for your dPTZ (digital PTZ- remember this term for later) camera. Basically, what you are trying to do is get a VERY wide picture, and then blowing up portions of the picture later, like they do on CSI. Unfortunately, on CSI blowing up a picture actually makes the picture sharper, where in the real world blowing up a picture means a loss in detail. Therefore, you need a very sharp camera, a great lens, ideal 24 hour lighting, and wonderful storage and compression protocols. The actual software is pretty simple and your existing DVR could theoretically do it using the zoom feature (if your DVR could handle such detailed pictures without compressing the hell out of them, which it can't of course).
Now since most CCTV or security people are unaware of the very existence of rectilinear lenses (but YOU aren't, are you, because your good buddy the CameraMan linked to the definition earlier in this rant), so most people wanting to set up a dPTZ camera actually use a fish-eye lens (or buy a camera with a fisheye lens already installed) and use fancy, sophisticated software packages such as the ones made by Avigilon, which actually uses a bunch of very sophisticated programs working together to 1) zoom into a sector of the fisheye picture (ie the easy part) and 2) flattening it out (the hard part). This is very cool, except for the fact that it doesn't quite work the way you need it to work because, well, the picture is still distorted, and a distorted picture JUST may give a jury reasonable doubt.
So just buy a rectilinear lens. The best ones are from Theia. They've got a choice of CS mount, auto iris (the SY125A), a CS mount, manual iris (the SY125M), and a C mount, manual iris (the MY125M). Expensive? Sure. The lens alone is nearly the price of a megapixel, non D/N camera... but worth it, if it replaces six or seven cameras.
Now, the other thing you gotta think about is: storage. This camera is going to eat up storage and eat it up fast, and I assume you need to store video for a goodish while because I assume you are a medium to high risk site because otherwise you wouldn't be using so many expensive cameras and such an expensive NVR package. So. Learn about RAID arrays and buy Seagate Baracuda SV35.3 series drives by the case. Have fun, and kiss your budget goodbye.
At this point, assuming you are still reading, you may be wondering why the hell you should get this setup- wouldn't be easier to just get a freaking PTZ and be done with it? The answer is no. Now, a rectilinear lens plus a GOOD 2 megapixel camera plus a boatload of storage is the same or even a little more than a normal PTZ plus a keyboard plus an encoder BUT dPTZ has an enormous advantage over traditional PTZ, and that is: you never miss any of the action.
Remember, if you point the PTZ north, and someone gets stabbed to the south, you are basically screwed (a technical legal term), but with a dPTZ setup, you are looking at EVERYTHING ALL THE TIME.
We usually only use PTZ cameras to supplement fixed, traditional cameras, but even then it is usually not practical to have full coverage. Proper use of dPTZ cameras could make true, full coverage a reality.
dPTZ is an operational concept and a design philosophy, not a product in a cardboard box. It
requires creativity and true understanding of how cameras work and experience in physical security. There will always be a need for true surveillance video experts to explain and implement solutions such as dPTZ.
More about rectilinear lenses here.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Understanding WDR
Understanding WDR Cameras from Peter Brissette on Vimeo.
Explains wide dynamic range cameras, and why you should get some.
Thursday, May 7, 2009
NBFAA to create Young Security Professionals group
With the cutoff age being 45. W. T. F?
IRVING, Texas and WASHINGTON—The National Burglar and Fire Alarm Association is concerned about the future of the industry. A recent survey it conducted found electronic life safety and security professionals between the ages of 25 and 45 are concerned as well, with respondents acknowledging the importance of education and participation. The results of the survey led the NBFAA to found a new industry group called Young Security Professionals, which will launch at this year's Electronic Security Expo in Baltimore... According to Security Partners vice president Kerry Egan, who is YSP Council vice chair, the first event, previously titled the NBFAA Young Security Professionals Reception, has been renamed to include some of the immediacy the group hopes to convey. "We just changed the name, so I might as well tell you. We changed it to YSP Launch Party! DMTB! [Don't Miss the Boat!]," said Egan, who was in Washington for the NBFAA's Day on Capital Hill.
Because we young people enjoy excalamation points. And acronyms. What with our texting messages and our innerwebs and so forth.
YSP Council chair Trevor McEnaney, who is general manager of Westchester, N.Y.-based Knight Security, believes the YSP is essential to the continued health of the security industry. "This is a much needed resource … Right now, as I see it, recruitment into the industry is nonexistent—or at least it's not marketed well—so we don't have the next round. We're not reaching out. No one really knows this is a viable career path," McEnaney, also in Washington, said. "Where are we going to find the next installation manager, the next installers, the next sales manager, the next salesman or operations manager? If we can get into the high school and college level, that will be pretty exciting. This is a really noble and exciting profession. You're protecting life and property."
This is, of course, very true. Much as I like to make fun of people, these guys have a point, which is that the fogey to whippersnapper ratio is out of whack. At least, I think that now. Let's see what I think in, say, 1,000 years from now when I'm the same age as the geezers are now.
Anyway, the website is here: www.alarm.org/ysp_register.html
I sent them my email address, we'll see what happens.
The Value of Making it Easy for Other Manufacturers to Work With You
The smartest blogger in our industry, John Honovich, talks about how manufacturers can be more open.
You know, I can buy software from, say, MacAfee and not worry about whether it'll work on my PC, because Microsoft is a known quantity and it's easy for MacAfee to make something that is so guaranteed to work I don't even have to think about whether it'll work or not. Hmmm
John Honovich keynote at Milestone MIPS 2009 from Fredrik Wallberg on Vimeo.
You know, I can buy software from, say, MacAfee and not worry about whether it'll work on my PC, because Microsoft is a known quantity and it's easy for MacAfee to make something that is so guaranteed to work I don't even have to think about whether it'll work or not. Hmmm
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Review: 2009 Video Surveillance Industry Guide
I just read the 2009 Video Surveillance Guide, written by John Honovitch.
Let me be frank. If your mortgage payments and grocery bills depend on your selling IPVS systems to people, you need to read this book, right now.
IP video surveillance is a teeny tiny little itty bitty market segment, and it is also the future of our industry. If you just do analog surveillance video, you are obsolete. Other companies will leave you in the dust and you will be forced to sell out or go under. I believe in 2 years over 51% of video installations will be IP based, because the price and capabilities of IP based video will blow analog out of the water.
For those of you who are already in IPVS- either as a distributor, manufacturer, dealer, or integrator, you need to know some specific things about our industry. You need to know who the major players are and which minor players are coming up from behind. You need to know about which side of the standards war to bet on. You need to know who will grow and who will fail and whose product to back.
Most importantly, you need to know how to market IPVS more effectively.
This book is not an introduction to IP video. John has already put out an introduction to IP video. This book is not for amateurs and trunk slammers. This book is for anyone who wants to be a player in IP video. Clearly written with so few technical terms the Marketing department can read and understand it. For those looking to break into IP video, John has written a free book called The Security Manager's Guide to Video Surveilance, which I also highly recomend.
Cost of this book is $40 for a single download, $100 for a 5 user license, and $200 for an unlimited license, through electronic distribution. My company spends more than that on name tags. John promises to update the book in March, in time for you to prep for ISC West. I don't think I'm going too far hyperbolic in calling this book "invaluable".
You need to know this information.
Let me be frank. If your mortgage payments and grocery bills depend on your selling IPVS systems to people, you need to read this book, right now.
IP video surveillance is a teeny tiny little itty bitty market segment, and it is also the future of our industry. If you just do analog surveillance video, you are obsolete. Other companies will leave you in the dust and you will be forced to sell out or go under. I believe in 2 years over 51% of video installations will be IP based, because the price and capabilities of IP based video will blow analog out of the water.
For those of you who are already in IPVS- either as a distributor, manufacturer, dealer, or integrator, you need to know some specific things about our industry. You need to know who the major players are and which minor players are coming up from behind. You need to know about which side of the standards war to bet on. You need to know who will grow and who will fail and whose product to back.
Most importantly, you need to know how to market IPVS more effectively.
This book is not an introduction to IP video. John has already put out an introduction to IP video. This book is not for amateurs and trunk slammers. This book is for anyone who wants to be a player in IP video. Clearly written with so few technical terms the Marketing department can read and understand it. For those looking to break into IP video, John has written a free book called The Security Manager's Guide to Video Surveilance, which I also highly recomend.
Cost of this book is $40 for a single download, $100 for a 5 user license, and $200 for an unlimited license, through electronic distribution. My company spends more than that on name tags. John promises to update the book in March, in time for you to prep for ISC West. I don't think I'm going too far hyperbolic in calling this book "invaluable".
You need to know this information.
Sunday, July 27, 2008
New Guy at Panasonic
From Security Sales & Integration:
DeFina oversaw a pretty big expansion of Panasonic's cctv division, including what basically was the phasing out of all analog products and the introduction of lots of great products. But while DeFina was terrific at the technology side, I don't know how much feeling he had for integrators, coming as he did from the land of broadcast video. Whereas Allain is an actual integrator, or at least, managed actual integrators. According to his LinkedIn page, he was the VP of Duos Technologies, GM at NetVersant, and VP at Adesta. So while he probably doens't have any dirty pants and scuffed boots in his closet or dirt under his fingernails, he managed people who directed people who supervised people who did have these things. Which can only be good news for us here in the trenches.
I'll keep an eye on Panasonic for you.
Panasonic announced that J.M. Allain will succeed Frank DeFina as president of Panasonic System Solutions Co. (PSSA). The company said DeFina recently retired. Allain most recently managed the operations of Duos Technologies. Allain has led deployments of integrated security systems in high-profile public and private institutions around the world. He has also established experience in a number of technology-driven industries including data communications and telecommunications.
DeFina oversaw a pretty big expansion of Panasonic's cctv division, including what basically was the phasing out of all analog products and the introduction of lots of great products. But while DeFina was terrific at the technology side, I don't know how much feeling he had for integrators, coming as he did from the land of broadcast video. Whereas Allain is an actual integrator, or at least, managed actual integrators. According to his LinkedIn page, he was the VP of Duos Technologies, GM at NetVersant, and VP at Adesta. So while he probably doens't have any dirty pants and scuffed boots in his closet or dirt under his fingernails, he managed people who directed people who supervised people who did have these things. Which can only be good news for us here in the trenches.
I'll keep an eye on Panasonic for you.
Friday, July 25, 2008
What's the matter with IP Video?
John Honovitch has a great post entitled Top Five IP Camera Problems. He identifies five reasons why people don't usually choose analog over IP (still):
IP Cameras are too Expensive Compared to Analog Cameras
Storage for Megapixel cameras is too expensive
Smart Cameras are still in their infancy
DVRs offer limited support
Lack of Integrator Training
IMHO, problems 2 and 4 are non-issues. Storage is dirt cheap and getting cheaper every day. I have a 4TB Drobo kit, for example, for $1,249.95. Very soon, we will not be worried about storage. As for DVRs offering limited support, well, that's what NVRs are for.
The price and limited capabilities of IP cameras are very troubling, but to me, the biggest challenge is the fact that integrators won't sell it because they are completely ignorant about the technology and unwilling to learn. It won't matter how good and cheap IP cameras get, if installers won't spec them, install them, or support them, then they just won't get used. End of story.
As soon as, say 60% of medium sized installers are confident enough to at least offer IP cameras as an option to their customers, we will see the widespread use of IP cameras. Not before.
That's why initiatives like Northern Video's IP Roadshow is so vital to the future of this industry. I attended the show in New York City and took the Northern Video Systems' IP Networks: An Introductory Course class. It was excellent, by the way, though I may have been the youngest person in the room. And that's fine- I think it's terrific that the people on the top are taking the time to check out this whole "internet camera thing" the kids are talking about.
IP Cameras are too Expensive Compared to Analog Cameras
Storage for Megapixel cameras is too expensive
Smart Cameras are still in their infancy
DVRs offer limited support
Lack of Integrator Training
IMHO, problems 2 and 4 are non-issues. Storage is dirt cheap and getting cheaper every day. I have a 4TB Drobo kit, for example, for $1,249.95. Very soon, we will not be worried about storage. As for DVRs offering limited support, well, that's what NVRs are for.
The price and limited capabilities of IP cameras are very troubling, but to me, the biggest challenge is the fact that integrators won't sell it because they are completely ignorant about the technology and unwilling to learn. It won't matter how good and cheap IP cameras get, if installers won't spec them, install them, or support them, then they just won't get used. End of story.
As soon as, say 60% of medium sized installers are confident enough to at least offer IP cameras as an option to their customers, we will see the widespread use of IP cameras. Not before.
That's why initiatives like Northern Video's IP Roadshow is so vital to the future of this industry. I attended the show in New York City and took the Northern Video Systems' IP Networks: An Introductory Course class. It was excellent, by the way, though I may have been the youngest person in the room. And that's fine- I think it's terrific that the people on the top are taking the time to check out this whole "internet camera thing" the kids are talking about.
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
IP Video Roadshow
I'm going. Are you? NYC next Wednesday. Free to Northern Video customers. Details here (pdf file).
IP is the future. In surveillance? Learn IP or get a new job.
IP is the future. In surveillance? Learn IP or get a new job.
Friday, July 4, 2008
Happy Birthday, America
Some pictures I took in Washington DC in the spring.
Now go out and celebrate the independence of your country by blowing up a small part of it. Don't hurt yourself, and if you do, post the story in the comments. I love "well, the way I ost my thumb was, it was the Fourth of July, and I'd been drinking" type stories.
Now go out and celebrate the independence of your country by blowing up a small part of it. Don't hurt yourself, and if you do, post the story in the comments. I love "well, the way I ost my thumb was, it was the Fourth of July, and I'd been drinking" type stories.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Where's the Bandwidth?
According to this story, New York City's much touted $450 million (that's $450,000,000 for you taxpayers keeping score at home) is not going to be completed any time soon. Why?
Some anonymous but obviously incredibly intelligent person wanted to install fancy, gee-whiz megapixel intelligent cameras in the subway system. It was to have auto-tracking, left-object detection, analytics, the whole nine. And while this person was writing up this job, he had a brilliant thought.
"Ya know, we could save a lot of money by using the existing fiber optic network already installed in the subway system. Whoopee! I'm a genius, just like Mommy always said!" Then he proceeded to split atoms with his mind while calculating pi to the millionth place. Because that's how he rolls.
The problem? The MTA had installed that fiber optics network in the 1980s.
Wow. Just... wow. Who woulda thunk that 20 year old cable made out of glass and running underground in a tunnel carrying the worlds busiest mass transit system with hundreds and hundreds of trains rumbling past at 45 or so miles an hour might have had problems? I would have run a speed test or something, but that's just me.
That's not all. Appearently, there are serious problems with the analytics.
Some anonymous but obviously incredibly intelligent person wanted to install fancy, gee-whiz megapixel intelligent cameras in the subway system. It was to have auto-tracking, left-object detection, analytics, the whole nine. And while this person was writing up this job, he had a brilliant thought.
"Ya know, we could save a lot of money by using the existing fiber optic network already installed in the subway system. Whoopee! I'm a genius, just like Mommy always said!" Then he proceeded to split atoms with his mind while calculating pi to the millionth place. Because that's how he rolls.
The problem? The MTA had installed that fiber optics network in the 1980s.
According to a board document, tests on the cable showed that it had “many broken fibers unsuitable to carry the high bandwidth required” to transmit large amounts of data, which hindered the surveillance camera project. The document did not say how long it would take to replace the cable.
Wow. Just... wow. Who woulda thunk that 20 year old cable made out of glass and running underground in a tunnel carrying the worlds busiest mass transit system with hundreds and hundreds of trains rumbling past at 45 or so miles an hour might have had problems? I would have run a speed test or something, but that's just me.
That's not all. Appearently, there are serious problems with the analytics.
One of the officials who spoke on Wednesday said those problems involved the cameras’ ability to spot an unattended bag or briefcase left on a train platform or other busy area and then alert law enforcement to the possible hazard. That capability had originally been promoted as a major feature of the system, but the official said it had failed in tests. “There are too many people, too many things moving around in the system,” the official said.
Well, dang. At least that's not the biggest scandal in American municipal surveillance systems. That prize surely goes to San Fransisco, with it's 0.01 fps cameras. Seriously, reading this article, you get the sense that a drunk monkey working for ADT set up the system: Bad wireless connections, terrible motion detection protocols, poorly sited cameras, framerates so low you'd get better results with an army of sketch artists using notepads and pencils standing on every corner, they don't have enough storage space to save what little data they do have (a staggering admission; hard drives are so cheap they're practically free), and San Francisco law doesn't allow the police to view the cameras live or to move the PTZs. Also, the cops say they came up $200,000 short and had to dip into their operating budget to cover maintainance.
There's video, too. Watch it and weep. At least they're megapixel cameras with some nice resolution, and clearly they didn't scimp on the lenses. Too bad whoever sited that camera was a moron, because it should be a little lower to see the entire crosswalk.
Seriously, people, I know figuring out the cabling requirements are the least fun part of the job, but if you screw that up, nothing is going to work, okay?
Monday, June 23, 2008
Show me your papers!
I was reading about this guy who flew with no ID.
Now, the rule is, if you want to fly, you have to show ID. You don't have to show ID to the TSA, but if you don't, you don't get to fly.
I guess this makes sense. This has the very salutary effect of weeding out the stupid terrorists who aren't smart enough to get a fake ID.
Above: Osama's most deadliest weapon.
Heaven forbid the terrorists ever get their filthy paws on Photoshop.
But what if you forget or lose your ID? Sat, you went to Vegas for a convention, and mysteriously and through no fault of your own the dealer inexplicably failed to stop dealing you cards and you had a big bunch of tequila and you are now missing your wallet and, also, your pants. So, according to the article, they'll give you the full business, which includes signing a piece of paper stating, under penalty of perjury, that you are who you say you are. They also give you a pat down and check your luggage- big hairy deal, they did that to me in the airport in Israel. The most interesting thing to me is that the TSA supervisor called a "service"- the DMV?- to answer personal questions. That's it. Sounds easier than getting a credit card. Not that you'd know it from the amount of whining in the story and the comments- you'd have thought they sent him to Gitmo.
Anyway. I guess my point is 80% of security is keeping the stupid would-be bad guys away from your target. This is important because 80% of bad guys are unnacountably stupid.
But, don't forget that the more attractive your target is, the more bad guys are going to want a piece of it. And 20% of them will be smart. And you can't play the laws of averages forever.
Now, the rule is, if you want to fly, you have to show ID. You don't have to show ID to the TSA, but if you don't, you don't get to fly.
I guess this makes sense. This has the very salutary effect of weeding out the stupid terrorists who aren't smart enough to get a fake ID.
Above: Osama's most deadliest weapon.
Heaven forbid the terrorists ever get their filthy paws on Photoshop.
But what if you forget or lose your ID? Sat, you went to Vegas for a convention, and mysteriously and through no fault of your own the dealer inexplicably failed to stop dealing you cards and you had a big bunch of tequila and you are now missing your wallet and, also, your pants. So, according to the article, they'll give you the full business, which includes signing a piece of paper stating, under penalty of perjury, that you are who you say you are. They also give you a pat down and check your luggage- big hairy deal, they did that to me in the airport in Israel. The most interesting thing to me is that the TSA supervisor called a "service"- the DMV?- to answer personal questions. That's it. Sounds easier than getting a credit card. Not that you'd know it from the amount of whining in the story and the comments- you'd have thought they sent him to Gitmo.
Anyway. I guess my point is 80% of security is keeping the stupid would-be bad guys away from your target. This is important because 80% of bad guys are unnacountably stupid.
But, don't forget that the more attractive your target is, the more bad guys are going to want a piece of it. And 20% of them will be smart. And you can't play the laws of averages forever.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Feel Good Security
According to this article, Delta Airlines will add registered traveler kiosks from Clear at LaGuardia and Kennedy airports, as well as LAX.
That's fine, although this really won't do anything to make us safer.
The Registered Traveler program is a scam, although in the spirit of fairness I should mention that I do not believe that Verified Identity Pass employees consciously realize this. If you've been in a US airport lately, you've probably seen them; the way the Clear program works is you give them your driver's license number, previous home addresses going back five years, SSN or alien registration number, and a valid credit card. They then run your info past... somebody, and then do... something, and, after taking your picture and biometric data (fingerprints and iris images, for what it's worth) and taking your picture and noting your two forms of federal ID, they give you futuristicy little card. All this for a hundred bucks a year, plus a $28 bribe to the TSA.
Now, anyone who's been stuck in security screening purgatory would gladly shell out $128 to get through it a little quicker. But that presuposes that there is some way to tell someone is going to be a terrorist before they actually, you know, terrorize somebody. And that doesn't work. Would they have caught Mohammed Atta with routine security screening, or even the kind of screening they do now? I doubt it. I've thought of a trillion ways to get past airport security just in the time I've spent on security lines. The only things that have made air travel safer since 9/11 is, as Schneier says, 1) locking cockpit doors and 2) the understanding of ordinary passengers that they may have to be prepared to fight back (which is what stopped Reid, after all).
Everything else is security theater. Clear isn't about making us safer. Clear is about making lines shorter.
That's fine, although this really won't do anything to make us safer.
The Registered Traveler program is a scam, although in the spirit of fairness I should mention that I do not believe that Verified Identity Pass employees consciously realize this. If you've been in a US airport lately, you've probably seen them; the way the Clear program works is you give them your driver's license number, previous home addresses going back five years, SSN or alien registration number, and a valid credit card. They then run your info past... somebody, and then do... something, and, after taking your picture and biometric data (fingerprints and iris images, for what it's worth) and taking your picture and noting your two forms of federal ID, they give you futuristicy little card. All this for a hundred bucks a year, plus a $28 bribe to the TSA.
Now, anyone who's been stuck in security screening purgatory would gladly shell out $128 to get through it a little quicker. But that presuposes that there is some way to tell someone is going to be a terrorist before they actually, you know, terrorize somebody. And that doesn't work. Would they have caught Mohammed Atta with routine security screening, or even the kind of screening they do now? I doubt it. I've thought of a trillion ways to get past airport security just in the time I've spent on security lines. The only things that have made air travel safer since 9/11 is, as Schneier says, 1) locking cockpit doors and 2) the understanding of ordinary passengers that they may have to be prepared to fight back (which is what stopped Reid, after all).
Everything else is security theater. Clear isn't about making us safer. Clear is about making lines shorter.
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Thursday, June 5, 2008
IP Video Market May or May Not Suck This Year: Report
Much has been written about this report from IMS Research. The very depressing synopsis says that
(T)he market has got off to a slower start in 2008 and it seems unlikely that the market will grow as fast this year as it did last year.
The main reason for the slow-down is the struggling US economy, which narrowly avoided entering a recession in the first quarter of the year, recording a modest increase of just 0.9%. Economists are divided as to whether a recession will take hold in the second quarter of the year. In this current climate of economic uncertainty, many companies are delaying capital expenditure and several major security projects have been put on hold. The retail industry, which is the largest spender on video surveillance equipment in the US, has been particularly hard hit. Soaring energy and food prices, together with the credit crunch, have curbed consumer spending. In the first quarter of 2008 consumer spending rose just 1%, the slowest since the second quarter of 2001, when the US was suffering its last recession. As a result, many retailers are scaling back new store expansion plans which will impact sales of video surveillance equipment.
First off, I'm not sure that a 1% rate of growth constitutes a recession, especially with our low unemployment rate (nearly the same as the economic boom years of 1998, when Internet money was going to make everyone a billionaire). This is slightly better than England's, much better than France's, and much better than Germany's. Of course, this is a CCTV blog, not an economic blog, so I may be wrong. And of course no one can deny the subprime mortgage meltdown has slowed new construction a little, although according to this they've been falling for the past two years so I guess the new housing market crisis isn't so much a result of irresponsible subprime mortgage lending practices and more the result of the housing market being flooded and the law of Supply and Demand really is true.
But that's not what this post is about. This post is about a press release Axis emailed me yesterday.
It reads:
The market research institute IMS Research announced today in a press release that the growth for network video products on the American market has slowed down. This affects the ongoing technology shift from analog to digital surveillance negatively. For a number of years, IMS has forecast that the market for installations of network video products has an annual global growth rate of approximately 40 percent. IMS expects slower growth in 2008 than in the preceding year as a consequence of the receding American economy. However, their estimation is that network video products will grow by at least 30 percent in the US. Axis' ambition, as announced previously, is to grow in pace with the market.
The interest for network video products has been considerable during spring and the inflow of new projects continued to be satisfactory, but the current financial turbulence has impacted new investments and expansion plans. This has now affected growth in the network video market. "We have seen signals from the market, e.g. from the retail trade in Europe but particularly in the US where major retail chains have chosen not to expand as planned. As approximately 25 percent of all video installations are performed within the segment, we have drawn the conclusion that the pace of the technology shift from analog to digital network video has slowed down", says Ray Mauritsson, President, Axis Communications.
Emphasis added for emphasis. Because I feel empathetic. Like, what they heck, guys?
I mean, 30% projected growth in an industry is not a reason for sackcloth and ashes, it's a reason for champagne and caviar and big stinky cigars.
At least Geoff Kohl of SIW is optimistic. He quotes a Panasonic rep as saying that "they are still experiencing year-over-year growth in the company's i-Pro IP video surveillance products." This is true. I'm hardly a big player in the IP sales market, and I can't even keep the WV-NS202A in e-stock- it flies off the cybershelves. That's because we have found all sorts of other markets for IP video. Vloggers, for example. Webcasting of all kinds, in fact. I have a customer who uses the WV-NS202A to save video of performances in his nighclubs. He likes the autotracking and the audio input. Another customer has a bunch of Axis 207Ws set up in his apartment. He feeds it to his website for entertainment purposes, ifyouknowwhatImeanandIthinkyoudo.
Anyway, my point is, relax. IP video isn't going anywhere, and the US economy is in semi-decent shape, too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
