Visual Privacy in the Collaborative Cyber-infrastructure Environment: A Case Study of Public Dance Performance in Physical and Cyber-Space

Ruzena Bajcsy and Lisa Wymore, UC Berkeley

Klara Nahrstedt, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign

Katherine Mezur, Mills College

 

Unblinking in Mobile Learning

Alice M. Agogino

J. Hsu, C. Daniels, C. Montgomery, P. Mackinney, and A. Gieringer

College of Engineering, UC Berkeley

 

I Spy With My Big Eye (pdf paper)

Nicole Ozer & Mark Schlosberg

ACLU

 

Steve Wicker, Commentator

EECS ~ Cornell University

---

 

Day 2 Unblinking session 2

__Lisa Wymore and Katherine Mezure: The Resonance Project__

Prof. Bacjsy could not attend

 

Choreographers, Dancers, Engineers.. working on a project about using tele-immersion projects in a performative context.

 

Reception

Visual tactile kinsethetic and proprioceptive fields found I intersecting virtual worlds

 

Tele-Immersion

• 3d Image Based Rendering
• Real Time Motion Quality (better for sustained slow movement)
• Tracking of the subject or an object
• Virtual Meeting points (streaming from their lab in U of Ill)

 

40 or 60 Clusters of cameras around people

You can wear glasses that reveal projections in 3D around you, you see depth

 

Image Capture

Reconstruction

Transmission

Display

 

Emphasizes the presence of the full body, not just upper half or two dimensions

 

Artistic Themes (black background)

• Ghosting or Doubling ‘you can be streamed to remote locations’
• Fragmentation
• Touch, can approximate touch or being felt? Or can represent it without feeling it?
• Co-Presence – how do we sense presence with real bodies and screen bodies

 

(can you see yourself? Where? Can you see what people do with you?)

 

Screens and Images used in performance

• Bi-located remote communication with a performer being projected onto the floor
• Replacing the dancer with a screen and an image on it. Plexiglass screen (can see though) with a projection on it. Is it live?
• Two-dimensional and Three-dimensional duets with both live and virtual performers. Focus on touch – interaction between virtual and real body. Resonance, reverie and presence

 

Dancers don’t ask about surveillance. Nobody questions that our bodies is going to be somewhere else… Why don’t we? What if all new media requires a deeper sense of truth, a contract or oath, require a designing of how we think? Tele-immersion: Haptic Ethics

 

Kinesthetic and visual presence and disappearance. Intimacy, distance and touch.

 

__Alice Agogino et al__

Funded by rico innovation. HP, others on mobile learning on a range of devices

 

Motivation: mobile tech as an education tool. Cybertracker gives people geographical, environmental, wildlife information. 5 year old boy caught a picture of a California condor (believed extinct)

 

Mobile learning infrastructure.

Educational digital library

How to provide support for good pedagogy

• Capturing
• Sharing
• Annotation
• Personal wellbeing w/ privacy and security made appropriate

 

1. students given simple machines. Things with moving parts.
2. Taught how to use a PDA to take a picture of the things with moving parts and annotate the image (an arrow to denote motion)
3. Could share photos and annotations with the whole class with each other back and the classroom

 

Privacy Policy for Children

Family Educ. Rts and Privacy Act

Images are private student document

Schools use internally have are responsible…

COPA laws for library of images

 

Prior Research on Mobile Learning: privacy and security

• hawk recommends network security
• ID of privacy as a trend for mbile device
• His –fear of privacy loss as a barrier for user in using mobile device for learning in a museum

 

when it was done, parents could replay experience. This was a good thing(?) Parents were concerned about the tracking of their children.

Recent concern –are children protected or threatened by tracking devices?

 

Research questions

• How do children capture annotate and share?
• Lots more but slides go too fast

 

Is that what really happens? The real story

She says they use it different from our plans. We have to observe them and how they use the technology. Interviewed educators after activity. Filmed it all and coded the images

 

Looking for:

• behavior re: capturing images
• re: images being captured
• What types of visual info
• What privacy and well being issues?

 

1. Children acquire consent only from adults, capture from other children
1. Do we want them to interact with strangers, does giving them cameras imply they will approach strangers?
2. What about the rights of how the image is used, in terms of the person photographing? Who owns it?
2. Consent doesn’t mean they are not uncomfortable
3. Who has right to annotate? Who can edit them afterwards? What are the parents’ rights?
4. Can we use them as a ‘learning opportunity’ or to punish rule breakers, do the children have any right to privacy of their pictures?
5. Who has the right to capture and manipulate the image of your child?
6. What part of the images do we give them, if they want to keep it?

 

__Nicole Ozer and Mark Schlosberg__

I Spy with my Big Eye

Video Surveillance- have twice prevented the city of Oakland not to install CCTV

Language that we used to convince them – cost benefit analysis worked, it wasn’t effective

 

Aftershocks of 9/11

• Increasing intersection of tech and civil liberties
• Expansion of intelligence powers
• Reduction in judicial congressional and public oversight of law enforcement
• Billions of dollars to DHS for development and deployment of new surveillance infrastructure

 

Video Surveillance Work at ACLU is only part of surveillance infrastructure

Well-funded, Sophisticated, Often surreptitious

Assault on privacy and free speech with tech as tool

 

“spy on you and me and other innocent americans” or even the guilty..

High Tech Public Visible Surveillance

Rapid Roll-Out

Lots of money from DHS to communities all over

Proven programs have budget slashed (community policing)

Spread into tiny towns non strategic

Texas Border Watch Test Site: enter name, no authentication. 7 cameras, expanding to 70. Paid for by 5million dollars in DHS money.

 

San Francisco as a case study.

July 30 2005 – Mayor at a conference in Chicago were interested in doing a pilot program of 2 cameras. Called ACLU. They went in made a huge presentation.

Newspaper announces they are going up in Western Addition

Strict protocol asserted, recordings erased after 7 hours, only used over violent crime, be cautiously.

3 months later – 6 more cameras, even though no evaluation of the two. Quotes from mayor is about people LIKING them, if they don’t have a problem it’s ok. Consider reducing controls.

 

About a year later – 33 cameras, funding for 22 more. 50 installed in public housing. Controls changes (7 days kept footage), more sophisticate cameras, remote control, wirelessly, maybe sound. Not just violent crime. Loitering! Garbage dumping!

 

One evidence of pushback. Board of supervisor passed an ordinance saying new cameras required a public process and an audit. But the city is trying to narrow the definition of what kind of cameras.

 

Kinds of cameras

Naked Cameras

• Not networked no coupled data surveillance
• Anonymity, not just political protest, what about people on the dancefloor, people like to be in a crowd
• Chilled just be being watched

 

More sophisticated cameras

• Higher res, wifi, audio, data mining (suspicious activity)
• Future face recognition, RFID, The Real ID Act. By 2008 all states have to have uniform driver’s license ** a national databes of digital photos, implications of face recognition. Could link to rfid readers on video surveillance

 

People don’t put the pieces together, don’t understand the data implications of that camera

 

Mark Schlosberg

Public survey

Lesson from San Francisco:

In the face of huge amounts of money, need for a political expedient response to crime rates.

Little consideration or debate in PUBLIC. Conversations with the mayor not effective and supervisors

Privacy concerns and implications.

 

CA right to Privacy

Public access

• California’s voter initiative right to privacy act: proliferation of government snooping
• California Public Records Act you can access info of govt records. Request video data for personal use.

Effectiveness

Most studies show it’s not effective.

Every talks about reducing violent crime. Evidence is not there. Especially in city centers and public spaces not much effect on violent crime.

There are surveys of offenders “violator surveys” how important was video survellance in affecting your choices, future behavior. Ranked it very low.

In assistance of apprehension and detection, no systematic evidence (one in Scotland 1999) of that. Only anecdotal.

 

Monetary trade-offs

Not a good bargain for police!

Public safety resources finite

Improve lighting works well

-uk Home Office survey of 13 studeies finds 20% reduction

Foot patrols more effective too

 

Surveyed 83 jurisdictions in CA, purposely excluded redlight cameras, parking lots etc.

Asked for lots of documents, locations, funding policy..

 

Results:

Increase in video surveillance – got docs from 70 agencies

Prior to 911 just a few out there

Now over half have some in place or in the pipeline

 

Scope of systems – it’s broad. Gave a few examples.

 

Not much debate about policy regulating cameras. Not a lot of policy to regulate it. Many big systems but no policy at all regulating use of cameras

 

Conclusion

Tech deployed too fast with little examination

Stop rolling them out

Cities that have them should reevaluate

 

Discussion: Steve Wicker

His research is to loot other fields. Self organizing networks of sensors

• Game theory
• Social network theory

 

Of interest to this group? Control Theory

Controllability and observability

 

Impact of surveillance on the way people behave (Agency)

Can you model and control behavior? Control theory is about doing this

 

Correlation of video with other information. *ubiquitous computing.

More than the sum of the data

Hard to intercept cellphones, but if you see someone hit send on a phone, you can add that information about TIME and it’s much easier.

 

Visual Privacy on the web. Virtual mediums being compromised

Things can be chopped, remixed, identified.

MPLS – voice over IP works. This means it’s traceable. All streaming technology works like this. It’s easily tapped or captured, eliminates all the benefits of packet switching.

 

IS801 – a ‘position determination entity’ can tell your phone to signal its location. Not in the hands of government. In the hands of local public safety workers. What policies in place?