@nictel said:
@nivash said:
PRISM might be cause for all kinds of concerns but for technical reasons Kinect 2 or any other camera is not really one of them. Why? Because of technical reasons. Just imagine the bandwidth of having to download and process hours worth of HD video from every Kinect 2 owner every day for it to make sense to analyse - it's not possible. Most of those Kinect 2 owners are not even going to have the bandwidth to upload it in the first place, and you can bet that they would notice several gigabytes worth of data being unloaded to some undisclosed location. As would their ISPs. And they would not like it one bit - bandwidth is expensive.
Then there's the fact that video is a very poor medium for mass surveillance because there's no easy way to process it. When dealing with text, all you need to do is a simple keyword search in the collected data. With audio you can do voice recognition but that will both take longer and require much heavier data sets, largely limiting you to targets that already caught your interest. But with video? You would pretty much have to put a guy there to look through all of the video in real time. It's simply far too complex for us to be anywhere near developing computer programs capable of scanning it quickly and accurately. Really, you might have to use a proper AI to get the type of information an intelligence agency is actually interested in.
If you really want to go the conspiracy route: the routers have specific software build in to them that reroutes the "surveillance data" straight to the NSA servers and ignores any upload limits set by the ISP. The upload speed is only limited by the hardware. Or the ISPs get paid for the bandwidth. From a technical point of view it is possible, of course that is with a lot of 'ifs'.
I seriously doubt most people even have the hardware requirements though. Assuming that the NSA actually wants it in HD - and they probably do, if they intend to be able to see anything on the video and be able to run image recognition - an h.264 compression leaves you with a file-size of 11 GB per hour. Even DVD quality requires about 4,4 GB per hour. That's a lot of data considering most sessions will likely last more than an hour. And that's assuming Microsoft has actually gone as far as to include compression software in the Xbox One capable of compressing it, and doing so without severely impacting console performance - quite a feat considering how CPU-heavy video compression is and how comparatively underpowered the X1 CPU (and the PS4 CPU, for that matter) are by conventional metrics, what with their low clock speeds.
Most people don't have a fiber connection. This means that the bottleneck will be the bandwidth of their DSL connections, even if you take away any "artifical" bottlenecks imposed by the ISP. Now, the ADSL2+ maximum bandwidth for uploads is a measly 2,5 Mbit/s under optimal conditions. That's 1,1 GB per hour. So for every hour of video a DSL connection would need 10 hours to upload, assuming perfect conditions, and while occupying the entire available bandwidth. Then there's obviously the fact that this speed can only be achieved if you basically have the exchange point as your neighbor, it deteriorates with the length of the copper wire. That's all the standard is capable of. Copper wires aren't exactly built for data traffic. That's why we invented fibers in the first place.
Let me put it this way: if you're on a DSL connection and the NSA want that video in HD, it will never get uploaded before your next session if you use your Kinect 2 more than 2,5 hours a day. It will create a backlog growing larger with every day until the NSA is getting video several months old.
The entire premise is simply insane.
Log in to comment