1993-08-13 - Re: Spooking of neural nets and image recognition…

Header Data

From: nfe@scf.nmsu.edu
To: smb@research.att.com
Message Hash: 92760c67c69f31c9f20fd900a69497652ba267180db70c326daf8da5bd138554
Message ID: <9308131644.AA16850@NMSU.Edu>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1993-08-13 16:48:27 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 13 Aug 93 09:48:27 PDT

Raw message

From: nfe@scf.nmsu.edu
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 93 09:48:27 PDT
To: smb@research.att.com
Subject: Re: Spooking of neural nets and image recognition...
Message-ID: <9308131644.AA16850@NMSU.Edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


  As to serveilence cameras, is anyone familiar with methods of not getting
photographed in the first place? Some methods I've heard of:

1) spray paint or vasoline on the lens (kinda obvious :)

2) putting a pin or finnishing nail in it's coaxial cable (umbilical if you
  will) - how good of a job of scrabbling the image will this do?

3) mounting a "test pattern" in front of the lens.

4) placing a magnet on the side of the camera (does this work?)

5) timing the pan, and taking advantage of "dead areas" (areas not covered
  for brief periods). Anyone familiar with the general range/resolution
  ratio, and how wide an area will get covered?

  Any other methods?





Thread