Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: :### - Original poster, Let me clarify. (Score 1) 478

by Paul server guy (#46292529) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Anti-Camera Device For Use In a Small Bus?

OK, Obviously I wasn't clear enough...

And - I'm just as surprised as anyone that this hit the front page. (Seriously?! Wow - I've only done that once before! that's COOL!)

OK, No, the customers aren't being ass-hats, No, they aren't trying to sell pictures, no, there is not a sripper pole/orgy/druggie bus, and - No, they could care less about selfies, but, if you allow selfies, you have to accept all photos. There will be drinking. Lots of drinking...

What they don't want is pictures taken of them, nor of the other passengers riding along with them, in a - comprimising position. They are willing to lose their own cameras, because they prize their passengers privacy (NOTE PAX, NOT Customer people do NOT pay to ride, it is strictly by invitation only!) and they consider it rude to ask for phones. Not like it matters when you can hide a camera in a button, pen, whatever... The reason they /want/ to keep their own cameras is for no other reason than if some drunken ass-hat douch-bad, Beiber wanna-be decides to do something criminal to someone else on the bus. No more, no less. they not only have no intention of using the footage for anything else, they don't even plan to review it, unless there is a reported incident, and they'll probably just hand it to the cops.

People will be asked to not take pictures, but their may be some very famouse people riding along with some very attractive (non-professional) other passengers, and - well, people will be people. There is a "Guido" on board, but by then it's too late.

We have tried single source, high intensity (250W NIR and 125W IR LEDs) to the point where it was starting to become visible, and it works, only in the immediate area of the LED cluster. There are indeed mirrors all over the bus, and a white light (RGB, I know) LASER show device, and a fogger, but that won't be enough.

One (several) of the comments suggested strobing and varying the LEDs, We'll try that next. It seems to make sense. We also like the idea of selectively targeting the CCDs, but - well honestly, I have no clue how. I know in theory how, and that it does work in movie theaters, and on the occasional boat, but it's above my skill set. I'm that good, but, in other areas. (I'm good, not God.) I'm checking out a link that was posted.

They understand that they won't get every camera, but they obviously want as many as possible.

And for the losers who say "No, it can't be done, and you're an idiot for asking!" - well, let me quote Capt. Tagon "Never tell me what *you* can't do as if it's something *nobody* can do."

For the rest of you who are actually trying to help, one nerd to another, Thank you.

Comment: Re:You are on the right track just not quite there (Score 1) 478

by Paul server guy (#46292437) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Anti-Camera Device For Use In a Small Bus?

You've tried ultra bright IR but you really need flickering ultra-bright IR strobing at different rates and levels. A solid IR just sets things up for a better photo. Providing the camera didn't have an IR filter and did photograph IR a flickering IR would cause differing light needs within the exposure window which the camera would be unlikely to adapt to.

If you are able to link the timing of the flickering in with your own cameras you'd be able to shut it off momentarily (electronically) and grab the photo.

I agree. This may be what we are looking for. We did use a single high intensity source, and what it took to bloom the CCD was - extreme. I'll play with several high intensity IR LEDs, fluctuating and strobing and see what happens. Thank you.

Comment: Re:Not Possible (Score 1) 478

by Paul server guy (#46292413) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Anti-Camera Device For Use In a Small Bus?

Anti camera tech that blocks the taking of images, but allows the taking of images by certain cameras, but you can't be required to do or wear anything special/different. So, basically, we need a non-existent cloaking technology that we can see through with our own cameras.

Dude, it is clear that you work for complete fucking idiots. Unless you are also a complete fucking idiot, (which I think you might be since you posted this on Slashdot) you need to find another job with a better employer. What will you do when they demand that the limos be driven by Yetis and lead along the road by unicorns?

Actually not. For example, There are several theater protection systems that use active lasers, looking for CCD, but that's not real practical here.
Unless someone knows somethign I don't. Hence the reason I'm asking...

Comment: Re:Makes no sense. (Score 2) 478

by Paul server guy (#46292285) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Anti-Camera Device For Use In a Small Bus?

I think that's why they want to prevent pictures, to encourage this kind of behaviour.

Actually, yes. That is exactly why they want it. And yes, they only intend to use their own cameras if there is a criminal investication, and the disc cycles every four days, and the passengers know this.

+ - I need an anti-camera device for use in a small bus. 5

Submitted by Paul server guy
Paul server guy (1128251) writes "I am building a limousine bus, and the owners want to prevent occupants from using cameras on board. (but would like the cameras mounted on the bus to continue to operate. I think they would consider this optional.) They would also like to do it without having to wear any "Anti-paparazzi" clothing. (because they also want to protect the other guests on board.)
They would like to do this without destroying the cameras. (So no EMP generators please)
We've done some testing with high power IR, but that proved ineffective. Several active emitters would be fine.
Does anyone have any ideas that they are willing to share? We will pay for a functional device."

Comment: Re:I found this on another forum (Score 1) 367

At the end of the day, Windows is good for two things nowadays: Games and SolidWorks. ; )

Don't forget Adobe Creative suite. $ per operation, I would so rather run After Effects, or any of the high horsepower Creative suite under Windows. (And I would pay even more to get a Linux version.) the Apple hardware just plain costs too much!

Comment: Re:It would be fair... (Score 1) 475

by Paul server guy (#42701461) Attached to: Unlocking New Mobile Phones Becomes Illegal In the US Tomorrow

Nail meet head. Every mobile phone I've ever looked at on a carriers price has the full non-subsidized price listed, then the discounted "with contract" price. Nothing here sounds like it would stop anyone who had the cash from paying full price for a non-contract and therefore unlockable phone of any model.

The only problem with that is the Fracking carriers still charge the same price per month. I walk in, "buy" a phone for $50, then get charged $50 a month over a two year contract. (t-mo) If I walk in with a phone, I still pay $50 a month for the same service, and still have to get into a two contract! Why not take the shiny new phone?

Comment: Re:Sure I will pay.... (Score 1) 132

by Paul server guy (#42119861) Attached to: Hotel Keycard Lock Hack Gets Real In Texas

Not quite.
1. offer (Profit)
2. Burgle (Profit)
3. Raise prices (Profit)
4. Re-offer (Profit)
5. Profit (Re-Profit)

FTFY

Their seems to be profit in every layer, except for the customer (hotel) and the hotel guest, who is the one paying for it all in the end.
I wonder how much the guests are suing for? I would certainly hope they all had tens of thousands of family heirloom jewels and a new alienware in there.

Numeric stability is probably not all that important when you're guessing.

Working...