Philip,
DHS is not DARPA. DARPA has a much larger research budget than 100million bucks pa. I could tell you how much but then I'd have to treat you to a truly extraordinary rendition...

That sounds like a performance of some sort:

And now, let's all enjoy the symphony's extraordinary rendition of The Flight of the Valkyries

;)

Sounds like someone has been reading 'Footfall'.

Problem is, Footfall was fiction and the Dreaming Fithp was a literary device.

Worth an experiment tho, I guess.

I've already got one ordinary rendition of The Flight of the Valkyries, I don't need an extra one.

Seriously, there is a website out there which purports to do face matching, providing pictures of celebrities who "look like you" if you upload your image. As one people were last linking it, the comparisons were based more on camera angle than detailed feature analysis. I'd hate to be kept off an airplane, let alone have the wrong person let onto an airplane, on that basis.

It turns out that the article above was extremely wrong in even more aspects.

The amount was $7 million, not ten.

The $7 million was one percent of their research budget, not ten percent.

The money spent wasn't on these "blue sky" projects, but was for other, less speculatve, high-value projects.

They didn't actually spend much on Sigma - what happened was that Sigma members got free admission to a DARPA meeting (that cost a couple of thousand each if they'd been paying attendees), plus expenses.

As far as I am concerned they can do whatever damnfool thing they like in their own homeland, just as long as (1) they don't expect me to visit any more, and (2) they don't in fact try it out in someone else's.

I rather fear Philip's title is right, however, and if anything actually comes of it at all, extraterritorial tendencies will get the better of them, particularly given the subtley and temperence of views of the group that has been recruited.

As far as I am concerned they can do whatever damnfool thing they like in their own homeland, just as long as (1) they don't expect me to visit any more, and (2) they don't in fact try it out in someone else's.

Whoa, there! The homeland in question is MINE! Whiskey, tango, foxtrot, interrogative, over!

As an aside, anybody who claims to be in law enforcement or public safety and who takes inspiration from any of the CSI series is, at minimum, an idiot. Real-time fingerprint matching rarely works as advertised. Actually, about the only real-world advantage to LiveScan is that people don't need to wash ink off their hands afterwards.

Primer-residue GSR can only conclusively tell that someone was in the presence of a firearm being discharged at some point. TMDT GSR can only tell that a person held a metal object, and is badly prone to false negatives.

A shoeprint might be nice, or it might tell me that "yeah, someone walked past here since the last precipitation, and he was a twelve wide. Oh, crap, that's my shoeprint."

AND NON-SWORN CRIME LAB STAFF DO NOT CARRY GUNS AND DO NOT INTERVIEW PEOPLE!

And I've never been involved in anything that turned on the ability to digitally enhance photos. What photos typically do is allow a jury to see what the officer saw and prevent the defense from claiming that the bruises weren't all that bad, or that knucklehead only beat his wife with a little stick instead of a big one, or that there was too a license plate on the back bumper.

And I pay taxes for this nonsense.

You have my sympathy, Sunfish. But not that much, since my point is the US has the mechanisms to protect itself from this sort of idiocy, whereas damnfool ideas from over there tend to end up being used over here. Total Information Awareness, for example.

This will amuse you. And this. And this.

The first link amused me. The second one was predictable. The third, well...all I can say is that ACPO are apparently all oxygen thieves and empty holsters. I had to almost wrap my head in duct tape as I read it.

The primary aims claimed for the system are tackling untaxed and uninsured vehicles, stolen cars and the considerably broader one of 'denying criminals the use of the roads.

HOW is ANPR going to accomplish that? Are the cameras going to pull the stolen cars over and bring the drivers out at gunpoint? (How do unarmed cops do felony stops anyway?) Are the cameras going to recognize the expired insurance card in the glovebox and cause the engine to quit? Are the cameras going to be able to see four pounds of cocaine and a dead hooker in the trunk?

All of the above can be done by traffic cops, who would already be on the payroll except the money's been spent on office staff, PCSOs, and the hate crimes squad. Pull a car over, and any experienced cop should generally be able to tell the difference between "Just slow it down next time, okay? Good night." and someone worthy of more attention. All it really takes is common sense and a properly-calibrated bullshit detector.

Assuming that your PNC is anything like our NCIC, I can run a plate (which I do on pretty much every traffic stop I make) and know if it's current (I think that's the same function as the tax disc over there) and if it's been reported stolen, and what vehicle it actually belongs on. If the driver actually has insurance, he'll have a card from his insurer.

In theory, in my state, he's supposed to provide that whenever he renews his registration, but I've never known that database to be better than about 75%, or 1 in 4 cars will not have insurance on file with the Department of Motor Vehicles, but will have perfectly-valid insurance anyway.

And all of this says nothing about the system's (in)ability to interdict criminal activity. ANPR is not advertised as being able to recognize six teenagers out to commit a burglary or robbery or whatever. Nor is it able to stop their car, ask them why six teenagers are in one car at that hour of the night on a school night, etc.

I could almost understand (and yet still disapprove) if this thing was actually somehow suitable for its stated purpose. However, I don't see that it can do anything at all well, other than tracking the movement of cars without regard to whether the people inside are up to naughtiness, nefariousness, wickedness, fiendishness, or badness, or not.