Skip to main content

tv   Arthur Holland Michel Eyes in the Sky  CSPAN  August 21, 2019 12:27am-1:57am EDT

12:27 am
left in the drawing board. >> good afternoon >> good afternoon i am research director and welcome heto the auditorium the highest here in washington dc or
12:28 am
c-span is also here so before we get to the meat of the program please make sure phones are turned off or in silent mode to hamper our discussion and the q&a portion as we get to the end of this and wait for the microphone and then i'll have you announce your name and affiliation. our topic today is this particular fascinating and terrifying book and i have to point out a video version from
12:29 am
lord of the rings for the content of this book and what we are discussing but six years ago this month the nsa by the name of edwa snowden with his absolutely amazing revelations about government surveillance taking place with the war on terror. and with those revelations and in some respects and with electronic surveillance. and i guess todayod brings us
12:30 am
and with that technological news with those minority reports scenario is not so far-fetched but theolog was inspired by a different movie. so now o here a journalist researcher and founder and codirector . . . .
12:31 am
a from johns hopkins in 2014 and in between is the policy council and progress serving as legislative counsel for the flight foreg the future for the policy manager of the sunlight foundation and as a policy fellow at georgetown law institute for public representation. in addition for progress education fund he also serves as director in the advisory committee he helped cofound on capitol hill with the folks you may have heard of california. his analysis has been published with "the chicago tribune."
12:32 am
my thanks and welcome to all of you. i'd like to begin by having you tell us how you developed this exception. i'd like t to thank the cato institute for having me. i feel honored to be back here in this space and it's been quite an incredible journey when you think about the fact that not seven years ago i was a pretty scrappy undergraduate in upstate new york and every morning i would read the times in the breakfast cafeteria and there would be a story about drum strikes in the undeclared
12:33 am
zones and if not that, then a story about how they were increasingly being used in the domestic and civilian airspace, both of which raise the unfamiliar question. in my part i was doing my research about immigration to northern new jersey in the 1960s. i was sitting there one day between my junior and senior year and suddenly i have an idea. i have too study drones for the study at the center of the drones. i told the faculty members we must do this and they are insane and allow me to goth forward wih it. we establish ourselves at the
12:34 am
time when people begin to ask these questions in a very broad public forum and those questions have only become more complex and more challenging and more urgent as time has gone on. >> i was used to working with both systems and also very highly classified satellite imagery programs, some of which i cangr talk about, a lot of whh i can' can't though unfortunatey even though it's been nearly 25 years since i've been actively doing any of that. but, what you say in the book about this issue of the service called tcall to see something fm above, that applies to pretty much any kind of conventional imaging platform including even
12:35 am
relatively advanced satellites the things i can point you to in the arena now are things like digital globe satellite. these things all operate on the spectrum you and i use on a daily basis to see each other and see the world around us. what i find terrifying about this you take a picture here and there and you are talking about this technology t tell us what t stands for and what it means in real terms. >> i should say that i spend a lot of time thinking about pretty frightening technologies, but nothing kept me up at night
12:36 am
the way that this technology d did. over the course of the cold war once you've moved into a terrifying you wanted to follow individual people and so for that you want a video camera. but think of them like telescopes, very good at watching them with a narrow ar
12:37 am
area. at a certain point the vehicle reaches an intersection and split up and at that moment they have to make a very difficult position do we go left or right and basically put for the flipa coin. in this technology that cost me 70 hoursrs of sleep you watch an entire city at once the idea being the note of this technology is from the movie
12:38 am
enemy of the state may be from 1998 and it's about this national security agency. rathose technologies and in his pants and shoes with trackers and smoke detectors. it seems the entire eastern seaboard all at once and it has a video capability and watches the will smith character as they scuttle around. one night at a movie theater in 1998, an engineer at the national lab went to see the
12:39 am
movie with his wife. he was absolutely thrilled. he thought it was amazing and that we shouldth do this. they were able to launch a very large area and the cia got involved and became interested in what they were doing because they could use it to unravel the networks where they were wreaking havoc on the servicemembers.
12:40 am
you could rewind that moment in time. you could see where they went but it gets better once you see where they went now you have a location associated and in theory you can find the people who play the really big positions in the group. this is obviously thrilling to the cia. t went through an incredibly rapid series of development cycles culminating with the system that graces the cover of my book which continues to be in use this veryte day operating in at least as far as we know afghanistan and syria the report
12:41 am
called it an absolutely crucial capability. it's i classified basically butt made a tremendous difference in the original roald. at least it is a claim that is being made on behalf if your source is. >> what we learn from the history of surveillance over the course of the last almost 100 years now. stopping the attacks in 2015 the congress and its wisdom would reauthorize its not just about
12:42 am
this technology but of technology that's out there right now whether we talk about the facial recognition and other forms of biometrics and things of that nature. these programs have a nasty habit of getting some advanced taking off into developing a lifeer of their own ever getting the kind of scrutiny thatea they need. so to the best of your knowledge, has any inspector general in the department of defense or the service inspector general's ever taken a look at these programs to see if it matches reality? >> beta came out about one of these programs, and also there
12:43 am
is some evidence that the technology has as you said escaped beyond its original constraint and set of uses. one senior officer who was involved on the analysis and end of the program said that it had been useful for the counternarcotics. that has nothing to do with what they intended for the technolo technology. but once it is there in battle, those checks don't necessarily apply. you use the tools that are at your disposal. so, that being said, i feel like the budget data speaks for itself. there are numerous ongoing development programs. the army haspr new programs such as marine corps and air force is
12:44 am
continually investing more into new technology and one gets the sense that probably had something to do with the fact that it has shown that th at thy least tremendous potential. there is one data point i was able to give these operations because there was one system, a set of four aircraft. according to one document i saww in a three year time span, it was credited and that is a direct quote, credited with the capture or killing of more than 1,200 people in afghanistan. that to me is a tiny peek to what exists behind the curtain. >> you just mentioned the use of this technology in a counternarcotics fashion to make sure we are being asked air as
12:45 am
we can. any technology can be used for good or evil purposes as we have seen and a lot of the same equipment that e is used to manufacture pharmaceuticals. there is a flipside to the story, and i think it's important that wei talk about them. i prefer to talk about it up front. let's take a hypothetical if google has its own capability, how much better would the maths b.? >> the prime contractor was driving in dc and the traffic
12:46 am
was incredibly bad. i did a little background on this it can be used to gather data to create traffic models and figured out how to best optimize the flow of traffic in a city and how to space them for example. but there is more to do. about a year before i started working on the book i was riding my bike home and witnessed a shooting. four people shot a 19-year-old and they disappeared into the night and didn't go chasing after them. i contacted the police the next day to try to get the information that i had and i
12:47 am
checked in a week or so later and they were never able to solve the crime. it's going a list of unsolved crimes in new york city every year. it would have been a simple question of tracking back in time from where they had come from to where they ended up hiding out even if that haven't allowed them that night it would have given them an address to work with. >> i want those people to be to justice. i saw this teenager lying on the ground. it is kind of incumbent upon us to make use of it. but the story is never so simple because i also heard about some very terrifying thing in a
12:48 am
domestic setting was make no mistake it is happening and it is being used and there were groups that are trying to have it be used in domestic setting. to have the technology flight oveflightoverthrows an incredibe areas this fall as he put it, unsolvable crimes. and it is completely legal. this man filming an entire city and me sticking my camera out of the window to take a picture of the landscape.
12:49 am
it is a public space. >> what about the apparatus around it and another similarity to the crisis where the increased collection ability generates way too much information for the intake process and i f have another question on top of that, but i think that we will need you to explain a little bit more in the audience before we get there. >> a single one generates an
12:50 am
unfathomable amount of data andf i calculate that itha would take 2,002 play the imagery at any been time for the real resolution as one engineer put it it takes a million people to watch a million people and sure enough, when the air force began analyzing all of this footage, they found themselves completely overwhelmed ending up on the floor. they could find what happened after an explosion was known about, they were not able to find what donald rumsfeld refers to as the unknown. there were so many other things happening in the footage but they certainly did have anythine to get to it so the solution to that is artificial intelligence. not only does it spare you the
12:51 am
grunt work of having to track individual vehicles a very simple solution to that you just say to the algorithm in theory the vehicle everywhere it' it'sn industry where it's going. give me a list of every location and then track all the vehicles that have been to those locationsf as well. but there's more. maybe you don't want to start with someone who's a known terrorist. maybe ifst the pentagon put it u want to get them before they mount an attack. as it turns out, the groups often exhibit some pretty predictable behaviors. they will drive aimlessly to make sure nobody is following them. tell me every time a car
12:52 am
exhibits one of these behaviors in a city. now the system even if it doesn't catch every single one, that is a true holy grail to find everything that happens when they have no other way of knowing about it and there's been an intense effort in the last few years to automate this technology a lotte of people in the room have no doubt about the project is a controversial effort google has been involved in another g silicon valley firm and first wainterest was to getd capabilities. now it is turned to the area of the motion imagery it is in part
12:53 am
how you use it and why. we talk about this to some e extent in the book there is an upperre bound this would look like. but as a true investigative technique domestically i'm not so sure that i would agree that it is legal to get involved
12:54 am
police use of the gps tracking device on a subject's vehicle not for a day or two but something on the order of the. it is basically a violation of the amman and. so for me the question is is jones applicable here even without the application on the subject vehicle becaus of vehicu are literally down utilizing a different form of the surveillance. you are just not sticking the actual feature if you will, whatever you want to call it on the car so it does make me wonder whether or not he would be operative here.
12:55 am
but your point is there is no case you are aware of in the federal jurisdiction right now. but isn't part of the reason this may be the case that pervasive surveillance systemth they did everything they could to keep the use of the system secret. they didn't want the public to know about it. to this day they say they had no knowledge of it and isn't this penchant for secrecy and using a designation known as law enforcement sensitive to the information in one of the reasons we haven't seen a thing?ge to this kind off >> without a doubt if you think about how recently the congress has begun to pay attention to these locations i think that is largely attributed to the fact.
12:56 am
and you are absolutely right in baltimore it was a secret observation and the reason is because it wasn't funded by the city. there was a texas billionaire philanthropist who actually gave the city enough money to run the program to see if the technology hahad the potential it seemed to have. as a result of r that loophole they didn't tell the mayor or mr the state legislature or the city council or the public defender. the list goes on. i was lucky enough to find out about the observation while it isng happening.
12:57 am
the briefing on the murder investigation ofo the shooting similar to the shootingng eyewitness and the analysts showed how they have been able to track the assailant for hours following the shooting and also leading up to it. one of the detectives said that the most by far the best briefing that he had ever seen in his life. the other almost had no words. he was trying to find a way to make sense of what he had seen n inside it's like that movie. i almost fell off my chair because at the same time, nobody knew that the technology had been directly inspired by enemy of the state. it's something that i reveal in the book. the following that briefing i stepped out onto the street and i knew that the airplane was watcng. i looked up into the sky and i could see itir very high. sure enough it felt
12:58 am
uncomfortable to know that i was being watched, but far more uncomfortable i will tell you everybody else going about their business in the city, knowing that they are being watched by the technology that they probably can't even count them where they don't even know it exists and they have no idea. to me, that that felt fundamentally wrong. it's wrong on a sort of low-level in that sense. also in terms of the fact the city council didn' council didnn opportunity to weigh in on it on whether this evidence would be admissible in court and it ended up having a width/effect because when it was finally revealed, there was so much outrage being kept secret.
12:59 am
>> what struck you about the journalistic techniques and his ability to get these peoplest to talk t to him? i was kind w of floored after agencies as well more like you have to talk to this guy. >> it's funny when you report on the intersection sometimes it leads to these topics people are excited to talk about. they've developed these tools and want to brag about them to a certain extent in the intelligence community particularly inn the research lb there is a basic kind of classification if you will and they are scientists and they may have a different frame of mind when discussing this sortnt of thing. i would like to hear more about
1:00 am
your process of reporting and the amount of information, but i also on top of that would love to bring up the issue as well as a journalist who has covered the sort of intersection between the intelligence community and something i'm often struck by is the sort of reliance on this tool and a dependency in which in its early stages it is very prone to error. i wrote about the use of the communications technology and using that to connect with sources on the ground in china, iran and a webpage mayay be a source they go to and say it looks like they are browsing about yoga but they are communicating. ...
1:01 am
>> absolutely. so i will start with the first question and to be up with tremendously high praise. so i started researching the book for the journalist that i navigate writing a book and invariably people would say and i started to get a little nervous myself but it was exactly one of these stories and there were a couple of
1:02 am
reasons for that. and with that core development. of technology and how those outpaced the growth of microchips with computing power and thats is an astounding achievement in computing improved in that time and maybe to brag a little bit much more important that they had a sense this was an important story of broad public interest and had the obligation to get it out there. one of my sources said in a way i have been waiting for this call for 15 years. i saidid why?
1:03 am
has we have to answer for what we have done. and then at the very outset of the program to create something formidable that was one incredible moment and then every single day was the day they were not in the field to get these networks rolled up. so actually they were doing surveillance without anybody knowing about it on palm beach. apparently they sat on the beach and are a littleno overwhelmed as they set off the process and not have any control over.
1:04 am
and another thing that amazes me about these discussions that every single one i intended even talking about these constraints and without exception every single one brought it up because they were thinking about it to. which should give you a sense that it is a crucial role they have to play in the public dialogue but technology itself that raisese these questions so your point of artificial intelligence you are right one of myot favorite anecdotes there was a group that was developing thisgo recognition algorithm and the system was very impressive but as other
1:05 am
researcherss put it so that is a strange prop to use in a couple of p those tey don't care even a large number of suspicious activity as long as they catch more than they could catch with human analysis. so as i was speaking to them and then to use thisal technology and its had tremendous potential in this application but the question raises the key issue to automation which is the issue ofs trust.
1:06 am
not every analysis by the computer over fully robust datata so it needs to say there is 99.9 percent and then to say i'm not sure. to have therecr is a 71 percent rate that there would be an armed robbery do you meander over with a single patrol car for next time there's a 71 percent content analysis what if it has a very high confidence rate cracks and is just a teenager cracks or the
1:07 am
next time he gives you 95 percent confidence analysis you don't trust it at all. lli feel like and then these police departments are going to have dysfunctional relationships with theirth ai and that is not only problematic but the effectiveness of the technology is compromised and also problematic because they could get hurt.ow >> is not just that 71 is a complicated number but in those passages that stood out to me but those behaviors with the software involved in those events of interest and flip-flop drivin
1:08 am
edriving, approach, driving, dg off. and presumably a factor of things like that that factor into the number. and then even more alarming going back to the other questions that i think it is noincredibly important , additional markers identified for anybody who likes to file the foi foia, those include name, gender religion biometrics, race, e-mail addres address. so how this question is framed and i am curious generally
1:09 am
speaking where you fall as an evangelist for this type of ework and the privacy hawks but just that granularity inspires not just legal questions but this is the quality even in a war zone would inspire in terms to trigger life-and-death situations. what are we doing about it? talking about all these great interviews about the evangelists everything that everyone could imagine all the way that i have to stop working on this. >> day recognize those issues broadly and how we address transparency but these are fundamental issues.
1:10 am
and honestly how well do these systems work quick. >> it touches on the important point the reason this technology is s significant not solely because it is powerful and a vacuum, but because it is emerging at a time when we have the capability to find out name and gr ligious beliefs and theirir association using things like social media analysis and wireless communications interception. if you bring all of this information together and then applyin big data analytics to it to find a person is not only doing a suspicious set in the middle of the night but also with information on facebook that shows they have political leanings that may be of interes interest.
1:11 am
that is tremendously powerful. not only because of the granularity but it touches on the automation element and also because it raises these questions if anything can remain private because there is this really incredible passage i found in one document talking about how brings all this information together. spd it does so by doing these things. so on and so forth but the answer to the broader question is they have a single mission in mind. they are absolutely dedicated to saving people's lives. and in a way i came to realize
1:12 am
how the british were frustrated by that answer but that's the role that they play. you can't expect the lion to decide suddenly it won't because there are no gazelles. these folks are in this technology space and they will do everything that they can. but yet it has a sense of what needs to be done and to suggest what can be done about it but in the ecosystem what they need toee respond to like what you spoke to in your earlier question my answer is no. not particular but perhaps with the use of drones to - - domestically or privacy maybe they haven't gone far enough.
1:13 am
in a way that's why i wrote the book and why they're willing to speak to me because based on what they did, now it is our problem. i wouldn't put that word in there now but that is the situation. so now it turns into a frightening tiger with eyes and ears to be automated and miniaturizing so used to way a thousand pounds now weighs 11 - - 30 and put on the drone one engineer said 72 drones the entire island of manhattan. because they are low flying drones with one highflying aircraft you could actually build a three d model so now
1:14 am
the police could have a three d explorable environment of the city. imagine a realistic videogame of manhattan where people are moving around and those are real people. and then you can fly around in the three d space. that is where they are headed. >> talked about the level of granularity and recently what happenss if they are protecting thatta cracks because constantly where they collect it all that they don't actually protect it. >> weight. china has it all now.
1:15 am
and the equifax data and what are people thinking quick. >> very much. and what they don't get is that we secure the data. i am not cybersecurity experts. [laughter] to show me those codes but that is another huge question of the scenario that i imagine is that you have a city with a surveillance system and what happens to be a black lives matter protest. and then to be associated with the white supremacist and now they can track every single protest. >> the entire city of baltimore. >> so if we assume this gets deployed the international
1:16 am
terrorism is now basis for fisa surveillance and then into access for the purpose of national security. the specific way is not just the 1 percent but everything they talk to afterward and under the law you are talking about the program and to serve a lot only those that are not expected but to be in contact and that is just so much different.
1:17 am
>> absolutely one of the tactics of the baltimore police department we can't just tracked - - attract people in shooting but also witnesses so they could track them back to their home address and have them knock on their t door. we all have a right to withhold testimony if they are just dropping by the house this is a way to see the network by definition that is what this is for so the only possible effect it is a chilling effect now that i know the surveillance system will potentially put a crosshair on, if i drive through a neighborhood with a
1:18 am
high concentration of people who are involved in the drugg trad trade, because it determines i parallel party do have some association but it's interesting i found this one that talked about the principles and with a joint e operating manual we want to give the adversary not just what they are planning but what they plan to do even if we are not directly watching. but the technology will have thegy exact same effect.
1:19 am
and it is intentional. they all have formidable names. and then to be deployed a domesticallyt with the ncpartment of homeland security that doesn't really toned that down but angelfire , but that greek mythology. >> and then it changes to boring once they have scrutiny. >> but then the things that we touched on already with those programs with race and religion and when you interview people and somebody
1:20 am
who supports this but what are they doing to get to these fundamental questions cracks is there a way to strip out these problematic component components? such that it would be powerful. but for those vectors domestically i don't know how that could possibly happen. >> absolutely. there is no doubt the needs to be a company privacy policy and there are some sensible rules in there with a meticulous law that every action by the analyst so that no analyst for example they
1:21 am
have minimum operating altitudes but in a way it's not their responsibility to hold that into account or is it wise because at the end of the day i will not do political surveillance and this allegedly was his next sentence but a world bank type of thing to have agitators and anarchist trying to make trouble. and those that are referred to as agitators like the civil rights movement and was spoken about at the time and another cheer at one - - chilling story and then use it to fly
1:22 am
over the michael brown protest agllowing the shooting of the black teenager. and he said it was simply a test he just wanted to test out someth algorithms across the large crowd. >> so they were test subjects. very much. and he also told me in conversation he opposes the black lives movement matters and to say you are not breaking laws but if you say things that raise concern, would you have told the police? he said of course. that is my responsibilitypo but what is his threshold?
1:23 am
he said i think if through that if that capability had existed during the montgomery march then who knows. that is exactly the same rationale used so i have no reason to doubt that these guys most of the people i spoke to were men and not in my own backyard was one of those women that yes. and is relevant and also his
1:24 am
wife opposes the black lives matter protest is also black. >> but there is that subjectivity element even though there is the best intentions they want to have a peaceful society and not the ones who call the shots. and that law enforcement and the national enforcement n community if they are extremely mission oriented culture but how is that defined? it is always get the bad guy. but g the message the public
1:25 am
politicians send on pretty much a regular basis. and that's why i think a lot of skepticism has to be applied and on page 180 and then he was on the majority republican side. with the house select committee on intelligence. this is what he said in response to the issues. the fact is he told me that he heard from years of operating and surveillance. he has the ability to spy on you but they do not because us intelligence community does not care about you.
1:26 am
community does not care about you. if you are watching, betty. [laughter] you might want to rephrase that and think about that. when he was on the hill is when senator grassley in 2012 the nsa inspector general had found employees were misusing systemson to listen to conversations of current or former spouses or lovers. and those are just the ones that they caught. so for me because i've been in this town for so long like sean i've been around a lot the last 15 years, what always concerns me is the back and a process so you can pass a law
1:27 am
it was designed but the foreign intelligence surveillance act. which engages in mass spying on americans. and with that report to engage it is our system our constitutional system is supposed to be held correctly but the caveat is it always self corrects. what gives you reason to believee we have a better shot to get o it right with this technology? i am fascinated by the technology superbly written
1:28 am
and beautifully edited. i love this book. but i know what drives folks in the community. and i worry about the mentality of those on capitol ahill that is too willing just to let things slide. just last week and the last month that congress is not doing his job to take a hard look at the existing surveillance program. in fact men and in previous years by the majority so i think that what i feared what i want you to address is what
1:29 am
is our hope to actually get it right with this technology? >> simply that there are cases at least at the local level we have very strong and maybe at the national level but with foreign intelligence so you would think the thing but i would find it hard to sleep at
1:30 am
night and barely on - - pessimistic about our prospects. but i don't see that as being an option. i think thoseti are mom - - they will even do anything. but to write to their congressman or those that are challenging the technologies in the courts. but this technology inul particular and they told the people about the big data analytics and it's hard to wrap your head around it but if you tell them there is a pie in the sky then that makes sense on a more intuitive level. and the recent issue is that
1:31 am
every time the city has revealed that has the technology and to be derailed like public pushback. and then we care about our privacy. and that can be used to our advantage. and with that wide area of technology. and then to jump in real quick not a single document has ever been transferred to the national archives. that's another area and we can
1:32 am
give that plug-in but those that are overcharged was seeing these programs are not transparent but at the state and local level you can see hope. >> and a way to talk about it. and not a single congressional research. but my hope is that begins that is one of the main and motivating factors behind this book and i think when people do know about it they do have
1:33 am
aw connection but law eenforcement by nature will always operate for what the rules say rather than what they do not. and one example. let's say they create a law that is very robust but all the limitations you could imagine and with these rules. urwhich the only solution it was a process rather than a single goal. that would be completely watertight forever.
1:34 am
and as they comply to and i should also say that we have seen cities take these actions. with a very robust municipal ordinanceo dclose to purchase any new surveillance technologyrv and with its thorough review. that is a small step forward.
1:35 am
and the one final thing i will say. and some of my sources probably feel alienated by seeing us here on stage to tensions bute then even these groups need to be brought into the conversation and at the end of the day and then that happen. >> with respect to the body cameras. and one of the issues there and then all of this is reported but is a public
1:36 am
access for that. talk if you can about the magnitude challenge. >> it is huge but technology creates the loophole that doesn't really work that has a citywide policy with any surveillance data that is relative to the ongoing investigation. fair enough. and with the entire city happening every single day. and it is becoming a lot cheaper and they seem not to
1:37 am
worry and at the end of the day you cut every third frame then you automate that and there are technological fixes with those state and local police departments because of the cost so do you see a movement accelerate that potential being with 300 people with an eye in the sky they could not previously do
1:38 am
to get more than 900 public safety to operate drones. they still carry one of these very large cameras but the surveillance technology is getting smaller but also the airspace continues to open up more and more and then eventually you get to the point where you have these swarms and then you can watch a whole area to actively and intelligently with a few more years down the line. and then to easily sell the idea and then to catch every bad thing before it happens but to be immediately thinking
1:39 am
like north korea it is cloudy the terrain is mountainous. and how that is a difficult target you could have that and with the middle east it's easier to use that aerial technology and then to counter that and then on the other side you feel like and those that could leave out the potential issues. >> and they gave a very good answer to the question that our job never ends. if we can develop the best systems ever to watch everything it will go bigger
1:40 am
this did not exactly say that if we want to see we will and then with the system of very big traces to extrapolate those who use maybe you don't use that camera these are all minor roadblocks and if another system comes along to achieve the same goals more effectively than they are put to the side and nobody is referring to it as the only game in town.
1:41 am
and it is an important point to stress and the context of all the others that are out there. of those that are in use today so that once it detects something in one part of town then to take a closer look. and then with that crowd - - cloud cover and as an enemy of the state and the whole idea of a satellite capability and we spent some time talking about that so walk us through your understanding with that
1:42 am
kind of development. >> as we know from recent events, drones are very vulnerable we are approaching a time where we had unfettered access now to where they don't have the privilege so in theory to put these technologies into space and with those trendlines that take us in that direction costing enormous amounts of money and resources now it can
1:43 am
collect wide area video. okay. satellites traveled 17000 miles an hour so we have 90 seconds over a target. so why not put a bunch up there? was a cross over the horizon than the next can pop out on the other i p side. start to get to a point we can see things where we are already at a pointnt today most of the earth is photographed on a daily basis that is still a relatively early time what people refer to as the new space revolution that leads to that conclusion like google
1:44 am
earth and i took that with a pinch of salt to respond to someone within a couple of months afterve that conversation had financing from bill gates to say that was a totally ludicrous idea but they did not say what they will use it for her when it comes to earth but now they have their eye up.
1:45 am
[applause] >> please wait for the microphones to come to you idenfy yourself and then ask a question. >> retired member of foreign service when we move from the permissible with the policeman on the street corner now we have four policeman on the same street corner and then for on each corner of a bad
1:46 am
neighborhood and then every intersection of the city and then in the sky. so where do we go from what is permitted and what is not quick. >> that's a good q question. in a way is one of the fundamental questions of how we balance safety and privacy there is a very simple answer to that question. anything that makes that we should embrace for those of us that don't make society safer.
1:47 am
and it's not a one-sided equation. look at the traffic light cameras. that's a simple technology and not a lot to argue with but they say we understand that you still don't want them to photograph us every time. so my sense there will be more of a conversation to have that equation of our relationship with the social media companies. i don't think giving up all my data in minor increments as a
1:48 am
result and that could be aap seachange. >> when technology is developed so today i don't go anywhere so what of those that you seey? coming over the technology quick. >> in the aftermath of hurricane katrina hundreds of people were stranded on the rooftops and the responding agencies had to spell - - spend a great deal of time to find everybody.
1:49 am
and with that infrared capability than that will light up so disaster response is one you look at a very large section you could anticipate an interest of using the technology and that can go either way. and those to find a polar bear dens in alaska to make sure they maintain a minimum
1:50 am
distance from the animals. that since the technology is so expensive instead of having that entity, a company can provide something where they put the information out there and then they can buy in and that is predicated on the notion there are potential applications that we have not even imagined yet. and then you distribute the cost through innovation and we could have this everywhere may be a real estate company or foot traffic or the insurance company or to see what happened or who takes the blame.
1:51 am
that is one of the models proposed and then to ask ourselves at any given time i can imagine there are more nefarious uses. >> the us coast guard has to be super interested. >> it is a fairly small camera but it has a tremendously powerful algorithm that is able to detect any object south of the border it sounds simple but it is not because if you are operating the sea is not one monolithic plane of
1:52 am
color but very much like objects floating and they have shown tremendous success and the benefit is you could put it on a small drone. it took about 50 hours to scan in detail the area the size of wales. so yes the coast guard definitely has their eye on it. >> formally in the intelligence community and i
1:53 am
am curious if you think they are part of this activity and why wait to desk? >> i am not familiar with that happening. at the moment the only groups that t are using very large drones are the military under very constrained circumstances. with that single commission and wild fire support and i'm not totally familiar with it and itts shows that value. and that is a very good point.
1:54 am
and the daytime camera. ed is a strong legal precedent of the infrared cameranf technology and from the ground level and it has an odd standard publicly accessible technology with 1 billion pixel military grade carol the distance like a publicly accessible technology either.
1:55 am
>> and that being said how the government itself or to fill in the blank and that in baltimore the camera recorded police shootings and that could be used to audit the claims and those that areer under the warrant that the basis is dubious at best but it dides not those that resembled associated with the drug trade. >> thank you for the great
1:56 am
panel. there are books available for those that have been fortunate enough thank you for coming out. [applause] [inaudible conversations]
1:57 am


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on