As a longtime Casino employee, I have personally witnessed everything referenced by the article and then some. I bet every survelliance department in the nation has a similar blooper tape.

If they insist on x-ray visioning through my polyester uniform, they're not in for a treat.

Is it just me, or does the video not work?

No fat chicks.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it the job of the surveillance employees to survery what happens in the Casino, humurous or not?

I realize that the ex-employee is complaining that there was a tape of "bloopers" made. But how can a tape that contains some nudity but also "...car crashes in the casino's parking lot; patrons caught on tape apparently smoking marijuana in their cars; gamblers, both male and female, urinating outside the casino; and an intoxicated man vomiting" be used "..by male surveillance agents for their own sexual entertainment"?

I wouldn't mind seeing some jackass trying to cheat and blantantly screwing it up. If they can show America's Wackiest police arrests , why not this?

The video works fine for me, but it's not all that impressive. The privacy "smudge" keeps it from being all that entertaining.

I've been to this casino in the last 3 months, but I doubt I was there long enough to put on much of a show. The dice were...unfriendly.

I've done stranger shiat than that at a casino.

Where the hell IS the link for the video. Maybe I'm just going all dumbass here but i couldn't find it.

I worked on the installation of the original security system at Zale Corporation's world headquarters in Irving, TX. The Monday morning after we turned on the CCTV system, I walked in to find the male members of the security staff were all gathered around the main console. They were reviewing tape from the weekend and found where a couple members of the cleaning staff had stopped the freight elevator between floors for about half an hour and performed a very detailed physical examination of each other. The camera was mounted in a flush mounted enclosure in the ceiling of the cab. They never knew they were being recorded.

The video is the first graphic in the body of text.

that video is farked up. the link is that little camera half way down the page right by the text.
/toke

this is just too damned funny

Narking Futs - It is that little square thing to the right of the third paragraph that says "See related video"

can you say, Americas Funniest Home Videos?

hhhmmmm-who cares?

I wrote their (Seattle Post Intelligencer) printed TV listings, in 2000. Not sure if they still use that template though anymore. Coolest one I made too. Then I was "let go" by TVData.

Too many articles about cameras in a row! Core dumped...into my pants.

that was slightly dissapointing..
If I wanted to see fat women dance I'd just go to your collective mother's houses.

How am I expected to beat off to that giant blurred out naked person?

Not that I won't. It's just difficult.

that sucks, did anyone else know that you can't type "difficult to ma_stur_bate to" anymore? CURSE YOU FARK FILTER !

ROFL at the Dancing Lady seen at the start of the video. Is she the mother of Star Wars Kid, by any chance?

I hope this gets on the national news. Maybe then there'll be a backlash against seciruty cameras. I knew someone who worked at Besy Buy in security, and those guys did the same exact things, zooming in on women's breasts and other stuff like that. Security cameras in stores that are controlled bby employees so they can pan and zoom should be outlawed, cause it's an invasion of people's privacy.

If _I_ have a need to scratch myself when I'm in a store, I should be able to go behind something and assume people can't see me, but with the cameras you never know who's watching and RECORDING you, and what they will do with that videotape.

Besides which, I don't like being treated like a criminal from the second I walk into a store. I HATE it when I walk into a Besy Buy and the security guy says "Hi, how are you.", because as a former retail employee, I know what that really means is "I'm watching you, and I'm letting you know I'm watching you."

Here's a little tip for you. In Best Buy, they generally watch people who are in the music aisle. They watch teens more than adults, and they pay very close attention to groups of three teens or more and those wearing baggy pants. And while they can chase you if they think you're shoplifting, they can't actually detain you.

Also, when a store clerk in any store asks if they may see your receipt, they are asking if they "may" because they need your permission. They cannot legally search you or your bags regardless of what any signs they have say.

The so-called "blooper tape" also contains footage that Viooltje Arpryazhka, a former surveillance employee at the casino, claims were compiled, copied and viewed by male surveillance agents for their own sexual entertainment.

Well, she's kind of got a point... wait, WHAT?! What the fark is that person's name?! What farking country is she from, Buy-a-vowel-potamia?

2003-06-29 05:05:42 PM schmack

Well, she's kind of got a point... wait, WHAT?! What the fark is that person's name?! What farking country is she from, Buy-a-vowel-potamia?

Call me crazy, but it might be America? Don't forget, they were here before euro-mutts.

She was the dancing lady at the front of the tape, schmack

/uninformed jerk

Not excusing schmack, just being pedantic. astudill, it appears to be a Dutch first name followed by a Russian last name.

Heh.

I live about 10 minutes from this casino, go there all the time.

Nothing very interesting in the video. At least they used Quicktime though.

This wouldn't even make the news here in Vegas. When you walk into a casino here you know (or at least you should know) that every square inch of the casino floor and the parking lot are being watched and possibly taped. Don't even pick your nose if you're concerned about someone seeing you.

It doesn't bother me or anyone else I know, though, because we don't generally act stupid in the casinos.

sswift said: I knew someone who worked at Besy Buy in security, and those guys did the same exact things, zooming in on women's breasts and other stuff like that. Security cameras in stores that are controlled bby employees so they can pan and zoom should be outlawed, cause it's an invasion of people's privacy.

I disagree. They can't see anything that a person walking by you couldn't see. When you're out in a public place you should have very little expectation of privacy. Besides, the thieves and criminals would have the upper edge if security wasn't able to pan and zoom. They have a right to protect their business.

"....am I on Candid Camera?"

humurous?

No entry found for humurous.

Did you mean humourous?

Suggestions:
humourous (proper Canajun spelling)
humorous (mutant Murican spelling)
humerus (bone somewhere in body)

/Heil Grammar!

what the hell is that ad about on that page?

The one for "Alegria" that's next to the Boeing plant?

I don't like that ad... it makes me feel dumb!

wheeeee....

I just opened the link for that ad - it makes a fun noise when you play with the balls in the right upper corner.

I have to go play with those balls now

http://www.cirquedusoleil.com/CirqueDuSoleil/en/shows/default.htm

I've seen the "Star Trek" blooper tape from the Golden Nugget where they hosted the ST:TNG guys when they were making Star Trek VII: Generations...

Brent Spiner goes through blackjack dealers the same way Anna Nichole Smith goes through fast food menus - he's farking good!

"I disagree. They can't see anything that a person walking by you couldn't see."

That may be true if I'm scratching myself in public, however IF someone were to walk by, I could SEE them. The cameras are hidden in little black domes and they can zoom in so much that they can almost read the label of a CD you're holding. Some cameras may be even better than those at Best Buy. Anyhow because I can't see the cameras I can't see if someone is looking at me. If someone walked by, then I could stop scratching myself. But as I can't tell if the camera is pointed at me, I don't know if someone is watching me.

Also, I was once in sears, and I started changing in a changing room and then noticed a sign saying "These changing rooms are monitored by male store employees".

As I could not see a camera, I was left wondering if they were watching me while I was in my underwear with a hidden camera behind the mirror. The mirror was sealed to the wall with that rubber stuff you use to seal cracks, so I couldn't see behind it to see if there was a camera or not. I don't like the idea that every time I try something on some guy, who is perhaps gay, is looking at me, and perhaps zooming in for a closer look.

In addition the Best Buy cameras can see something that a person walking buy could not see. Right down women's shirts. So it's not like they can only see what a person wlaking by could see. And a person walking by taking a close look at a woman's breasts would get slapped, or yelled at but in this case they don't have a clue a bunch of guys are standing around a ssecurity monitor making lewd comments.


"When you're out in a public place you should have very little expectation of privacy."

Only because of the cameras. I WOULD expect, if not for the cameras, I can look around to see if anyone is wathcing me and be relatively certain someone is not. If I say, go off the highway to take a piss in the woods, I have a good expectation that nobody can see me from the road. I don't expect that someone has hidden a camera and is recording me.

Also you can't even say that I should expect to be videotaped when in a store, because I happen to know that many stores just have those black domes with no actual cameras in them. So black domes don't mean that there is a camera there. It only means there might be. I should not have to guess whether or not a camera is watching me. Fooling people about whether they are being watched or not should not be legal.


"Besides, the thieves and criminals would have the upper edge if security wasn't able to pan and zoom. They have a right to protect their business."

No they don't have any rights. They can only do what the law allows. They are a business, not a person. You also do not have the right to protect yourself in certain ways. For example you, and buisnesses, in most states can record video, but you are not allowed to record audio without a person's knowledge. What's the difference? I say both are violations of privacy. They only allow the video cameras because it would hurt them politically if they pissed off the businesses. But contitutionally, if recording a person's voice is unconstitional without their knowledge then I say that recording video of a person is much worse as it can capture all kinda of embarrasing things audio could never hope to. And now look at these people who have the embarrasing video on TV. And look at all the stuff on COPS. Did you know that it's now illegal for those video crews to release video recorded with police officers without the arrested person's consent? They were getting away with it for years.

Video surveiulance is an unwarranted search. And a violation of privacy. It's big brother in action. I don't like it, and I hope it goes away and is declared uncontituional eventually, just as recording video of people using night vision during the day is illegal because you can see through their clothes.

mike8536
But how can a tape that contains some nudity but also "...car crashes in the casino's parking lot; patrons caught on tape apparently smoking marijuana in their cars; gamblers, both male and female, urinating outside the casino; and an intoxicated man vomiting" be used "..by male surveillance agents for their own sexual entertainment"?

You haven't been on the Internet very long have you? Sadly everything you just listed has it's own porn webring somewhere on the Internet. If you don't believe me check out this rejected TotalFark linkclown/food sex NSFW.

Screwed the link. Here it is in all it's NSFW glory clown/food fetish

sswift the cameras and an invasion of privacy are a small price to pay for what they do. many criminals are caught because of those cameras, and lives are saved. that's a fair trade for some pervs looking down your shirt. how could the cameras exist in some way that didn't invade someone's privacy? if they had some kind of shutoff when a certain image was displayed on them, then criminals could wear a shirt that would replicate that pattern. the cameras HAVE to be there, blame it on your fellow man.

if you're so worried about security guards looking down your shirt, then don't wear an outfit that allows them to look down your shirt. it works on the same principle as this: if you don't want someone to stare at your naked ass, wear some pants. the cameras don't have superman vision that allows them to stare at any set of boobs that walk into the store. if you're wearing a low cut shirt, you have to expect that people are going to try and get a nice look. it's natural.

your comment about gay people watching men change is along the same lines. what it comes down to though, is that they're doing their job. when joe smith walks into your changing room with a gun and points it at your head, you're going to be happy that someone was watching so that you won't end up dead in a sears stall. it doesn't matter if they're gay or straight or whatever; their job is to protect you and their business, and they're going to do it or lose their job.

next you'll say that trying on clothes is your right before you buy them. yes it is, but some people also think it's their right to keep those pink socks on under the socks they came in with and walk out. what happens after a while? the price of socks skyrockets for those who are buying them legit, to make up for all the losses from theives that can't be caught.

so go live in your happy cameraless world where you can die and pay 50 dollars for a pair of socks. and make sure there are no guns there. because i heard once that guns, besides their power to stop criminals, can kill innocent people. this is absurd. when i'm walking around i should have the right to know that someone isn't going to shoot me on the sidewalk. i don't care if the good outweighs the bad, any possibility that one of them heathen homos can come within 50 feet of me is bad enough in this country.

damn you're stupid, you can't possibly believe everything you said before. i think you were subliminally just looking for someone to argue with because you were bored.

/that someone

sswift

recording video of people using night vision during the day is illegal because you can see through their clothes.

Uh ... excuse me? Is this true? And if it is, how come I have not heard about it before? Seems like this kind of ability would have been highly toted by half the globe's population by now were it true.

bedouin, what do you mean at least they used quicktime? quicktime sucks, the player is a pain in the arse always asking if you want to buy QT pro and the non-standard interface on it sucks on older computers (my old 533 mhz celeron played jumpy at high rez, even though EVERY OTHER format would do fine at full screen

Somehow I am reminded of the Kids in The Hall sketch
involving Bruce McDonald as a Convenience store clerk on
a surveilance tape, during the said employee's job appraisal meeting w/ the 7-11 bigwigs..

"fast forward.. keep going...we've seen the making out with the girlfriend... seen the dog running around... seen the dancing.. pause... is that the finger?"

If it's out there, in any format.. I know it's a farker that can TRACK IT DOWN....

SOMEHOW!

Sswift is a anti-authoritarian troll. In his warped view of the world, the world would be full of sunshine and happiness if only there weren't any policemen, or any other representitive of the "man" here to oppress him. Just ingnore him.

the title may be a tad misleading. Casino's have cameras that cover EVERYTHING all the time.

Hey, why don't you watch "Mounties" some time and compare it to "Cops" and see how differently people behave when people in positions of authority treat people with a little respect?


"Uh ... excuse me? Is this true? And if it is, how come I have not heard about it before? Seems like this kind of ability would have been highly toted by half the globe's population by now were it true."

It's quite true. And you are of the half of the globe who is not aware of it!

What happened was a company released a camcoder which had night vision capabilitites built into it. People quickly discovered that certain clothes were rendered "invisible" when recording with these camcorders set in night vision mode during the daytime. It was in black and white, but you could very clearly see skin and the bra a woman was wearing.

When the company learned of this they quickly took the product off the market, and you won't see any other company doing it, but you can still buy the camcorders used if you know which models to look for.

Meanwhile people are using them to make videos which they put up on the net, and as a result laws have been passed to restrict this sort of recording.

I don't know if this is legit or not. It says it can take color images. But here's one link:

http://www.advanced-intelligence.com/xraycam.html

Here's another one which looks a little more legit:
http://www.tvcameramen.com/lounge/webwatch03.htm

Apparently I was wrong about you not being able to get this technology anymore. They may not sell the camcorder as is, but they have lenses which you can use to filter infrared light and get the same sorts of images.


"next you'll say that trying on clothes is your right before you buy them. yes it is, but some people also think it's their right to keep those pink socks on under the socks they came in with and walk out. what happens after a while? the price of socks skyrockets for those who are buying them legit, to make up for all the losses from theives that can't be caught."

Bullshiat. People have been shoplifitng since the eighties, and while prices have risen, they have not skyrocketed, and they've increased accoridng to normal rates of inflation. Your arguments that shoplifitng causes prices to skyrocket are simply false, and have just as little merit to them as the RIAA claiming that they're losing profit from all the people downloading music off Kazaa when their profits are UP by 20% from the previous year, or when software companies claim they are losing money to pirates who wouldn't have even bought the software anyhow, yet they claim losses in the millions.

Shoplifiting does cost stores money, but there's so few people shoplifiting that it barely affects their bottom line at all. The Staples store I worked in didn't even HAVE cameras, and you know how sucessful staples is? VERY sucessful.

Also all the people stealing music from Best Buy wouldn't cost them much at all if the music companies didn't charge Best Buy full price for ten cents of plastic when someone steals it.


"fast forward.. keep going...we've seen the making out with the girlfriend... seen the dog running around... seen the dancing.. pause... is that the finger?"

Hahaha. I remember that sketch, that's hillarious. :-)

And yes John, I am an anti-authoritarian. I beleive people have a basic human right not to have the gestapo stop them because they're driving 40 in a 30 zone, because they have parked their car a little too far out in the road while snapping pictures of a barn, because they are carrying a TV set home that someone threw out, or forceing them to call a $60 tow truck they can't afford becuase their car staleld at a red light, even though it will start again in five minutes if it is allowed to cool down.

There's too many laws for any one person to know, and too many damn cops spending the majority of their time mucking about with people's lives over minor non-offenses instead of doing actual detective work to catch actual dangerous criminals.

But I'm sure you think it's perfectly acceptable that the people in position of power act like assholes when you talk to them, FIGHT WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT OVE RHOW TO RESCUE A GUY, arrest the fire marshal, and racial profile people they choose to pull over.

Too many police in america, and too much surveilulance. And it's getting almost as bad in Britain. But at least the cops there are nicer.

Pelleranonymous:

A very intelligent argument.

Wait till fark releases it's secret technology 'Fark Sees YOU' video tape. SMILE!

Were THESE the guys???

Um, it's a casino. Anyone who doesn't realize by now that every movement of every person in a casino is being watched and recorded at all times is braindead.

And don't blame the casino, the state gaming commission requires it. The gaming industry is only slightly less regulated than nuclear power.

Tulalip casino? Why couldn't it have been the Muckleshoot casino? On my first time there, I won $100 on the nickel slots.