If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Tech News Daily)   New app will allow your phone camera to see through walls. Strictly for scientific purposes, of course   (technewsdaily.com) divider line 48
    More: Scary, mobile apps  
•       •       •

8901 clicks; posted to Geek » on 30 Jun 2013 at 10:00 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



48 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-06-30 10:04:58 AM
If get me an android phone will you still call me superman?
 
2013-06-30 10:08:24 AM
Look, I'm telling ya, there's somethin' movin' and it ain't us! Tracker's off scale, man. They're all around us, man. Jesus!
 
2013-06-30 10:10:46 AM
Wake me up when it can do something more useful, like see there clothing.
 
NFA [TotalFark]
2013-06-30 10:14:41 AM
Subby your reading skills suck!
 
2013-06-30 10:16:08 AM
The device is meant to be portable so, for example, a person worried that someone was hiding in the bushes could do a quick scan for her personal safety.

Yeah, "personal safety".  Got it.
 
2013-06-30 10:17:00 AM
To bad it's only moving bodies, because you could use it to find avalanche victims or something. There is all kinds of practical uses for this technology now that I think about it.
 
2013-06-30 10:27:12 AM
Sounds plausible for exterminating issues without need of a special camera
 
2013-06-30 10:28:22 AM
upload.wikimedia.org

Approves
 
2013-06-30 10:35:58 AM
Actually, the really cool application for this is that you can do gesture computing from any room in the house without a sensor or camera being mounted in that room.
 
2013-06-30 10:36:13 AM

p4p3rm4t3: To bad it's only moving bodies, because you could use it to find avalanche victims or something. There is all kinds of practical uses for this technology now that I think about it.


The way the technology is described, it should not be limited to moving bodies. The problem is that the way humans absorbs/deflect radio signals isnt that unique. Unless there is a high resolution scan, a person sitting quietly against a wall may be mistaken for a piece of furniture.
 
2013-06-30 10:50:38 AM
Seems like a great tool for my business, said every home burglar.
 
2013-06-30 10:52:44 AM

elysive: p4p3rm4t3: To bad it's only moving bodies, because you could use it to find avalanche victims or something. There is all kinds of practical uses for this technology now that I think about it.

The way the technology is described, it should not be limited to moving bodies. The problem is that the way humans absorbs/deflect radio signals isnt that unique. Unless there is a high resolution scan, a person sitting quietly against a wall may be mistaken for a piece of furniture.


If you consider that we're essentially a 4 to 6 1/2 foot bag of water... I don't see too many pieces of furniture looking much like us. Really though, you could imagine this really working well through snow.
 
2013-06-30 10:57:03 AM

Gotfire: Seems like a great tool for my business, said every home burglar.


This so much
 
2013-06-30 10:59:24 AM
Great! All those years of practicing interpretive dance and trying to "be a rock or a tree" will pay off when I start stalking again!!!
 
2013-06-30 11:00:25 AM
Big deal.

Back when I was growing up I had a pair of X-ray glasses.  You could order them from any comic book...
 
2013-06-30 11:01:28 AM

elysive: Unless there is a high resolution scan, a person sitting quietly against a wall may be mistaken for a piece of furniture.


I've met many people who were easily mistaken for a piece of furniture, even under direct observation.
 
2013-06-30 11:13:13 AM

dennysgod: Wake me up when it can do something more useful, like see there clothing.


Assuming you meant "see through clothing", that's already possible (for some fabrics) by swapping filters so that the camera is sensitive to near-infrared light.
 
2013-06-30 11:14:12 AM
Yeah ...I'm not worried yet, seeing as all it can do is detect  whether you're moving towards or away from the device.
 
2013-06-30 11:14:40 AM

TeamEd: If you consider that we're essentially a 4 to 6 1/2 foot bag of water... I don't see too many pieces of furniture looking much like us. Really though, you could imagine this really working well through snow.


No, I couldn't. As you stated, humans are bags of water. Snow is also mostly water. In both cases, water does a great job of absorbing microwaves.
 
2013-06-30 11:23:14 AM

t3knomanser: TeamEd: If you consider that we're essentially a 4 to 6 1/2 foot bag of water... I don't see too many pieces of furniture looking much like us. Really though, you could imagine this really working well through snow.

No, I couldn't. As you stated, humans are bags of water. Snow is also mostly water. In both cases, water does a great job of absorbing microwaves.


Doesn't density play into it? Or is snow equally microwave-absorbent?
 
2013-06-30 11:41:08 AM
It only tracks location.  It doesn't image.

people.csail.mit.edu
 
2013-06-30 11:45:55 AM
The DoD has had this technology for over a decade now.
 
2013-06-30 12:08:52 PM

Pick13: The DoD has had this technology for over a decade now.


10 years ago it would have been the size of a shipping container, and top secret.
5 years ago it would have been the size of a fridge, and restricted.
Tomorrow it will be in your pocket and the app will be available to anyone who ponies up 0.99.
 
2013-06-30 12:13:00 PM

TeamEd: Doesn't density play into it? Or is snow equally microwave-absorbent?


Density matters, but snow remains very microwave absorbent.
 
2013-06-30 12:29:36 PM

BumpInTheNight: Look, I'm telling ya, there's somethin' movin' and it ain't us! Tracker's off scale, man. They're all around us, man. Jesus!


Well then YOU'RE reading IT wrong!
 
2013-06-30 12:36:47 PM

Archie Goodwin: Pick13: The DoD has had this technology for over a decade now.

10 years ago it would have been the size of a shipping container, and top secret.
5 years ago it would have been the size of a fridge, and restricted.
Tomorrow it will be in your pocket and the app will be available to anyone who ponies up 0.99.


Using wi-fi you will get at best 1"=1 pixel.  Presumably you could rig some sort of backscatter X-ray for high resolution, but don't ask what your sensor array would have to look like.  The optics of physics really work against most of these ideas.

On the other hand an IR filter will still do wonders for looking through walls with crappy insulation.
 
2013-06-30 12:39:47 PM

Ambitwistor: It only tracks location.  It doesn't image.

[people.csail.mit.edu image 425x300]


ufopedia.csignal.org

ufopaedia.org        ufopaedia.org
 
2013-06-30 12:48:15 PM

elysive: . Unless there is a high resolution scan, a person sitting quietly against a wall may be mistaken for a piece of furniture.


Well I guess I won't be using it in my classroom.  The students in the back row are already easily mistaken for furniture.
 
2013-06-30 01:44:19 PM
Disconcerting results from early beta testing:

4.bp.blogspot.com

i1.wp.com

www.liveforfilms.com
 
2013-06-30 02:09:07 PM
Star Trek implied that images on the viewscreen had nothing to do with cameras as we know them. It's taken for granted by characters in the show, of course, except in Star Trek IV  when Kirk orders the whales on screen, when the ship is nowhere near them yet, and the woman from the 20th century asks, "How can you do that?"
 
2013-06-30 02:37:30 PM

Pick13: The DoD has had this technology for over a decade now.


I don't recall a man-portable system for more than the past several years, but yeah.
 
2013-06-30 02:39:18 PM

dennysgod: Wake me up when it can do something more useful, like see thererough clothing.


ftfy
 
2013-06-30 03:53:46 PM

drjekel_mrhyde: Gotfire: Seems like a great tool for my business, said every home burglar.

This so much


In my area there was a rash of daytime home burglaries recently.  The thieves would go up to the front door and knock.  If nobody answered, they would break in.  100% success rate for them (they never ended up breaking into a house that had people in it at the time).

But sure, let's pretend this technology will make you more vulnerable to being robbed.
 
2013-06-30 03:56:33 PM
It's how you track stealth aircraft, duh. Radio shadows are just harder to grok than radar returns.
 
2013-06-30 04:12:03 PM

My Yali or Yours: Disconcerting results from early beta testing:

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 377x261]

[i1.wp.com image 500x211]

[www.liveforfilms.com image 342x228]


Hehe, just watched that again today, and had the same thought.
 
2013-06-30 04:27:12 PM

Lachwen: The thieves would go up to the front door and knock.  If nobody answered, they would break in.  100% success rate for them (they never ended up breaking into a house that had people in it at the time).


Yeah. Thieves don't need technology to get better at being thieves. Robbing a house is easy.
 
2013-06-30 06:31:32 PM

Ambitwistor: It only tracks location.  It doesn't image.

[people.csail.mit.edu image 425x300]


Man, that is one SEXY waveform.  Yeah, you know that it wants it.
 
2013-06-30 06:40:08 PM
Perhaps imaging capabilities aren't too far away, if this is basically radar-over-wifi.
 
2013-06-30 06:59:36 PM

born_yesterday: BumpInTheNight: Look, I'm telling ya, there's somethin' movin' and it ain't us! Tracker's off scale, man. They're all around us, man. Jesus!

Well then YOU'RE reading IT wrong!


"IT'S READING RIGHT, MAN!!! LOOK!"
"Well, then, maybe YOU'RE not reading it right."
 
2013-06-30 07:38:38 PM
Where Devil: The App With No Fear.
 
2013-06-30 10:14:29 PM
Katabi's wivi sends out two wireless signals, one of which is the inverse of the other. In what Katabi calls "interference nulling," the two signals cancel each other out unless they hit a moving target - such as a human.

Cue the kids in Jurassic Park.

/is there a Van Eck phreaking app for android?
 
2013-06-30 11:12:21 PM

NFA: Subby your reading skills suck!


You really are new here, aren't you?
 
2013-07-01 12:00:33 AM

Stone Meadow: Pick13: The DoD has had this technology for over a decade now.

I don't recall a man-portable system for more than the past several years, but yeah.


Rule #1 of conspiracy theories: no matter how implausible the technology might be, at least one secretive government agency already has it and uses it regularly.
 
2013-07-01 02:34:01 AM
OH NOOOOOO SOMEBODY WILL LEARN MY SECRET, THAT I'M ACTUALLY NAKED UNDER MY CLOTHES NOOOOOO
 
2013-07-01 10:42:43 AM

TeamEd: elysive: p4p3rm4t3: To bad it's only moving bodies, because you could use it to find avalanche victims or something. There is all kinds of practical uses for this technology now that I think about it.

The way the technology is described, it should not be limited to moving bodies. The problem is that the way humans absorbs/deflect radio signals isnt that unique. Unless there is a high resolution scan, a person sitting quietly against a wall may be mistaken for a piece of furniture.

If you consider that we're essentially a 4 to 6 1/2 foot bag of water... I don't see too many pieces of furniture looking much like us. Really though, you could imagine this really working well through snow.


RF does not do chemical analysis on people but you do inadvertantly answer the first person's question about finding victims in an avalanche (with the wrong conclusion). Since we are largely water, humans absorb/deflect/disperse RF at a very similar rate that snow and ice do. As such WiFi cant tell between a pile of bodies and a pile of snow. The tech is just a really lo-res and limited application form of sonar whereas some great forms of sonar have been in use like forever. I love WiFi but there's not much to see here.

Now, about the RF again, a typical person will cause a 5 dB wifi loss/absorption (in 2.4GHz, the only radio available on most Android phones), while standard drywall is a bit less like 4 dB loss. Find a piece of furniture that is slightly denser than drywall and shorter (because ppl arent typically as tall as walls) and viola, your stupid WiFi sonar is broken for sedentary objects!
 
2013-07-01 02:52:09 PM

elysive: TeamEd: elysive: p4p3rm4t3: To bad it's only moving bodies, because you could use it to find avalanche victims or something. There is all kinds of practical uses for this technology now that I think about it.

The way the technology is described, it should not be limited to moving bodies. The problem is that the way humans absorbs/deflect radio signals isnt that unique. Unless there is a high resolution scan, a person sitting quietly against a wall may be mistaken for a piece of furniture.

If you consider that we're essentially a 4 to 6 1/2 foot bag of water... I don't see too many pieces of furniture looking much like us. Really though, you could imagine this really working well through snow.

RF does not do chemical analysis on people but you do inadvertantly answer the first person's question about finding victims in an avalanche (with the wrong conclusion). Since we are largely water, humans absorb/deflect/disperse RF at a very similar rate that snow and ice do. As such WiFi cant tell between a pile of bodies and a pile of snow. The tech is just a really lo-res and limited application form of sonar whereas some great forms of sonar have been in use like forever. I love WiFi but there's not much to see here.

Now, about the RF again, a typical person will cause a 5 dB wifi loss/absorption (in 2.4GHz, the only radio available on most Android phones), while standard drywall is a bit less like 4 dB loss. Find a piece of furniture that is slightly denser than drywall and shorter (because ppl arent typically as tall as walls) and viola, your stupid WiFi sonar is broken for sedentary objects!


???
www.wwbw.com

I don't get it... How does a viola break wifi sonar/radar?


 
2013-07-01 03:57:29 PM
washington-babylon: elysive:Now, about the RF again, a typical person will cause a 5 dB wifi loss/absorption (in 2.4GHz, the only radio available on most Android phones), while standard drywall is a bit less like 4 dB loss. Find a piece of furniture that is slightly denser than drywall and shorter (because ppl arent typically as tall as walls) and viola, your stupid WiFi sonar is broken for sedentary objects!

???
[www.wwbw.com image 360x360]

I don't get it... How does a viola break wifi sonar/radar?


I assume spellcheck changed the word "voila". That's French for "see there".   Thanks for the cute graphic and drawing attention to the error.
 
2013-07-01 04:19:44 PM

elysive: washington-babylon: elysive:Now, about the RF again, a typical person will cause a 5 dB wifi loss/absorption (in 2.4GHz, the only radio available on most Android phones), while standard drywall is a bit less like 4 dB loss. Find a piece of furniture that is slightly denser than drywall and shorter (because ppl arent typically as tall as walls) and viola, your stupid WiFi sonar is broken for sedentary objects!

???
[www.wwbw.com image 360x360]

I don't get it... How does a viola break wifi sonar/radar?

I assume spellcheck changed the word "voila". That's French for "see there".   Thanks for the cute graphic and drawing attention to the error.


I see. Tripped up by the old auto correct gremlins. I see by your last sentence that I may have offended or embarrassed you. Please accept my apologies.
 
Displayed 48 of 48 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report