Throwable WiFi Camera 198
Dotnaught writes "The Eye Ball is a spherical, throwable WiFi camera designed to precede police into areas where there's no direct line of sight. It's manufactured by O.D.F. Optronics, Ltd, an Israeli maker of vision-based systems for the defense, security and consumer electronics markets. Remington Arms Co. has won approval from the Federal Communications Commission to sell the Eye Ball domestically, with law enforcement being likely buyers. The cost is about $4,800 for two EyeBalls (who would want just one?), which apparently also includes video monitoring gear."
not like back in the day (Score:5, Insightful)
Law Enforcement (Score:3, Insightful)
Because when one of these comes crashing through the window, the bad guys are just going to say: "Huh, I wonder what that was. Oh well." And then leave it alone. Right.
I think a system like this one [uspto.gov] has a much better chance at successfully spying on the "bad guys."
Posting anonymously because I work at a place that manufactures these, and even though it's patented, they still like to think it's a secret. Also, clearly not everything in the patent is in the actual system. "Interpreter Software" and "Intoxication Meter" in particular are amusing bits of the patent that aren't even possible to implement as described.
Re:Very good idea, but (Score:3, Insightful)
Also, the article doesn't say, but it probably also has more than one camera inside so it can see in multiple directions at once.
Re:more great editing (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:$4800?? (Score:5, Insightful)
Trouble is, the force that drives the new booming field of security/military/anti-terrorism devices isn't free market, but rather how much it's possible to milk public money from law enforcement agencies before they start to complain. Since they never complain, primarily because they *want* to be seen as spending a lot to "protect" the people, all these companies keep jacking the prices up. And none of them would dare giving the game away by trying to be cheaper than the others, there's just too much money to be made for everybody without having to being normal business competition into play.
In short, the anti-bad-guys market isn't driven by capitalism, and hasn't been since 9/11. Rather, the state and the private sector work together to spend your tax money as fast as they can, making themselves richer and you poorer under the pretext of protecting you.
That's freaking expensive (Score:2, Insightful)
Now granted, it's wired to my computer by a 20 foot cable, but making it wireless wouldn't take a lot of money. I'd say $50 ish tops.
I certainly wouldn't want to spend more than $70 for a camera that I would use to throw around corners that might not even end up pointing in the right direction.
And with these new suggested cameras, you still have to view the output from said camera. In order to use this camera you have to:
- Throw camera
- Look at screen displaying camera output
- Put away the screen displaying camera output
- Go around corner.
Between steps 2 and 4 there is a huge amount of time that people could use to change their position, thus negating effects of having a camera at all.
Not WiFi (Score:3, Insightful)
It operates on part 15 freqs... (Score:2, Insightful)
"Throwing together" (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:That's freaking expensive (Score:2, Insightful)
You can throw it thirty or forty feet? You can roll it like a bowling ball for ten or twenty yards? I really doubt that's true. Web cams aren't well known for their ability to take a lot of abuse. My old Logitech Quickcam Web survived a few minutes in my dishwasher (wrapped in plastic so I could diagnose a problem with the lower spray arm) but I wouldn't be too happy about dropping it off a table into a concrete floor, let alone pitching it into the air; the EyeBall can apparently survive a two-story drop.
Now granted, it's wired to my computer by a 20 foot cable, but making it wireless wouldn't take a lot of money. I'd say $50 ish tops.:
How do you know this? Could you perhaps describe the inventory of hardware required to make a wireless interface that's also shock resistant the point of being throwable? And compact enough to fit with the power supply, optics, logic and wi-fi transceiver into a baseball-sized object?
Note also that this unit has the additional features: it can capture video up to 25 yards away, with 55 degree horizontal and 41 degree vertical fields of view. It also has near infrared capability, making it useful in nighttime exercises. This would I think add to the cost a little.
I certainly wouldn't want to spend more than $70 for a camera that I would use to throw around corners that might not even end up pointing in the right direction.:
Please read the article. It will assume an upright position, and it's capable of 360 degree rotation (you can see the seam near the bottom of the device). It even has a simple feature where the picture can be reversed vertically if it lands upside down and doesn't right itself.
And with these new suggested cameras, you still have to view the output from said camera. In order to use this camera you have to: - Throw camera - Look at screen displaying camera output - Put away the screen displaying camera output - Go around corner. Between steps 2 and 4 there is a huge amount of time that people could use to change their position, thus negating effects of having a camera at all.
Did you consider the possibility that it doesn't have to be thrown all the time? You could put it on a pole, lower it on a line, even attach it to a small robot for transport into the site. Consider also the possibility that the same guy throwing the camera isn't the same guy watching the screen. You almost sound like you're considering this as a player in a first person shooter video game, and not real live law enforcement or counter-terror activity. This could easily be used as a last-minute tactical information-gathering device, in preparation for a final assault: throw or roll the thing for a last check to determine target disposition before you attack. Or it can be used quietly for longer periods of reconnaissance. This is a pretty nifty package.
Re:Likely buyers (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:not like back in the day (Score:3, Insightful)
Thermal imaging equipment is incredibly expensive. A non-hardened camera is generally $10k-$15k, although I've seen used models for as "low" as $5000. I would expect that an Eye Ball equipped with one would cost about ten times what the standard ones do.
The military could still afford them, but police? And even military purchasing departments would (I hope) be a little hesitant to hand close to twenty thousand dollars in hardware to a soldier with the intent of them pitching it into a dangerous area.