> anti-camera system deployed at movie theaters years ago which would look for camera sensors, and then blind them with IR lasers
I think it is unlikely. IR lasers can still damage eye sight.
Re:AVG Announces Invisibility Glasses
by drzaiusapelord on Monday March 02, 2015 @10:07AM
(#9132107)
Looks like shooting IR at the audience is how some/most of these systems work:
http://archive.wired.com/entertainment/music/news/2004/11/65...
but yes, it does sound like its probably like plain old IR light and not a laser.
Wouldn't this all be undone by an ~$50 IR filter attachment on the camera[1]? No need for new algorithms or computing power to fight the ultra-bright sections, just limit the camera to the visible spectrum and the "anon light" is defeated.
[1]http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=23078...
Re:AVG Announces Invisibility Glasses
by TheCraiggers on Monday March 02, 2015 @10:57AM
(#9132401)
Depends on if it's using IR to illuminate. I guess I was thinking of dystopian settings where there's a camera on every signpost, tracking your every move. In these cases, I'm assuming they'd be very interested in what goes on at night.
Now, realistically (at least for now) the bigger concern will probably be cameras tracking you in well lit malls, stores, things like that. In those cases, you're probably very right. Either my idea wouldn't work in those cases, or something in the visible spectrum would have to be used instead- something that couldn't be filtered out.
I seem to remember an anti-camera system deployed at movie theaters years ago which would look for camera sensors, and then blind them with IR lasers. While probably not as portable, something precise rather than the shotgun approach they're using here might work better. Bonus: you don't need to have it mounted to your face, either- it could be attached to your hat, shoulder, chest, etc.