Am I pushing technology too far?

[PollyannaMom]

It sounds fascinating, but I believe the more we concentrate on things like this, the more stressed out we become. Checking this thing every night and scrutinizing the photos...I think it may do more harm than good.

 

[clutter]

I don't think feeding into her fear is helping the situation. She needs to talk to a professional who can help her deal with her fear rationally.

I have to agree. And this isn't feeding her fears, it's a virtual feast. Honestly in the long run, could do more harm than good to the family. If you feed the parents, how and when will they let go? The child has no chance at a normal life until the cycle of fear is broken. And a device like this will only keep the cycle going.

But from a cool new technology point-of-view, I think you could potentially make a fortune from this. I don't like it, I hate that there's a market for it.

From a friend point-of-view, I think this will hurt not help your friend. The one-in-a-billion almost happened to her child, and a more useful tool would be therapy. I think it's potential would be better when there is a known threat - an ex, a bunny killer, someone that you have reported and been told 'there's nothing we can do,' rather than using it to search for unknown boogie men.

From my point-of-view, my first thought was "I will never go outside my house again."

 

[mousefan73]

If you have Netflix I suggest you watch the Arkangel episode from the series ( Black Mirror).

I see the purpose of creating something like this is to do good, but I think in the end it only does bad. We simply cannot protect our kids at all times and we need to allow our kids to grow up with the ability to gain their own sense of security, not an AI or computer driven sense of security. Also this thing will most likely never be approved as designed as there are privacy laws. EU is far ahead and I can see the US at some point coming to that level. You are collecting and I question who is owning the personal data of those the system is filming?

I am not a security expert here but I think there’s a difference between your normal surveillance cameras that are on private property and this. This device simply records anyone and everyone anywhere without them being made aware. And is not limited to private property. I have an issue of me being surveyed and filmed, that data stored of me for ex , simply walking down the street in passing this child. having my face recognition data stored By a private person Who can do who knows what with that data

 

[JLTraveling]

This sounds an awful lot like pre-crime to me, from Minority Report. My dad can't resist making silly faces at any kid around--now he's being scrutinized by AI as a possible abductor? Like mousefan73 said, I'm walking down the street past the kid, and now your system has my facial recognition? I agree with clutter--there *might* be some applicability for screening for a known specific threat (though I think this still goes way further than needed for that), but it really creeps me out to have AI searching for an unknown threat. As a tech geek, I can appreciate the work that went into this and the desire to use it for good, but as a sci-fi geek I can see lots of ways that it could go horribly wrong. And as a person whose background is child and family therapy, I agree that the mom needs therapy to work through her fears, not technology to feed them.

 

[Squirlz]

But from a cool new technology point-of-view, I think you could potentially make a fortune from this. I don't like it, I hate that there's a market for it.

You'd think the "valet scooter" would have done that.

 

[DopeyDame]

I don't think feeding into her fear is helping the situation. She needs to talk to a professional who can help her deal with her fear rationally.

+1 million to this. You're not helping the kid or the mom.

 

[Cannot_Wait_4Disney]

I think it sounds great! But it would be illegal in my state--you can't record audio or video without consent here. We just use a good old-fashioned cell phone with an app called Life360. I can see exactly where my kids are at any time

Said law only applies to private communication. Out in public which would include any business or government building that serves the public you can record both video and audio of everything you see including people without breaking the law against recording. Of course with businesses or government buildings, if they ask you to stop and you refuse to stop they can ask you to leave. And if you don't leave, you're trespassing.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Each night, we go through the list of faces of people who were looking specifically at kiddo for more than fleeting glimpses. Anyone we know, we tag as such.

This sounds like an incorrect assumption that would lead to a confirmation bias.

The kind of thing like this:



Nothing seems out of the ordinary until you find yourself staring and staring at it and now aha you see the cigar....and now that's all you keep seeing and you wonder how you couldn't see it before. And now everytime you look you just see the cigar not the bricks for a wall.

Truthfully your idea seems like it's coming from a good place but this is just not something I would ever delve into. You don't seem trained on the psychology into potential sex offenders or kidnappers, you aren't working (as far as I know) with the proper authorities on development (again with training), etc. You seem like you want to alleviate this mom's mind but I agree with others--more harm than good at this point. And legality is not the only question I would have ethics plays a big role too.

 

[Feralpeg]

First, kudos on developing something like that! I can't even imagine being able to do something that complex.

I guess it would work for people stalking a person for an extended period before they decide to strike. Unfortunately, from what I've read, most abductions are spur of the moment. The victim is just in the right place at the wrong time. No advanced planning involved. And even sadder, most victims don't last more than an hour after abduction. The bad person does what they intend to do and get rid of the evidence quickly.

You might approach local law enforcement to see if they see a practical use for your invention.

 

[sam_gordon]

I am not a security expert here but I think there’s a difference between your normal surveillance cameras that are on private property and this. This device simply records anyone and everyone anywhere without them being made aware. And is not limited to private property. I have an issue of me being surveyed and filmed, that data stored of me for ex , simply walking down the street in passing this child. having my face recognition data stored By a private person Who can do who knows what with that data

You do know you have no right to privacy in public, right? As long as you're in a public location, I can take all the videos and stills of you that I want and do almost anything I want with them. If you don't want the possibility of someone taking your picture, you'll need to stay in your house.

 

[MrsCobraBubbles]

Said law only applies to private communication. Out in public which would include any business or government building that serves the public you can record both video and audio of everything you see including people without breaking the law against recording. Of course with businesses or government buildings, if they ask you to stop and you refuse to stop they can ask you to leave. And if you don't leave, you're trespassing.

Are you sure? When we needed to install security cameras in the small-town library that I worked in, we were advised by our lawyer we had to put up signs at all the entrances informing people that there were cameras recording on the premises.

 

[Cannot_Wait_4Disney]

Are you sure? When we needed to install security cameras in the small-town library that I worked in, we were advised by our lawyer we had to put up signs at all the entrances informing people that there were cameras recording on the premises.

There are other regulations that may apply to businesses and public buildings, hence the need for the signs. Now if you're talking to an employee with the door closed in the office, there is an expectation of privacy there. You would indeed need consent to record in a state that requires it. But not out in public. That said budding young photographers, getting the stuffing beat out of you because you insisted to the MMA fighter he was ignorant and you have a right to take a picture of him and his kids in the mall parking lot may not be the best thing to do.

 

[sam_gordon]

Are you sure? When we needed to install security cameras in the small-town library that I worked in, we were advised by our lawyer we had to put up signs at all the entrances informing people that there were cameras recording on the premises.

That may have been an overabundance of caution. The basic rule is whether the subject being visually (take audio out of it) recorded has a reasonable expectation of privacy. If not, you (general) are free to record their image (via still or video) without informing them.
https://www.upcounsel.com/video-surveillance-laws-by-state

 

[Hrhpd]

The system doesn't rely on WiFi. It doesn't actually use it except when at home for wireless downloads and updates. Any real-time connectivity is by way of a cellular network with very good coverage. There is a feature that reports the wearer's location to a parent but I see this as a secondary function of the project.

It's one of the coolest aspects of this relatively new technology (well it's new that I can afford it anyway), that really all of the AI decision making is on board. Got a non-custodial parent you're worried might grab your kid on the way home from school? Feed this computer a few photos of them and it will watch your kid's back, let kiddo know to find a safe adult if that parent shows up, alert the custodial parent, etc.

Got some creep threatening you and you're worried? This thing will keep an eye out for them every time you go anywhere. It's literally looking over your shoulder for you all the time. And whenever it sees the person you're worried about it lets you know, and it documents when and where and saves photographic evidence of it.


It does seem creepy and over the top. The mother has had a shock and is looking to 'circle the wagons' around her kiddo. My question is what is worse for the kid? Being sequestered, pulled out of school, having all of their limited personal freedom revoked abruptly? Or having a digital tether that let's mom keep tabs and alerts of possible future threats? If the kiddo were older I would be more reluctant to impose this level of surveillance. If younger I would be less considerate of their autonomy. I still don't know the best answer here.

This would only increase the mother's paranoia with the possibility of her becoming obsessed with results and stressing about them. I would not do that to her.

This poor woman needs counseling, not a spy backpack.

 

[RedAngie]

Long post. Short answer.

Yes, you’re pushing technology too far.

 

[cabanafrau]

This kid went through a traumatic experience and doesn't need to be burdened with a literal backpack of mom's anxiety issues. A good friend wouldn't enable that. Common sense and counseling are what's needed here.

 

[Squirlz]

Long post. Short answer.

Yes, you’re pushing technology too far.

You spelled 'credibility' wrong.

 

[monsterkitty]

I was riding my bike in the open field and dirt hills a block from my house when I was 8. A man approached me and asked if I wanted to see some baby bunnies. Well duh! Of course there were no baby bunnies and I figured out really fast what was then about to happen when he unzipped his pants. I jumped on my bike, screamed (I had a piercing scream) and rode to some construction workers not even 100 yards away from the dirt hills. The guy had to drive past us on his dirt bike and one of the construction workers tackled him. I was not this guys first victim, but because the man tackled him, I was hopefully his last.

My parents had taught me about stranger danger but those baby bunnies, you know. They reinforced the stranger danger but refused to let me live in fear.

Yes your pushing technology to far. Who wants to watch 8 hours of video from a child's backpack camera every night? That is not living. I would say it's creating more fear for all. I personally think this is a ridiculous idea. I can't even imagine how this would have messed with my head if my parents made me carry a camera in my backpack.

 

[MrsPete]

Each night, we go through the list of faces of people who were looking specifically at kiddo for more than fleeting glimpses. Anyone we know, we tag as such.

I see two potential problems here, though they're opposites:
- Going through the footage every night can become a paranoia-reinforcer -- both for the parents and the kid. It means that -- to some extent -- the family will relive that horrible experience every single night. It's hard to "move on" and get past something if you spend time reliving it every night.
- Going through the footage every night can become such a chore that they just give it up, and -- if so -- what was the point?

I think it sounds great! But it would be illegal in my state--you can't record audio or video without consent here. We just use a good old-fashioned cell phone with an app called Life360. I can see exactly where my kids are at any time

I don't think it'd be illegal anywhere. We are videoed constantly: at the ATM, by traffic lights, over the cash register at every store, and more. Our Walmart has recently installed "bubble cameras" in the aisles. We have cameras inside our school and on the building /aimed at the parking lot. None of us have given permission for the bank to tape us.

One place where kids DON'T have permission to video is at school. Why? Because of kids videoing one another in the locker rooms or bathrooms in various states of undress. And because kids can easily be egged on to things like food fights or bullying if they think their friends are videoing them.

Since when are cell phones "a good old fashioned" anything?

Sounds a little much for me, but I’ve never had my child almost abducted.

I agree. "A little much".

It is an irrational fear we can’t shake as a society.

I think we're scared of the stranger-danger thing because we can't control it. In reality, we are MUCH, MUCH, MUCH more likely to be in a car accident, but we're not afraid of driving -- partly because we feel we have control over what happens to us when we're behind the wheel.

Consider this, too: when does this stop? Is Mom going to send him off on his first date or college still wearing this on his shoulder? If you start something like this, you have to think long-term about it. You know, have an exit strategy.

3) Is there still room in the backpack for books, assignments, lunch boxes, etc?

Continuing this thought, will it stand up to the kid shoving the backpack into a locker? Dropping the bookbag? Will it withstand a spilled drink?

@kdonnel and @kaytieeldrbut is it not like saying "everyone should learn how to fly a plane in case the pilots are incapacitated"? OK, extreme example, but hopefully you get what I'm saying.[/QUOTE]It's a good analogy. We're talking about a lot of effort for an event that's going to happen to a tiny number of people.

My question is what is worse for the kid? Being sequestered, pulled out of school, having all of their limited personal freedom revoked abruptly? Or having a digital tether that let's mom keep tabs and alerts of possible future threats?

Fallacy of forced choice. Any number of other options exist.

I don't think feeding into her fear is helping the situation. She needs to talk to a professional who can help her deal with her fear rationally.

I'm not quick to jump to "Counseling is the answer", but -- yes -- she needs to deal with the fear.

 

[cobright]

Now I'm confused. First you said it uses Wifi, now you said it doesn't..

Actually, I first said that it tries first to use municipal wifi, then falls back to cellular data. Then in reply to scrapquilter's concern that municipal wifi may not always be available, I restated that it doesn't rely on wifi.

I did say that it doesn't actually use wifi except at home which is more or less true. As I'm testing it, there's actually very little network traffic at all. I did shift its location reporting to SMS and that's really all it does when out and about. It wouldn't use wifi for any emergency reporting anyway as making the connection is a bit fidgety. Really all that it would try to use wifi for is getting updates for map data.

My point, however, was to dispel the impression that this is a connected device. Like how Amazon Echo doesn't actually figure out what you are saying, it instead only recognizes a wake word then sends the audio over the internet to a much bigger computer to be analyzed. Turn off Alexa's I internet and she can't figure out what you're saying. My backpack cam (still can't figure a non ominous sounding name for it) gathers the data, analyzes it, and makes decisions locally.