ThinkingShift

Well, this was probably something I shouldn’t have stumbled onto - printers that spy on you. Regular ThinkingShift readers would be well aware of my slight paranoia over CCTV/public webcams, invasion of privacy, the surveillance society and so on. As part of my research into a future (no doubt very long) post, I came across an article from the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) about how some colour laser printers contain “invisible yellow spy dots” - a hidden code that silently reveals information such as the serial number of the printer, date and time printed, make and model of the printer. In other words, you and your printer can be tracked and identified via a secret “fingerprint”. Apparently, the US Secret Service struck a deal with some printer manufacturers to add tracking information to printed matter. Some manufacturers named by EFF were: Brother, Canon, Dell, Epson Aculaser, Konika/Minolta, Kyocera, Lanier, Ricoh, Savin, Tektronix and Xerox.

Almost on the verge of hyperventilation when learning about this and wondering about the printers in the office I work in (Government organisation), in came a post from Boing Boing, which caused further hysteria. Apparently, if you are bold enough to ask the manufacturer of your printer to stop spying on you, “they respond by ratting you out to the Secret Service (in the US) as a dangerous subversive, and a few days later, the SS will show up and ask you why you care about your privacy”.

But Seeing Yellow (out of MIT) is planning to launch a spirited campaign against printer manufacturers by overwhelming them with customer complaints. Apparently, some mention the existence of the tracking dots in their documentation, whilst others don’t. The ’spy dots’ can be seen under bright blue light (LED) or through a microscope and the particular pattern of the dots identifies which printer was used to print a particular document.

This is an example of the spy dots from the EFF site, which will give you more information about printers and spy dots. And here is an EFF research paper, with links to white papers and articles.

The official word is that the spy dots were coded to help track counterfeiters but in today’s climate of mistrust and fear, it takes little imagination to see this as a tool for government surveillance.

Bummer….there are no diamonds to be found on the remote planets of Uranus or Neptune. Not that I’ve been there over the weekend to check - I have to rely on the expertise of the co-authors of a new study, Luca Ghiringhelli of the University of Amsterdam and Daan Frenkel of the FOM Institute for Atomic and Molecular Physics in Amsterdam, Netherlands.

After seeing Blood Diamond with Leo and his spiffy South African accent, I swore not to buy anymore diamonds (please don’t think I make a habit of doing that anyway) as they might be conflict diamonds. So I was hoping that when humans finally set foot on Mars (NASA is planning a sample-return trip to the Red Planet by 2018 the words uttered would not be “This is one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind” but more like “This is one small step for a man, one giant leap for womankind, cos there’s a whole lotta glittering diamonds in this red dust we’ve just stepped on”.

Alas, according to New Scientist, Ghiringhelli and Frenkel’s study shows that Neptune and Uranus simply don’t have enough carbon to make diamonds. Both planets only contain 1 to 2% carbon and, for diamonds to form, about 15% carbon is needed. Guess that means Mars too. A girl’s only hope apparently is white dwarf stars.

White dwarfs are burnt out suns and the dense core left behind after a sun has its melt down could contain as much as 50% carbon. If the white dwarf is young and hot, the carbon would exist in liquid form and is almost like a liquid diamond. As the dwarf cools down, the liquid starts to crystallise into a diamond. It’s possible that the white dwarf called BPM 37093 could have a moon sized crystal at is core. Now, this is encouraging: perhaps there are lots of white dwarfs out there with glittering diamond cores. I can just imagine this inspiring space-themed engagement rings - instead of the traditional diamond solitaire, perhaps a ring in the shape of a comet; or a large round diamond with gold wire encasing the diamond, like a dwarf core spitting dust and material as it dies.

But the diamond industry and bling buffs like me shouldn’t get too excited about all this - after all, setting up a diamond mine on a distant dwarf would be some feat and the dense gravity would probably crush you. Stating the obvious Frenkel says: “Don’t send a rocket out to these stars.. the diamond is too expensive to get, apart from the fact that it’s very hard to get something off a white dwarf.”

I came across this fascinating story from BBC News. It’s a real mystery. The sort of spicy plot you’d love to dream up for a debut novel that would be turned into blockbuster movies! There’s intrigue, theft, sexual indiscretion, shadowy figures, even a relative of a famous person.

I have to start off by saying I was unaware that there are Irish “Crown Jewels”. You normally associate the Crown Jewels with Queen Elizabeth II and the UK. The Irish Crown Jewels are not quite the glittering diamond tiaras and baubles of Her Majesty, but rather were the insignia of the Order of St Patrick (a chivalric order founded in 1783). The regalia had been created in the 1830s from jewels once belonging to Queen Charlotte and Queen Victoria used the Crown Jewels. They consisted of a star and a badge made from rubies, emeralds and Brazilian diamonds.

Our story begins in 1903 at Dublin Castle. A vault was built in the castle’s Bedford Hall to house a safe in which the crown jewels would be safely tucked away. But the safe turned out to be too wide to fit through the doorway to the vault and…this is the first part of the mystery….the safe was stored in the castle’s library. The Ulster King of Arms and guardian of the Crown Jewels, Sir Arthur Vicars, was in charge of the keys to the library.

All remained quiet until July 6, 1907, four days before the visit of King Edward VII and Queen Alexandra. The Irish prepared to dust off the jewels but discovered they had vanished from the safe, along with jewellry belonging to Vicar’s mother. There was no evidence of a break-in as the safe had been opened with keys.

At this point, it sounds like a great Miss Marple mystery or a Sherlock Holmes thriller! Who dunnit? Sir Arthur Vicars? Another castle official who borrowed Vicar’s keys (he had two sets)? Irish nationalists (this was pre-independence Ireland)? Was it an inside job? Did the butler do it? The King was furious - presumably he wanted to deck himself out in the insignia.

The finger of blame was pointed at Vicars who came under great pressure to resign his office. After all, he had the two sets of keys in his possession. But he refused to buckle under the pressure. Rumours were spread about his ’sexual orientation” as he was said to associate with a man of undesirable character (who was never named in the official report into the theft). Wild parties and orgies were said to occur at the castle. Were these rumours spread by the real culprit in an effort to force Vicars from office and pin the theft on him?

But Vicars was a feisty chap. He demanded a public royal inquiry and accused his second in command, Francis Shackleton. And this is where it gets REALLY interesting. The astute amongst us might recognise the surname - Shackleton. Francis was the brother of Antarctic explorer, Sir Ernest Shackleton. But he seemed to be the opposite of his famous brother - a somewhat shady character and a known homosexual (homosexuality being a criminal offence at the time). Was Shackleton the culprit? Was he the man of undesirable character Vicars was said to associate with?

The inquiry exonerated Shackleton but left Vicars in disgrace, accused of negligence and failing to exercise due care. Sadly, Vicars was later murdered at the hands of the IRA in 1921. And what of Shackleton? Well, if we believe that a leopard never changes its spots - then perhaps he was the real culprit for he was found guilty of fraud six years later in 1913. He later changed his name to Frank Mellor, ran an antique shop and died in 1941.

Was the King himself involved? In early 1907, Ernest Shackleton was preparing for his expedition and the King and Queen had visited him before his departure. If Francis was the culprit, there’s a suggestion that Vicars became the scapegoat in order to protect a national hero.

Vicars’ will was closed to researchers until 1976 when the explosive allegations against Shackleton became known as Vicars accused both the Irish Government and King Edward VII for making him a scapegoat and specifically named Shackleton as the thief. Could be some truth to this - all the official papers relating to the scandal have been destroyed. Was an innocent man’s career destroyed?

A bit like the so-called Curse of Tutankhamen, others involved in the jewel scandal met a sinister fate. Captain Richard H Gorges, a disreputable friend of Shackleton’s, was said to be linked to the theft. He killed a policeman in 1915 and was convicted of manslaughter. Francis Bennett Goldney, an honorary office holder under Vicars, and said to dabble in theft, snuffed it in France in 1918 the victim of a motoring accident. Pierce Gun Mahony, another honorary office holder and Vicars’ nephew, was shot through the heart in 1914 in a hunting accident, although rumours of murder swirled. You can read a full account of this fascinating mystery at Irish Historical Mysteries.

For the ‘bling buffs” like me: what became of the Crown Jewels? Rumour has it that the jewels were broken up and sold to private collectors. Another rumour suggests that in 1927, the jewels were offered for sale to the Irish Free State for £5,000 and purchased on Prime Minister W.T Cosgrave’s orders. But then someone on their death bed in 1983 fessed up to the jewels being buried and this caused the Irish police to dig around the foothills of the Dublin Mountains.

One thing is clear: 100 years later, this is a still a great who dunnit mystery. Now I’m off to try and pen a similar tale of jewels, intrigue, drama and accusation. Actually….I’ll just write about many of the organisations I’ve worked in as they have all the elements of a ripping yarn, sans the jewels of course :)-

We’ve recently had LiveEarth and a raising of awareness around global warming. Seems green is the new black. But it might surprise us all to learn that the Welsh of the 17th Century were into sustainability and “green” practices way ahead of us. Coming from Welsh ancestry myself (with some Russian thrown in), I know the Welsh are pretty smart characters, not to mention good singers.

News from BBC tells us that five historians and archaeologists ditched 21st Century living for one year and adopted the farming life of the 1620s. Now I don’t need to remind you that no iPods or iTunes existed then; no TV; no mobile phones; no hairdryers; and darn, no lip gloss!

So these five people roughed it: they ate the food of 17th Century Wales (not sure what was on the menu); used the technology of the times and wore the fashions of the 1620s (not sure 17th Century Welsh farmers checked out the fashion of the catwalks, so the clothing was probably pretty boring in those days). But their experience offered key lessons for modern living that might help us live in closer harmony with the environment:

Know thy neighbour: I am sure it will be a shock to you if I suggest that contemporary society has lost that village notion - when neighbours knew neighbours and actually spoke with them and maybe shared a dinner or two or talked in the town square when they met. Increasingly, we live in McMansions or apartments that resemble monks’ cells and sometimes don’t even know who our neighbours are. And there’s a trend towards living on our own: “living loners” will account for about 9.9 million people by 2026.

But in 17th Century Wales, life was lived in a small square radius and people in the village possessed specialist skills that were shared among villagers. You were judged on good neighbourliness; if you were willing to help others, then people were more likely to help you in times of need.

Share the load: running a 1620s farm was no easy task and family members were multi-skilled and had to pitch in, particularly during harvesting time. Translating this into modern times, an organisation is full of specialists and multi-skilled people - sharing the knowledge and skill set makes running the organisation a whole lot smoother.

Less creature comforts: rather like people who advocate a simpler life and a return to the basics, the historians and archaeologists discovered some benefits to having fewer modern gadgets. With no electricity, the working day ended when the sun set and people had to (shock) converse or resort to social activities around the fire - dancing, singing, knitting. No carpets or fancy doona covers meant less dust mites and less asthma and allergies. People were more in touch with natural herbs and remedies and scattered herbs on the floors to get rid of insects and pests.

Eat what’s in season: contemporary society demands access to produce year-round. No waiting for the strawberries or peaches when you can use chemicals and artificial means to encourage fruit and veg to grow year round. But more often than not, it’s poor quality and pretty tasteless. Back in 1620s Wales, you ate what was in season and available. And because of this, tasty food tended to come in small batches. What was in season was tasty, such as particular cheeses, and once the season was over, so was the speciality food until next season.

Reuse and recycle: this is a mantra we hear today, but it was common practice back then. I remember my grandparents and mother kept scraps of everything - used wrapping paper, ribbon, used envelopes (great for shopping lists), left over vegetables to make into “bubble and squeak”. But it was the teensy weansy bits of soap that used to annoy the heck out of me - trying to fiddle with soap when I was growing up that had bits often falling off it was very annoying. Consequently, I have been guilty of being part of the “wasteful society” - chuck it out and buy a new one. But the old Welsh farmers and their families kept everything - from the dreaded bits of soap pressed together to make a new bar to old bed linen that was used as fire-lighters. It’s the bit about human waste that I’m not sure I could adopt - faeces was used as a fertilizer and urine was stored to make ammonia to remove laundry stains. But why not? No chemicals to mess with our immune systems.

Dress practically: the 17th Century had its own fashion styles: clothing was ruffed, puffed, starched, stuffed (hoops in ladies’ skirts) and lace went wild. I think after the 1620s if I remember my history, the fashion became less starched and softer, but I would suspect that Welsh farmers in the 1620s didn’t have time to worry about whether they were sporting the latest ruffed collar. Practical Welsh farmers stepped out in a linen shirt and woollen doublet; breeches helped to avoid the annoying wet trouser leg; and arms were covered to avoid insect stings, sunburn and scratches. Today of course we have a love of following whatever is in fashion regardless of impracticality and danger to health (I read somewhere that the shoe fashion of the moment is towering platforms reminiscent of the shoes of the 1970s).

In with corset, out with the bra: who invented the modern bra or brassiere? I’ve read of claims that it was invented in the 1880s and the 1930s, so the jury’s probably still out on this. Apparently, the 17th Century Welsh farming family couldn’t care less when it was invented as they preferred the corset - not the corset of the Victorian era, which caused many a lady to swoon from lack of air - but strong, practical corsets that supported a farmer’s back as he bent up and down gathering the harvest.

Biodiversity is a good insurance plan: the Irish suffered a disastrous potato famine in 1845 and in 2001 foot and mouth disease wreaked havoc on UK farms. The developed world tends to place all its eggs in the one produce basket and should a crop fail, disaster ensues. The Welsh farms of the 1620s had a variety of grains, fruit and vegetables and a range of animals, so if something failed, there was a back-up. Similarly, if oxen used to plough the fields succumbed to illness, implements were reshaped and horses were brought in to do the job instead. Modern society of course is a society of reliance on a dominant thing: reliance on fossil fuels for example. We rely on the oxen without having the horse as a back-up.

Ban the pesticides: Our produce is literally drowned by pesticides and in summer, we spray ourselves with insect repellent so we can enjoy our BBQ without those pesky flies and mosquitoes. I was reflecting just the other day on butterflies. When I was growing up, I remember lots of butterflies - white ones, black ones with yellow spots, boring coloured ones. I live in the bush where there’s lot of birds, but hardly any butterflies - I was thinking “where have the butterflies gone?”. Pesticides of course affect birds, insects and…butterflies. So back in the 1620s there was probably a richer ecosystem with birds and insects feasting on pests that dared to encroach on crops. Natural insecticides and not the poisons of today.

I’d like to think I could rough it for a year on some farm, living the simple life, even sans lip gloss. If you believe the notion that our current civilisation is heading for collapse, then the skill-set of 1620s Welsh farmers is knowledge that we’d better pick up pretty quickly!

Forget Facebook, MySpace and all the other social networking sites for humans - now there’s Dogbook. Yep, social networking for your beloved canine. Dogbook is available through Facebook (new applications section) and really isn’t for dogs as such - more for pet-obsessed humans.

So now dogs and their owners can post profiles and photos, find dog friends living close-by and share news about the likes and dislikes of their furry friends. Dogbook was created by a 21 year-old - a darn simple idea I wish I’d thought of - and has been a four-legged run-away success.

I was about to utter “this is cat discrimination” but then read news that this same 21 year-old has recently added Catbook, which already has about 45,000 users. What next in the social networking world I wonder: Fishbook?

In a recent post, I returned to my pet topic of the surveillance society and told you about the UK Government giving the green light to fingerprinting school kids as young as 5 years and news of a New Zealand day care centre with kiddie cam. I intended to go off and find out about Australian schools, but I didn’t need to do any nosing around as in came this article from The Sydney Morning Herald in my RSS feed.

Seems NSW classrooms are being fitted out for webcams. Some schools already have CCTV/webcams in public areas of the school grounds such as playgrounds and sports areas. But this is one step further: in the classroom.

Before law, I was a teacher (many different careers, many different disguises!). And if I were still a teacher, I’d be pretty concerned about this and it seems the NSW Teachers’ Federation is a tad worried too. Many teachers have spoken up about privacy concerns - it’s the same old list I’ve mentioned before really:

• how will the images be used?
• how long will they be stored for?
• what if a child or parent does not give consent?
• who’s monitoring the webcams?
• will the images be destroyed once the child leaves the school?
• what’s the guarantee against inappropriate use of images?
• how do you know images of children won’t suddenly turn up on some “adults only” internet site?
• how does knowing you’re being surveilled affect the teacher?

Reading this article, I was reflecting back on my teaching days. No camera phones where school kids could take footage of the teacher and classroom interactions and plaster them all over MySpace or Facebook. This is known as sousveillance: when ordinary people grab a camera and watch the watchers.

Glad I’m no longer a teacher; and glad I’m not a kid in today’s surveillance society.

This looks like a fabulous, free online resource. On the Creative Commons.org site, I found news of Wellcome Images - a source of images just launched on the history of medicine, modern biomedical science and clinical medicine, being made available under a Creative Commons License. For anyone interested in the study of the history of medicine and human culture, the fact that the images are coming under a CCL unlocks a vast store of historical knowledge for students, teachers, academics and members of the public.

The collection features some interesting stuff: an oil painting of Florence Nightingale; a picture depicting Charles Darwin as an ape (below); a photograph of Alexander Fleming in his laboratory; visual images from Chinese medicine. So I set about finding some curious images.

This image is of blood vessels in the retina emerging from the optic disc (black). Amazingly colourful, you could almost hang this up as a piece of art in the home! Image credit: Freya Mowat.

If this weren’t an image of something we all fear, you might almost be tempted to have this as a piece of art work too. The image shows human cancer cells in culture. Reminds me of peacock feathers. Image credit: Matthew Daniels.

Here’s a caricature of poor old Charles Darwin depicted as an ape and holding up a mirror so a fellow ape can catch a glimpse of himself. Image credit: Wellcome Library, London.

Here’s a fascinating 1904 photo of Pavlov conducting an experiment on a dog in the amphitheatre of the Physiological Laboratory, Imperial Military Medical Academy, St Petersburg. Image credit: Wellcome Library, London.

And finally, a Parisian lithograph from the late 19th Century - a chart showing the basic elements of phrenology, physiognomy and palmistry, with diagrams of heads and hands, and portraits of historical figures. Image credit: Wellcome Library, London.

Credit for image accompanying this post: Prof R Bellairs. Image shows a 13 day chick embryo that has been stained to highlight the skeleton. The blue stain shows cartilage; the red stain shows areas where bone has started to form.

I’m a bit saddened by this story from Wired. It’s the story of a handwritten daily newspaper, The Musalman, from Chennai, India and its 76-year old Editor in Chief, Syed Fazlulla. The Musalman is quite possibly the world’s only handwritten daily paper lovingly tended to by master calligraphers. The only piece of technology in the newsroom is a fax machine, which spits out scribbled notes from reporters.

Fazlulla decides what story should make the cover and then hands over to his brother who translates the story into Urdu. After translating, the story is turned over to six calligraphers ready and waiting with quills and ink. The team of calligraphers painstakingly spend three hours or more with their quills, ink and rulers to transform a sheet of paper into news and art.

Time consuming? Yes. Old-fashioned in a digital age? Yes. An art form? Most certainly. Four of the calligraphers are known as katibs - experts in the ancient art of Urdu calligraphy. The Urdu language is one of many languages facing possible extinction. It is a vibrant mix of Arabic, Persian and local Indian dialects and originated in the army camps of Muslim rulers in Delhi. It is the language of poets and artists. This is why The Musalman is truly a work of art - elegant, sweeping calligraphy in a language where all the old masters are mainly dead. Spoken Urdu has declined and those interested learn the language mainly as a hobby. To master Urdu once meant a seat at court, hopefully near the Sultan. Urdu was once the court language but British colonialism ushered in another time and another language.

Each calligrapher is responsible for one page of The Musalman, which has a circulation of 20,000. Should one of them be sick, the others have to cover for their colleague and if a mistake is made with quill and ink, the calligrapher has to start afresh. The final copy is placed onto a black and white negative, then pressed onto printing plates.

As often happens when “progress” occurs, Fazlulla’s son, Syed Nasarulla, has no interest in calligraphy and wants to embrace the digital age. His father disagrees saying Urdu is “sweeter when written by hand“.

Generational change will occur when Fazlulla dies and when arthritis, bad eye sight or retirement catch up with the expert calligraphers. A lovely part of this story is that from the time the paper was established in 1927, the only technological change occured in the 1950s when Fazlulla took possession of an offset printer that he salvaged from a defunct American newspaper. For the last 50 years, that printer has faithfully served Fazlulla and his calligraphers.

The Musalman office seems to be a hive of social activity and knowledge sharing - poets, religious leaders, royalty and members of the community hang out at the offices drinking cups of milky chai, telling their stories and contributing to the historical artefact that the paper has surely become.

The paper may not survive and with it will go a long tradition of oral stories, beautiful inked illustrations, the expertise of calligraphers and an artefact that was an attractor for a community with shared values and traditions. A great shame if you ask me.

This is an example of the stunning calligraphy. Photo credit: Wired. Go here to see the rest of the slide show: 22 images of expert calligraphers at work.

In Australia, we have a saying - “only in America” - meaning it could only happen in America, the land of the free, the bizarre, the (insert whatever word you like). But I have to admit Australia is giving the US a run for its money with our first How Curious story.

Pick up a new skill! If you’re thinking of expanding your skill base, you might consider taking up an Australian company’s offer - be a real life tester for condoms. Reuters tells us that Durex Australia is advertising for condom testers with the snappy advertising line of “Got what it takes to be an official condom tester?” (Mmmm…what’s an unofficial condom tester?). No doubt with a smirk on his face, the company’s Marketing Manager says: “With this job on your CV, it really will be a chance to brag to your mates about the special skills you possess, not to mention that your new role will work wonders with the opposite sex”.

Should you be interested in this “bed-testing position”, you stand the chance to win $AU1,000. Are you up for it?

Fancy a trip to Mars? If you’re in the mood to follow up condom testing with a bit of simulation, then the European Space Agency is looking for you. You’ll need 520 spare days to take part in a simulated mission to the Red Planet. You’ll be able to munch on “astronaut food”, experience the 40 minute delays in transmissions back to Earth; and hunker down in very, very isolated conditions. Once you reach Mars, you’ll be able to check out a faux landscape and it might be handy to speak Russian as the simulation will be carried out in a facility in Moscow. No word yet on whether volunteers will also be able to try out NASA’s new Russian-built US$19 million toilet! Photo credit: NASA images. Source: Space.com.

Check what’s in your freezer before you invite guests! A story from Reuters out of Brussels is extremely curious. A Belgian man threw a dinner party but forgot to tell his guests not to look in the freezer. One guest went to put leftovers in the freezer and found….the bodies of the man’s wife and son. Apparently, the couple argued a lot.

Look carefully at your cat. I have a vicarious cat - the moggy belongs to my next door neighbour. Said cat has 18 toes; I checked it out myself at the risk of being clawed. But UK cat, Des, is very special - he has 26 toes - 7 on his front paws and 6 on the back paws. Apparently, cats with extra digits were once very common in the area around the old county of Cardiganshire and were known as “Cardi-cats”. (Did they ever think to check what was in the cats’ milk in Cardiganshire?!) Des is a bit temperamental - I would be too if I had 26 toes and rather odd-looking, glowing eyes. But maybe it’s not Des’ best photo angle.

Source: BBC News. Photo credit: BBC News.

Is Mickey Mouse a lot older than we thought? Mickey was created in 1928…but maybe not. The Discovery Channel had a wonderful piece that I couldn’t resist sharing with you. In 900AD, a French artist created a bronze brooch that looks like…well, Mickey Mouse. This amazing find was unearthed at Uppåkra in southern Sweden. Although it might remind us of the iconic mouse, archaeologists say it represents a lion. Source: Discovery Channel. Photo credit: Discovery Channel.

A bit like a volcano about to erupt, I am well on my way towards doing a comprehensive post (outpouring!) on my research into the surveillance society. Regular ThinkingShift readers will know this is a source of angst for me - the increasing encroachment by Government and private companies on our anonymity and privacy. If you’re interested in past posts, check out the Surveillance Society tab and the Privacy tab under Categories. I continue to be puzzled by why so many people don’t seem to be concerned about the surveillance going on. I tried to sort out my thoughts on this in my post Is Privacy a Generational Thing?, where I explored whether the MySpace and Facebook generation worry about revealing private facts. I haven’t plunged yet into finding out whether they are worried at all about CCTV cameras and increasing Government intrusion.

So….today’s post is about New Zealand. Being a Kiwi myself (yep!), I visit my relatives in Wellington often and have never worried about surveillance there. But news from the NZ Herald has me a tad worried that New Zealand is experiencing surveillance creep. It’s a bit like my recent post on the UK Government authorising the fingerprinting of school children as young as 5 years old.

The Giggles Day Care Centre in Te Puke is New Zealand’s only web-enabled day care centre. A webcam has been installed so parents can zoom in during the day to view what their little bundle of joy is up to. Now I understand this - you want to keep a protective eye on your children, especially in a society filled with pedophiles and weirdos of various types. And I’m sure that watching kiddies at play is fascinating stuff. No doubt the webcam will be used responsibly and is really Little Sister rather than Big Brother, but the issue is (once again) one of privacy. Little children living under the glare of webcam surveillance; teachers and centre staff being watched. I presume the images are transmitted to a secure site that only parents can access and with unique, hard to crack, passwords that frequently change. I say this because the technology being used for this kid webcam is the same as that used by a network of pedophiles who were recently busted in Christchurch, New Zealand for engaging teenagers in cyber sex.

I’m in two minds about all this: watching your child at play is an innocent thing, but it makes me feel uneasy. Children as objects of surveillance. And New Zealand has yet to formulate policies on webcam usage. Together with the UK busy fingerprinting 5 year olds, it makes me concerned that nothing we do in the future will be private, we’ll be constantly watched.

In fact, a report I found in my research (which I’ll share with you soon) presented a scenario of what a surveillance society could look and feel like in 2016. Pretty scary. Another chapter in this report followed a Day in the Life scenario of a family as they went about their daily business and were unknowingly snapped by CCTV cameras. This inspired me to do my own research into CCTV cameras following me in the Sydney CBD.

But first: I’ve learnt that the term “CCTV” is misleading because ‘closed-circuit’ is now obsolete technology. Modern surveillance systems are networked, digital cameras and should be referred to as “public webcams”.

How aware are we of public webcams? Have you ever taken the time to glance around as you go about shopping in your local mall or walk along public streets to see whether webcams are gazing silently in your direction?

In a 24 hour period, I purposely looked out for webcams on my way to and from work and during my lunch hour. I get off a train at Central Station in Sydney, get another train to Town Hall and walk to work, which is located in Pitt Street in the CBD. For non-Sydneysiders, this journey takes about 15 mins and along the way I go through the Queen Victoria Building (shopping complex). Going home, I took a slightly different route - walking from work to Wynyard station and taking a train back to Central. Here’s what I found:

• 38 webcams (both private and public) watched my movements after getting off the train at Town Hall station, walking through the QVB and on the street towards work;
• 8 webcams followed me on a swift 10 min walk from work and down Pitt Street mall (left hand side of a public space) and back to work.
• 31 webcams saw me walk from work, to Wynyard station, getting off at Central Station and onto my train.
• on a slightly different route, 58 webcams followed me from Central Station, to an ATM machine at Town Hall station, downstairs to a cafe in the QVB and then to work.

Now by my calculations, that makes 135 separate webcams whose line of sight I crossed in a 24 hour period and theoretically could have snapped me. That makes 135 separate images of me that could have been taken by people we don’t see. On the last leg of my investigation (with the 58 webcams), I think the security people were interested in what I was doing as two of them came out from who knows where and lurked behind me at the cafe. No doubt I looked very suspicious staring into the webcams, but it raises the question of how the people monitoring the cameras make the decision that someone is a ‘person of interest’. If I had not been dressed in work clothes, but was perhaps a homeless person merely seeking a moment’s shelter, would I have been targeted? Are stereotypes at play when people monitor?

I plan to request some of the images be retrieved as I know exactly where I was and at what time. Not sure how to do this just yet, but I want to see what resistance I meet up with or otherwise.

Take the ThinkingShift challenge: in a 24 hour period, as you go about your normal activities, count the number of webcams you see. Look carefully as some of them (at least in Australia) are very discrete and hard to spot. Then let me know what you find - what city you’re in and how many webcams potentially snapped you.