Pentagon - video ei kerro mitään...

En usko, ettei Pentagonilla olisi tarjota kuin halpahallin valvontakameran tasoista kuvaa sitä kohti tulleesta lentolaitteesta. Muuten, Washington Timesin mukaan läheisistä liikennekameroista ei ole saatavilla kuvaa, koska niistä oli loppunut *filmi*. :-D

Eräs henkilö kirjoitti Pentagonin kameroista näin 911 Bloggerilla:

I am a long time IT worker, who, in 2003 installed hardware and software that tracked and managed the loading dock at the new Time Warner building at Columbus Square in NY. The company that I worked for was contracted by The Related Companies (tm), who managed the building, and is loosely related to Time Warner. The datacenter that we were originally housed in was on the 4th floor Security Operations Center.

The Security Operations Center consisted of large plasma screens which displayed, REAL TIME at approx 24 frames per second, nearly 400 different locations in or around the building. These were then recorded directly to a bank of approximately 100 Panasonic hard drive based video recording units. Security policy dictated that these units keep 14 days of footage readily available on disk, and then archived thereafter on double sided DVD media. Six months of archives were kept on site, with copies shipped offsite to a secure storage facility.

You may ask how this is related to the Pentagon footage. My point is that a commercial entity with a smaller budget than the US Military was able to provide real time data on demand, while the released Pentagon footage resembles something similar to what a convenience store might have. In fact, Sears stores have far more coverage and better quality surveillance systems than what the Pentagon purports to have.

Are we to believe that a highly secure building, a building that is so highly important to the US security and military infrastructure, is less secure than Time Warner, or for god's sake, a retail establishment at your local mall?

I've seen many posts on this board claiming that modern security systems only record approximately 2-5 frames per second. To say that this is the case at the Pentagon is completely disingenious.

My father spent 12 years in active service (US Army Signal Corps), and an additional 20 years working as a civilian in the field of Data Cryptography. The hardware that was used to encrypt data was INTENSE and quite expensive, and in the late 80's/early 90's was ahead of what the private sector has only gotten around to recently. Doesn't seem to make sense that they would leave hideously behind the times video equipment installed, as your security scheme is only as strong as your weakest link (obviously).

My belief is that the current Pentagon footage was downsampled from the more believable 24-30 frames per second, to the released 2-5 frames per second. Are there any video experts available on this board that could dissect the video to look for anomalies in the frame refresh, like possibly inaccurate or slightly off-time frame refreshes? Are there tell-tale signs of downsampling that could be found?

Ok, I'm off to bed, keep up the great work guys. On the IT front, I'm glad to help out the search for truth whereever I may be able to. Thanks so much for not giving up the fight!
J Fizzle | 05.18.06 - 3:44 am | #

truthseeker kirjoitti:

En usko, ettei Pentagonilla olisi tarjota kuin halpahallin valvontakameran tasoista kuvaa sitä kohti tulleesta lentolaitteesta. Muuten, Washington Timesin mukaan läheisistä liikennekameroista ei ole saatavilla kuvaa, koska niistä oli loppunut *filmi*. :-D

Eräs henkilö kirjoitti Pentagonin kameroista näin 911 Bloggerilla:

I am a long time IT worker, who, in 2003 installed hardware and software that tracked and managed the loading dock at the new Time Warner building at Columbus Square in NY. The company that I worked for was contracted by The Related Companies (tm), who managed the building, and is loosely related to Time Warner. The datacenter that we were originally housed in was on the 4th floor Security Operations Center.

The Security Operations Center consisted of large plasma screens which displayed, REAL TIME at approx 24 frames per second, nearly 400 different locations in or around the building. These were then recorded directly to a bank of approximately 100 Panasonic hard drive based video recording units. Security policy dictated that these units keep 14 days of footage readily available on disk, and then archived thereafter on double sided DVD media. Six months of archives were kept on site, with copies shipped offsite to a secure storage facility.

You may ask how this is related to the Pentagon footage. My point is that a commercial entity with a smaller budget than the US Military was able to provide real time data on demand, while the released Pentagon footage resembles something similar to what a convenience store might have. In fact, Sears stores have far more coverage and better quality surveillance systems than what the Pentagon purports to have.

Are we to believe that a highly secure building, a building that is so highly important to the US security and military infrastructure, is less secure than Time Warner, or for god's sake, a retail establishment at your local mall?

I've seen many posts on this board claiming that modern security systems only record approximately 2-5 frames per second. To say that this is the case at the Pentagon is completely disingenious.

My father spent 12 years in active service (US Army Signal Corps), and an additional 20 years working as a civilian in the field of Data Cryptography. The hardware that was used to encrypt data was INTENSE and quite expensive, and in the late 80's/early 90's was ahead of what the private sector has only gotten around to recently. Doesn't seem to make sense that they would leave hideously behind the times video equipment installed, as your security scheme is only as strong as your weakest link (obviously).

My belief is that the current Pentagon footage was downsampled from the more believable 24-30 frames per second, to the released 2-5 frames per second. Are there any video experts available on this board that could dissect the video to look for anomalies in the frame refresh, like possibly inaccurate or slightly off-time frame refreshes? Are there tell-tale signs of downsampling that could be found?

Ok, I'm off to bed, keep up the great work guys. On the IT front, I'm glad to help out the search for truth whereever I may be able to. Thanks so much for not giving up the fight!
J Fizzle | 05.18.06 - 3:44 am | #

Niin on tuo huvittavaa, että kas loppuu tallennuskapasiteetti. No en ole silti koskaan nähnyt selkeä kuvaa turvakameroissa, joka vastaisi edes normaalin videokameran kuvaa.

Tietenkin kun katsotaan valvontakameroista live-kuvaa, niin silloin kuva on hyvää.
Mutta kun tallennetaan kuvaa myöhempää tarkoitusta varten niin tippuu laatu roimasti.