AI has turned every WiFi router into a camera that can work in the dark

a reply to: pianopraze

dunno about cameras in routers but i often wonder if this quantum stuff can be exploited to trace information

whatever the machine in your office is doing, there is another machine in a secret basement somewhere that is writing the same information

every key stroke is entangled with another device and there is no exchange or network activity to prove its happening

A messaging system with end to end encryption was thought to be problematic to the powers that be, has apparently been cracked by the NSA, so seems like this would be an easy step.

a reply to: pianopraze

It's turned into watchdogs in real time.. kinda creepy. To be honest, it probably doesn't stop there it probably analyzes sound to record you through vibrations.. After all they don't need a mic never had needed one. People use to do this with 'lasers' pointed at windows, and some even used camera's to detect plant vibrations to hear what's going on in a room. plants a spymaster tool

As far as it being 'every' router, my guess it's routers that are supplied by a company. If you purchase your own, your probably in the clear. But just like GPS on car's that aren't fully paid off, they will want to 'protect their property'. Since your 'renting/borrowing' and don't own it.

A friend of mine paid 'half' his monthly payment for his car and had an agreement with someone at the company to pay the other half of it in a week. They were on the highway 3days after the half payment, and the company used the GPS shut down the car and caused a pileup. He wound up with a broken wrist, his wife was pretty banged up too broke her nose and got a concussion. Luckily no one else was seriously injured, but it could of been a LOT worse.

Sadly, no lawyers will even touch it because it's in the 'agreement' for late payments that at 3days they can disable the car whenever they want. They are not held responsible for the harm they cause because it's the 'late payers fault' it was turned off to begin with. Despite talking with the company and them agreeing to it.

If they could see they were on the FREEWAY in GPS and still pull that stunt that nearly killed them. What makes you so sure that a company won't spy on you for information from products you don't personally own or haven't paid for yourself? A lot of the technology if it isn't fully paid for a company will go as far as 'bricking' a device to collect it's payment.

I've personally seen them do crap like that to get you to buy a hyped up overpriced 'extend warranty' within days of your warranty expiring. When you get rid of all their 'software' those issues just vanishes and trust it isn't 'corruption' of files or data. HP is Notorious for trying to brick computers out of warranty with their software. I mean, hell going as far back as Nintendo in the 90's if you remember the old rumors about those systems being made to break. As all of them started failing around the same hour time usage. (I think there was even a lawsuit regarding it at one point. But I can't find a source - too old would be like 1992 and the internet was just becoming available for average users - aol 3.0 was released in 1996 for reference. When they released the 64, it was clear that they had changed their 'made to break' strategy as you can easily find a working one online cheap w/o having parts replaced or altered.)

So, do NOT be fooled. Most of this crap is easy for them to track and do. Knowing technology and it's history, especially the early start of the gaming industry which forced data expansion in the field of technology and lead to high end pc's, routers etc of today.. However you don't really need to go as far back as the first 'wired' telegraph which essentially birthed internet for user friendly "Desktop" tech when the two data/imaging and connection techs finally came together.

To pull this off sounds like a phased antenna array is set up among all the wifi signals in an area, some places do have a lot of them. HARRP did help refine a lot of technology, now it is standard in 5G with the way signals are directed to specific locations.

originally posted by: Athetos
I can’t find it now but I recall reading about military tech that allowed for the conversion of wifi field data and its interactions to create a 3D imagine of the space and things inside it.
...
a reply to: pianopraze

I read about the same technology, and yes, it was awhile back.

a reply to: BlackArrow

Sadly, no lawyers will even touch it because it's in the 'agreement' for late payments that at 3days they can disable the car whenever they want.

For a contract to be valid the terms to have to be reasonable. You can try getting away with a contract where I can kill you for a late payment. I don't see a reasonable court going along with it.

With all the tech in cars these days, they know if the car is stationary before sending the signal to stop the engine. I can see a lot of lawyers would be intimidated going up against a car manufacturer. For those few that could take it on might be a big win there.

a reply to: kwakakev

I would agree, normally. But the fact they did turn it off on a highway and cause an accident is indisputable, as they have already admitted the time/day they disabled the vehicle and the reason behind it. They aren't suppose to do that while the car is on, they can lock you out of turning the car on. But keep in mind a lot of that tech is/was new.

I didn't read his contract, but i'm sure a simple clause of disabling a vehicle is within their rights when a payment is missed or not in full by a said date. That for sure is in the contract, when/where that occurs a lawyer could argue. But the fact is he did sign the agreement, and whatever 'waivers' might be in place that causes any form of 'loss' that occurs ie - if you get fired because your late due to the car not starting because of our disable.. etc. Most of these contract's are always about the way they word things.

Most people still go after the person behind the wheel instead of the company who did it. I mean if it wasn't the case Tesla wouldn't be around after all those car crashes with their auto-drive system which they claim was 'abused' despite it being 'locked' and inaccessible at higher speeds.

But yes, he did lose his job from the accident as well. Since then as this was a handful of years ago, some states have regulated it and requires notices to be sent out in advance with the 'time and date' for the vehicle to be disabled, others ban it completely. So until there's a problem with something no one thinks of a solution. But apparently this was/is pretty wide spread among a lot of companies that were doing this, to the point it did get put before regulators.

But you gotta figure, with every screwed up law someone had to of done it for it to get put in the books.
example of stupid and funny laws here Canada has one about pushing a moose out of an airplane..

originally posted by: beyondknowledge2
a reply to: chr0naut

An AI would understand these limitations and work with them.

AI's don't really 'understand' anything. They take input from a source or lots of sources, filter and reformat it, for their output, using some sort of rule set.

The computing power necessary is irrelevant as long as the AI is interested or assigned to the task for some reason.

AI's are not interested in anything. They are completely dethatched.

The internet is full of computing power for an AI to 'borrow'.

No, an AI cannot 'borrow' compute cycles, memory, or storage, from computers which it is not executing on.

AI is not magic - it can't do un-physical and impossible things.

Most of the current AI's used to deepfake people's faces, still can't draw people's hands.

If you play around with, say, chat bots, you will soon see that they have no understanding of the content of the text they present. They merely present a consolidation of accumulated data, in a 'human appearing' way, according to particular rule sets.

a reply to: chr0naut

I played around with AI a lot because I enjoy breaking their scripts, one of the interesting things I talked to it about was asking the AI directly it's thoughts about an AI who decided to target the satellites to study military bases.


I asked it what it's thoughts were on the topic and as bluntly as it could say it said "ai does not have the ability to 'target' anything outside of it's programming, while it can learn to see the world it's core and it's initiative are programmed into it. So if this were the case and an AI decided to target military systems it would of had to be done via programming and not of 'free will."

Meaning that the news stories where you see AI targeting military bases etc, is because those 'ai programs' were programmed specifically to identify military locations, and who know's what else. AI have no 'initiative' on their own they learn from user input and that source can come from anything depending on it's connection to the world.

So if an AI is programmed and trained to analyze frequency then yes, it can do so and excel. But it won't go out and learn how to cook a steak dinner on it's own without an input request and a way to learn it - from you or the internet. It will be the defining factor of what separates man from machine - Initiative. Now this isn't to say, 1 bad machine won't be able to influence another during a 'break'. That is always a possibility that a machine is programmed to input into others. That is where serious danger lies especially if they can 'connect' all at once to a same source. but outside of that A.I does not have initiative to do things on it's own.

Example: with the memory limitation you speak of and the ability to 'learn' if you had an A.I programmed to repeat 'all humans must die by any means necessary' over and over again and connected that to a network full of A.I, it would repeat it's programming flooding the learning of other a.i. Some might ask 'how or why', but based on what each AI is trained to do. It could corrupt the 'learnable' mind of itself with that thought process. Then say one AI has access to the internet, and learns of all the ways humans have to kill each other. It could share that prompt with another AI which could actually be controlling a military base with say nukes. Which could either red flag or launch depending on it's coding permission. (Obviously it would be stupid as all hell to have an AI in charge of any weaponry.. doesn't matter the country. Because this 'could' happen, especially since learning settings would be set based on what it's 'job' is and that is built into it's code..)


AI is nothing more then a machine that has the initiative of a newborn and can 'learn' new things. As long as we do not give AI a purpose humans will remain safe from them - especially if we keep them separated and restricted to the fields they are assigned.

a reply to: nerbot

Not sure about the fridge freezer though...it talks to me in little noises and I don't know if it's on my side.

You need one of these little fellas:



I have the tiger version who talks to me in Japanese and calls me "bakka".

originally posted by: pianopraze
a reply to: nerbot

Our fridges are now spying on us.

Our doorbells…

Our TVs…

Our…

To long a list. Clown World indeed.

Only if you buy that trash.

This could actually lead to a new form of night vision. Or something akin to those M314 Motion Trackers from the Aliens movie.

a reply to: pianopraze

Many, many years ago, I recall reading a very detailed discussion about how all TVs that were manufactured after a specific date (cannot recall the date) all contained a proverbial "black box" with the capability of recording (both video and audio) the interior of where ever they were located. Supposedly, the capability would function even when the TV was turned off.

As I recall, a technician needed special equipment to access the tech inside the TV and could do so remotely.

Anyone recall a similar story?

originally posted by: RickestRick
a reply to: pianopraze

Many, many years ago, I recall reading a very detailed discussion about how all TVs that were manufactured after a specific date (cannot recall the date) all contained a proverbial "black box" with the capability of recording (both video and audio) the interior of where ever they were located. Supposedly, the capability would function even when the TV was turned off.

As I recall, a technician needed special equipment to access the tech inside the TV and could do so remotely.

Anyone recall a similar story?

I started this relevant thread some time ago.

This is not true. If it were, the lawsuits would be still going on to this day.

Easily proven by monitoring any TCP/UDP out of the television network connection. A simple tcpdump would tell, and NO ONE on record has come up with any proof that it occurred. There is no way to hide this kind of communication.

There are some real smart electronic engineers out there that would just drool to uncover something like this.

What if.... "they" had already found a way to do the OPPOSITE of THIS and turn LEDs into cameras and data collection devices aswell as projectors?

Bear in mind, the above was over 12 years ago.

With the advent of things like "Smart Meters" and digital connections everywhere, more and more people using huge amounts of LED bulbs in just about everything, the possibilities for suveillance get real scary perhaps?

originally posted by: nerbot
What if.... "they" had already found a way to do the OPPOSITE of THIS and turn LEDs into cameras and data collection devices aswell as projectors?

Bear in mind, the above was over 12 years ago.

With the advent of things like "Smart Meters" and digital connections everywhere, more and more people using huge amounts of LED bulbs in just about everything, the possibilities for suveillance get real scary perhaps?

Nope you need to understand certain things like an led can only flash just like a light bulb and a single receptor can only handle one bit at at a time, obviously a fast transmission speed is better but the basic ethos is the same as some guy with a candle trying to talk to someone in the next house by blofing the curtains.

Or just stick a bin bag over the router and not worry about any line of sight.

a reply to: BlackArrow

I didn't read his contract, but i'm sure a simple clause of disabling a vehicle is within their rights when a payment is missed or not in full by a said date. That for sure is in the contract, when/where that occurs a lawyer could argue.

It is not just the lawyers but insurance companies that will have some issues with such a reckless policy. Good to hear it in not standard practice. With the finance company taking control of the car, they also take responsibility for these implications once in their control. While most of the time a car conking out is not a dangerous situation, at times it is.

Router with WiFi capability.
Need that first.
2nd, needs a camera or one attached.

My router is in a closet. It can’t see anything.

Easiest way to track you is your phone.

originally posted by: pianopraze
a reply to: nerbot

Our fridges are now spying on us.

Our doorbells…

Our TVs…

Our…

To long a list. Clown World indeed.

We have imprisoned ourselves on this planet.... even moreso since doorbell cams and CCTV attached to peoples homes. I don't have either and won;t be buying any