The next generation of Surveillance, from DARPA

hahaha sooooo dumb. This is archaic.

I like this quote for many reasons:

en.wikiquote.org...

...the spread of secondary and latterly tertiary education has created a large population of people, often with well-developed literary and scholarly tastes, who have been educated far beyond their capacity to undertake analytical thought.

Originally posted by Clairaudience
Funny that the very video in this thread proves you wrong. Again, 1.8 billion mega-pixel camera system... thats far more than the public could ever imagine to be able to buy in the next 50 years.

No, actually it proves me right.

DARPA was reportedly in a hurry, and also wanted to keep costs down, so Antoniades opened up a smartphone and pulled out the five-megapixel camera sensor, saying ARGUS uses 368 of those sensors.
"Unlike a Predator, which has a camera that limits the field of view, ARGUS-IS melds together video from each of its 368 chips, to create a 1.8 billion-pixel video stream."

They're using todays technology.

link

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by Clairaudience
Funny that the very video in this thread proves you wrong. Again, 1.8 billion mega-pixel camera system... thats far more than the public could ever imagine to be able to buy in the next 50 years.

No, actually it proves me right.

DARPA was reportedly in a hurry, and also wanted to keep costs down, so Antoniades opened up a smartphone and pulled out the five-megapixel camera sensor, saying ARGUS uses 368 of those sensors.
"Unlike a Predator, which has a camera that limits the field of view, ARGUS-IS melds together video from each of its 368 chips, to create a 1.8 billion-pixel video stream."

They're using todays technology.

link

1.8 billion pixels is a million times smaller than 1.8 billion megapixels.

368 million chips, so the chips alone are at least half a billion dollars. That's 36,800 square meters of sensor area. About 5 US football fields of flying sensor, without any lenses/overhead.

That girl saying at the end of the video that we are reaching a society where all of our movements are tracked kind of scares me

MystikMushroom
reply to post by alfa1

 

Urban legend? That's what they want you to think.

I'll trust my sources over some website anyway, thank you.

Sparrow's, Dawes' and Rayleigh's laws aren't "from some website". It's a hard limit on achievable resolution due to diffraction. All those stories about reading the mint marks on coins are horse puckey.

You can get non-optical images with better resolution because you can synthesize large apertures, but a camera image, no. At least not yet. One day, I would expect you to be able to beat Rayleigh's limit with a metamaterial lens. But not quite yet.