4 ms·
Don't camera systems beat this in pretty much every way? http://www.placemeter.com/ http://www.placemeter.com/ comes to mind. You don't have to resort to infra
by sultanofsaltin 11y ago
Don't camera systems beat this in pretty much every way? http://www.placemeter.com/ http://www.placemeter.com/ comes to mind.
You don't have to resort to infrared sensors in order to provide anonymity, but they do inherently limit you potential accuracy and metrics you can prodive. It all comes down to where the data is processed and what is made available. Also, cheap camera components are coming down fast due to economies of scale, not sure how IR will play out in the long haul.
- daenz 11y agoFrom the landing page: Camera: Real-time, Accurate Break Beam: Anonymous, Accurate Density: Real-time, Anonymous, Accurate, Cheap
- escobar 11y agoYeah, I find that claim particularly amusing since they're just using a single PIR sensor, which is far less accurate than any camera based system. There's no way that you can claim a single PIR beam is as accurate as a camera based system. There's absolutely no information on what they consider "accurate," and anything I can find on older HN threads is very vague and implies that accuracy wasn't their main focus. Here's a basic question I have: can this count a mob of 20 people walking out of store at the same time? If it can't, I believe "accuracy" should have some context, since there are other enterprise systems that do that no problem.
- tonyhb 11y ago> "With Density on a doorframe, we’ll tell you." The landing page advertises this as an entry-level system for doorframes. It doesn't seem that this is made for costco-level swarms of people entering a large space at one time. That said, I also have my doubts on accuracy but the error margin is probably acceptable enough to most.
- Pyfagorass 11y agoMost camera systems wouldn't accurately count the mob of 20 (I work on camera count analytics, and we have to correct for this)
- afar 11y agoYeah... I mean I appreciate that people pay lip-service to privacy but a surveillance camera that counts you as a distinct individual without your consent is an invasion of privacy. The cost is higher than the price tag, homie. Edit I am an employee of Density and definitely biased.
- Rapidwire 11y agoIf a camera films you while you are on someone else's property, then I'd argue it isn't an invasion of privacy since there was no expectation of privacy to begin with. Also, it would be nice if you would identify yourself as an employee of Density when you post comments.
- afar 11y agoI agree. But I think there should be a distinction between being on someone's property and being recorded for security and being in a cafe, having your face recognized as someone that frequented a sex shop last week, pairing that with an online profile, and then being pushed a retargeted ad campaign about your fetish.
- dfine 11y agoFor the record, that's not what Placemeter does. We don't individually identify people with our algorithms. (I am a PM at Placemeter.)
- sultanofsaltin 11y agoWhat the....?
- dfine 11y agoI am a PM at Placemeter. We do not "use facial recognition software" in our algorithms, as Density's website claims of video-based systems. None of our algorithms use biometric markers for our counting—we're essentially the same "dumb" counters as Density's IR with the added advantage of accuracy and area of coverage. Placemeter does much more than pay lip service to privacy. We pride ourself on our privacy efforts. If you want to lear more about them, @afar email me: david@placemeter.com
- tommoor 11y agoPlacemeter looks very smart although they have an enterprise sales model, Density is literally giving their units away...