Russian billionaire keeps you from photographing his mega yacht
Interesting use of technology. I bet he has a pretty cool network floating around with him. World’s Largest Private Yacht Features a Laser-based Anti-Photo Shield
Comments
-
Roguetadhg
CompTIA A+, Network+. Member Posts: 2,489 ■■■■■■■□□□
I doubt this is true.In order to succeed, your desire for success should be greater than your fear of failure.
TE Threads: How to study for the CCENT/CCNA, Introduction to Cisco Exams -
jibbajabba
Member Posts: 4,317 ■■■■■■■■□□
I used to live in Gibraltar for 5 and lived in a flat with sea / dock view (5th floor Sydney Court) and the Eclipse was docking for two nights - they couldn't get directly to te dock due to its size but the guy I was sharing the flat with was yacht-spotter and he certain was able to snap some pics, including the crew cleaning those two heli-pads
My own knowledge base made public: http://open902.com
-
GOZCU
Member Posts: 234
"lasers to scan the surrounding area for digital camera CCD sensors"
what if the camera doesn't use CCD ? doesn't make any sense, nothing can stop if someone wants to photograph.... take a dslr + 70-300 mm, done....
-
jibbajabba
Member Posts: 4,317 ■■■■■■■■□□
How was the picture for the article taken?
magic ... Plus even IF he technology exists - it probably only applies to old-skool cameras - probably won't work on a phone lense as it is too small.My own knowledge base made public: http://open902.com -
paulgswanson
Member Posts: 311
Originally Posted by kj0 
How was the picture for the article taken?
Who knows whether the article was false or reality but they say the system is easily switched off and is only active when the pestarazzi are presenthttp://paulswansonblog.wordpress.com/
WGU Progress: B.S. Network Management & Design <- I quit (got bored) -
ptilsen
Member Posts: 2,835 ■■■■■■■■■■
It does not seem that far-fetched, but I doubt it is perfect; I'm sure there are cameras it can't detect/block, and I doubt it works consistently under all conditions. -
SephStorm
Member Posts: 1,732
gotta be bs. notice that the other cameras are whited out, but the picture was taken, so if the tech was turned off, then others would have been able to take pictures of it. Also, the times article that they quoted is for registered members only, so theres no verification. A quick google search should bring other references if it is true. I'm sure Wired would have covered it... And why would someone spend all that money on a system that has the obvious flaw that it only works on digital cameras? I'd walk into the nearest walgreens and buy a kodak camera. done. Paparazzi would have figured it out in about a day.
EDIT: looked on google, first page hits are no major reputable sites, and most are outside of the US... -
paulgswanson
Member Posts: 311
Lets assume its real and the laser effect was just photoshop lol for effect and all that lolhttp://paulswansonblog.wordpress.com/
WGU Progress: B.S. Network Management & Design <- I quit (got bored) -
GOZCU
Member Posts: 234
paulgswanson wrote: »Lets assume its real ..
in that case: waste of money... -
paulgswanson
Member Posts: 311
How so? Rich or not, they still deserve privacy from the paparizzi. Plus it's freakin laser put to practical non-weaponized use how awesome is that!?waste of money...http://paulswansonblog.wordpress.com/
WGU Progress: B.S. Network Management & Design <- I quit (got bored) -
SephStorm
Member Posts: 1,732
because it probably costed millions to install and operate, money that could be well spent elsewhere.
And its protecting the privacy of whats going on outside, in port, which is just a bunch of rich people getting on the boat. Not saying they dont deserve privacy, but i'd prefer they take the pic, and then i sue the pants off them.
