Swarms of tiny intelligent drones with cameras — what could go wrong?
May 10, 2012 by Amara D. Angelica

Little brother is watching you --- from the sky (credit: Fraunhofer Institute for Microelectronic Circuits and Systems)
Are you ready for Eye-Bots — flying smarms of intelligent drones that zoom in and track everything going on?
Yo boy, this one’s gonna make them spyder bots in Minority Report and Big-Brother TV sets in 1984 look positively user-friendly.
A flock of flying robots rises slowly into the air with a loud buzzing noise. They perform an intricate dance in the sky above the seething hordes of soccer fans. Only the swarm of flying drones can maintain an overview of the escalating situation….
This ultimate aerial surveillance scheme was dreamed up by the Fraunhofer Institute for Microelectronic Circuits and Systems in Germany.
These are unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) designed as mini-helicopters with a wingspan of around two meters, and intended for police, crisis managers — an ultimately, the dreaded TSA, one imagines.
In operation over the playing field, their cameras and sensors capture urgently needed images and data, and transmit them to the control center, all autonomously – and without ever colliding with each other, or with any other obstacles. The rabid soccer fans suddenly erupt in a huge melee, and riot police storm the field, vectored from the remote command center….
The anti-collision technology trick: a CMOS sensor that can measure 3D distances very efficiently, explains Werner Brockherde, head of the Fraunhofer development department. Every pixel on the sensor is assigned a gray value and 3D distance value, “which enables the drones to accurately determine their position in relation to other objects around them” — and the distance to the subjects below.
He claims this allows for higher res than radar, and can image objects as small as 20 by 15 centimeters at ranges of up to 7.5 meters, with images sent at 12 images per second. They also use nanosecond pulses with timed electronic shutters to deal with sensor washout.
Other uses they suggest: monitoring nuclear power plants for contamination (Fukushima could use some of them right now), maps of difficult-to-access areas (think: Africa, remote areas of China), urban planners (roof inspections for solar installations, 3D models of streets), monitoring construction sites and remote properties (that getaway cottage in Montana?) — avoiding the need for expensive aerial photography or satellite imaging.

MQ-8 unmanned helicopter (credit: Northrop Grumman)
Hmm, I wonder if they plan to use some of these in Chicago next week for the NATO Summit? How about for border patrols? What about the obvious military uses? And will these mini-helicopters be in communication with those thousands of drones flying around the U.S.?
This news from South Korea of an unmanned spy drone that killed two people when it crashed into their control vehicle, and the unmanned Navy helicopter hovering over this guy’s back yard don’t bode well either.
And if you thought people were queasy about seeing themselves in Google Street View, what about when these Eye-Bots go into operation (maybe with silent engines?) and hackers upload their images onto Facebook and YouTube? Hey, maybe it’s time for sousveillance?
But when they start adding tasers for crowd control — and RFID sensors for identity checking — to these things, all remotely controlled from a secret government bunker in West Virginia authorized by CISPA, I think we’re really gonna have a problem….
Investigate further: Fraunhofer CMOS Imaging Workshop in Duisburg, June 12 and 13.
Comments (25)
by Peter Simmons
There are a few UK journos who’d like one of these. But then again, maybe they’d be too scared to use it now after the News of the World closure and Mudoch trashing.
by Bri
The law is simple. If you are in public, they can watch you. If it’s private, oversight, in the form of a warrant is necessary. I got pulled over twice in one day for “not wearing my safety belt. I was. Try and tell a police officer otherwise. They said I just hooked it up as they were walking up. If that big dog wants to sniff your butt, you can’t say no. So your living in a dream if you think you can stop Big Brother. Always has been. We actually have it very good o, on the Humanity continuum. They are making the “smart” dust that Ray wrote about in SN, so don’t worry about the noise, and don’t worry about the warrant. I was married to a girl with Mob connections. She tolled me I could get out of any ticket other than DWI, it just costs. You guys don’t have any idea what the real world is about. I used to get Radio Electronics magazine. One of the gadgets they gave tha blue prints for, was a means to pick up the vibration of window panes, with laser light. You could listen in on any conversation, no warrants. In my electronic music class, me and some buddies built an overload device for tha cops radar detectors. It would sense the signal, like a regular radar detector, and then blind them with a massive return signal, thus “jamming” them. Lots of fun. Just a bunch of kids, on both sides, playing with toys. Trust me, they are gonna spy on you.((((((we have nothing to fear, but fear it’s self))))).(what’s so funny bout peace love and understanding! I can’t wait to see your faces in the future. Just covered in smart dust! What are you going to do then?
by Raymond Kegley
I have a group on FB called DRONE ZONE please come check us out.
by GFreemanPHD
I hope you realize that your link on “Drones over America” goes to The New American magazine site, It is published by American Opinion Publishing, a wholly owned subsidiary of The John Birch Society.
by Editor
Thanks. Deleted.
by trakk
jeez how are they our overlords when they are remote controlled by us.
by Sir Stephen
THIS is TINY?
by Mark Duran
SkyNet
by Steve Engard
Flying Robot drones are fine if a private person can obtain them inexpensively, to watch over their property, and alert them about unwanted intruders, whether human or animals. But they are of little use in securing the inside of ones home from home invaders. Better to have a pint sized robot that has facial recognitions and built in tasers for unauthorized individuals. Much better than sleepy home owners with guns, who are more likely to shoot a late arriving family member.
by James Guilford
These things are going to be quite obtrusive if they’re flying only 25 ft away from people where they can still only see something as small as 6×7 inches. Pretty useless for facial recognition software, and if they try to get any closer, anyone with a bolo could knock it out of the sky. I would guess the main purpose would be to follow large crowd (troop/vehicle) movements.
by Bob Vasquez
Just what we need, more noise in our environment.
by Ralph
She means swarms of smarmy robots.
Excellent article! I completely agree, and I don’t think there is anything we or anyone else can do to keep this technology from creating something very similar to the scenario described here. Proof: Multiply tempting technology x eager earthmen (qty 7 billion) and you find that the probability of planetary surveillance to the max equals 0.999999…
by lara
Great tone on this piece! Nice to see this on kurzweilai. Amara D. Angelica did a nice job reporting the facts while adding some personality the subject…
by Eric Sandal
Like the Supervision in http://Gluddle.com!!
by Jamie
Hmm. I tend to agree that this is a bit over teh top. Any creature can be made to accomodate it’s environment. A dog locked in a small cage it’s whole life will shake in fear when removed by an animal rescue tech. Does this make it moral to keep it this way? The puppy mill operator wil point ot how the dog is terrified that it is. Can a human adapt to the fact that it’s government removes all privacy for it? Here is a good test. Have one of teh main 2 parties in teh US state that they are going to instigate complete surveilance over every conversation and move we make, including aerial surveilance over our backyards and see how far they get with even the 18 year old voters. The fact is that most of this was carried out after the attacks on the 2 towers and used the emotion of that time as a stimulus. Had they tried this 1 year earlier, all hell would have broke loose. And then the ‘creep’ that takes place over the intervening years further erodes our rights.
by Khannea Suntzu
I hail welcome to our peeping tom pervert overlords.
by Marcos Marin
Yep, let’s worry about typos instead =P
by Mark Harrison
Is this a problem?
That’s probably another of those ‘when were you born questions.’
Should I wear a wristwatch:
— Born before 1975 -> yes
— Born after 1995 -> no
— Gap of indecision —> 20 years
Is a swarm of mobile cameras recording me 24×7 a problem:
— Born before 1995 -> Yes
— Born after 2005 -> No
— Gap of indecision —> 10 years
which leads us to ‘Mark’s theory’…. the ‘gap of indecision’ in which you can determine a person’s age by their answers to a small set of questions is getting expoentially shorter :-)
by Jes
Well, with those born within the gap of indecision being variously inclined on the subject, and those born before and after the gap being outliers at an unknown rate, I question your ability to determine a person’s age via a small set of questions. A small set of questions would at most suggest a slightly greater likelihood of a person being a certain age, or within a certain range of ages – not ‘determine’ their age. How many questions make up these ‘small sets’?
Also, your data suggests to me that one can get children to go along with this with little resistance as long as they are no older than 6 years old.
(Just because one can get children to go along with an idea, that does not indicate that there is no problem.)
by Jho
I was born in the eighties, and I think flying robots recording everything sounds useful and kind of fun. I hope they don’t waste too much energy though.
by Brian Roberts
Spot on! I wonder if anyone has extrapolated a time-line in just a decade as to what the drones will possess. Of course we are all paranoid for asking about it but what the hey.
by Bri
Your perspective might be different, because of your age, but the issue is the same. You have a right to privacy. It can only be circumvented with justifiable cause. A judge properly trained and devoid of influence should “blindly” evaluate the need for an intrusion. It’s a power that can easily be abused. If you don’t feel pause on the issue, or by this I mean, if it’s kinda kool, then they have done a good job at making you be ignorant! Why I bother explaining this , I don’t know. You all have no idea what’s about to happen. Not even a clue! Whatch the video at thrive.com!
by nfordkrz
One thing that could go wrong is a blogger putting “smarms” in a headline instead of “swarms”. ;-)
by Editor
Hey, I meant that they were smarmy, yeah, that’s the ticket! Also THEY made me write that!
by Merton Gaudette
Smarms? You mean swarms…correct?