- cross-posted to:
- politicalmemes@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- politicalmemes@lemmy.world
Error in the text: 1000mW laser with 532nm wavelength which is green light.
1000nm light is infrared.
Cross posted in https://lemmy.ca/post/64612634
You must log in or # to comment.
I know that Xwitter is usually a reliable source, but 1000nm is outside visual range and therefore not green. Green lasers in the ~500nm range will absolutely damage a camera sensor, but you’ll need good aim and sustained illumination.
If you actually want to do this, look at the NUBM44-V2 laser diode. 7 watts of output power and around $30 on eBay. Another $50 or so for a driver, heat sink, and lens and you can burn out cameras in seconds (you can also burn out your eyes so a good set of laser goggles is essential).
Laser googles lol
Oops, fixed lol
“My eyes! The Googles do nothing!”
_B0c5X8LoSy.gif)
Also make sure your friends have laser goggles, and that nobody is anywhere downrange if you’re trying this. It takes way longer to blind a camera with these than it does to blind a human/animal, and it will turn minor vandalism charges into felonious assault.
This is why I advocate for the anti-surveillance method of “hit camera with big stick”
“Heave rock at bad thing” really does cut to the primal core of the species. Thog not believe how much copper is in mammoth.
nobody is anywhere downrange
Reflections can also blind, so make sure no-one, including you, are uprange, or siderange (to stretch a wordform to breaking point) either.
Also worth noting that in a lot of places you’ll need a license to legally own and operate a class 4 laser like thatEdit: I looked into it some more. This might only be true for commercial facilities. Idk though I’m not a lawyerOi mate you got a loicense for that diode
Don’t even fucking joke
“class 4” is just the highest class, being over 500mw. Technically, the experimental lasers they use on warships are class 4 lasers.
Most countries don’t restrict owning them, but they do restrict selling them. When you have one, it’s kinda like owning a kitchen knife, perfectly legal, but as soon as you do dumb shit with it, thats still on you.
And class 4 lasers make it VERY easy to do dumb shit.
I don’t think a license is going to help you if you’re found walking around with a 7 watt laser hooked up to the relevant drive circuitry. They’re still going to presume you’re up to no good, and, when they find a camera with a burned sensor, they’re going to assume it was you. I guess the moral of this is: don’t get caught.
We were promised lighsabers and yet we can’t even have a cool torch!
Probably don’t even need that much, my cheap eBay laser pointer from 20 years ago damaged one of my first smart phone cameras in a couple seconds because I aimed it directly in. It was red, too, not green. Both work though.
I didn’t want to some in my rites so I thought the camera lens would be OK. It was indeed not OK.
They ostensibly meant mW rather than “nm wavelength” based on the image, but they might not be the brightest laser in the activist’s pocket.
Edit:
Jason Bassler is co-founder of The Free Thought Project and has been featured in such publications as Rolling Stone, Reason, Infowars, RT, MIC and The Tom Woods Show.
Checks out.
535nm for most/all of my greens.
I do have one of the old 1000mw Wicked Laser blues as well, however, which I think is 445nm.
Oh yeah. And my engraver is 100 watts of infrared (1084nm?), not milliwatts, although the range is probably a bit crap for this sort of thing and it’s not exactly concealable. You’d also want to pack rather a long extension cord.
Yeah engravers need near focusing.
What would be the type of laser that you should most keep away from camera sensors?
Brutal honesty here: if you can’t figure that out on your own, you really really REALLY should not be playing around with high power lasers.
Okay, but what’s the answer to my question please and thank you /s
Silenced .22LR rifle.
Also, you’ll want one with a fair bit of power to it if it’s going to do any permanent damage.
A typical ‘safe’ 5mw laser isn’t going to do shit, regardless of the color/frequency.
What kind of wattage?
Yall make sure you’re not visible on another camera when you try this - it’s not like they won’t be able to figure out when and where you were when you did it. FLOCKs are usually in high camera-density areas like parking lots and strip malls and such, and there’s a lot of pressure to address vandalism against the surveillance apparatus.
No one on lemmy is ever going to do this anyway.
If you hit an airplane they will try very hard to track you down. If you hit too many cameras they will probably try to find you, too. They will use your purchase history, social media post history, and location, for instance. So, best to buy the laser somewhere far from where you use it, AND pay cash if you can.
Not that I recommend this, but if you want to try, be smart about it. And, be careful.
That’s the problem with this really. You gotta be really careful you’re not caught on camera beforehand, and they have a lot of cameras. So unless you can just walk out of the woods near one and disappear the same way, you’re likely gonna have a bad time.
A camera is a camera no matter the brand. Take a walk around your neighborhood and imagine the cone of sight each one has, eventually you’ll see one that doesn’t have another watching. From there it’s just a game of mine sweeper.
You also have to be able to fry the camera without it being able to record you before you’re successful. Can you burn out the sensor from an angle of attack that still has you out of view? Maybe, maybe not. And how will you know for sure?
I would think probably not. Light paths are typically reciprocal, ignoring scattering or dispersion.
In other words, if photons from your body aren’t hitting the camera sensor, how are photons from the laser going to hit the camera?
Unless you have an insane laser that shouldn’t be used outdoors, I doubt there will be damage from an indirect hit.
This was my thought as well and if so, it’s virtually impossible to fry the camera holding a laser without being recorded doing it. And even a poor quality pic of you might be good enough to match to a pic of you getting out of your vehicle, and that good enough for a plate match from another camera. This is a high-risk endeavor.
If you stand directly under the camera it will only be able to see a hand and laser on the edge of it’s vision. That’s why you start with the last camera in the chain.
I think you and the next guy are over thinking it. If a camera isn’t being watched by another camera, you stand underneath it and you can’t be seen. From there you simply reach into the field of view until you can hit the lens. That’s assuming the camera doesn’t have a parallax to it, which would refract the beam to the diode while the source is still in the deadzone.
I think its horrible that so many things are happening to us from our own government. They are supposed to be on our side but that was long ago now.
Put it on a remote car with a camera set up for sightingbthw target
Better yet mount it on a drone
Purchase history is harder to check than you’d think. Use a giftcard on AliExpress and anyone outside of the federal level will be lost.
Theres always the straw- buyer/ owner method. Person A buys the tool, preferably with some legitimizing use for it. While Person A is alibied, Person B borrows the tool, uses it to do the deed, then returns it.
Sounds like a flea market purchase
If you got the time im sure waiting a year to use it would also help.
I mean, fuck flock. But really, truly, do not do this.
I don’t give a damn about the Flock cameras. Set them on fire or steal them and sell them for scrap for all I care. But a laser powerful enough to quickly fry a camera sensor is going to be an extreme danger to human eyes. These type of lasers can be acquired fairly easily, but you don’t want to be using them in public outdoor spaces. At these power levels, even reflections of laser light can be damaging to human eyes. And when you shine laser light on a solar panel or camera lens, some is going to be scattered in random directions. Sure, you can make sure to wear laser safety goggles while doing this. But random bystanders won’t have that luxury.
So very much this.
These things should not be available to buy for the general public, or anyone without safety training and equipment.
Remember: Don’t stare into laser with remaining eye.Edit: It is true that there are lasers that can damage camera sensors and not eyes, but they are infrared outside of the visual spectrum, and absorbed by the water content of the human eye. BUT STILL DO NOT USE LASERS OUTSIDE OF CONTROLED ENVIRONMENTS
Apparently they can also set dark objects on fire and melt plastic, which has a lot of potential for unintended consequences.
Can’t tell if you’re trying to talk me out of or into buying a laser.
Hmm that seems like maybe rhe safer approach then- instead of damaging the sensors, melt a hole in the casing and let h20 damage do the rest? (Or just keep going until you’ve cooked the circuit board?)
There is simply no safe way to use a laser to destroy these things. Human eyes are more delicate than any electronic component. If the laser is powerful enough to destroy any component in the camera, random reflections will be a risk for any other person that happens to be in the area. All surfaces are both reflective and absorptive to some degree. All surfaces will reflect some of the laser light. Unless you’re pointing one of these high-powered lasers directly at an empty sky, there’s simply no way to use one of these lasers safely in public. Maybe if you were on some giant deserted ranch out in a rural area it would be fine. But forget about using one of these outdoors in any urban area.
In my town, roads have potholes deep enough to cause damage to cars. Many intersections have been down and operating as 4 way stops for months. But somehow there’s money in the budget to do this shit. I think some vandalism might be in order to teach priorities.
The likelihood that you’re going to get caught anyway, this might be a better situation for an “act like you belong” approach.
Hi-vis vest, hard hat, a ladder, couple safety cones, and some tools. Just waltz right up and run a half-inch drill bit through the lens. Pack up and move on to the next one.
Everyone knows that construction workers famously never have their phones with them so complete the look by leaving yours at home.
There’s a pretty great video of what happens when you fuck with a police heli
Just smash. Doesn’t matter how. Smash smash smash. Or cover with paint or an oily plastic bag. Or just smash. They are always like 8 feet up. Smash.
Just smash. Doesn’t matter how. Smash smash smash. Or cover with paint or an oily plastic bag. Or just smash.
Basically my dating strategy as well
😅
Yeah. Paintball gun if you want to be fun with it.
Spray can on a stick (there’s tools for this at the hardware store, lets you press the button from down the other end of the stick) if you want to do it easily.
It would be interesting to train an image recognition algorithm on detecting flock cameras, build a raspberry pi with two servos and put it all in a nice box to carry around. For research purposes of course.
There is a website that tracks flock cameras.
It would be interesting to train an image recognition algorithm on detecting flock cameras
Or just query nearby bluetooth devices:
https://www.ryanohoro.com/post/spotting-flock-safety-s-falcon-cameras
EDIT: Also, those things read bumper stickers in addition to license plates. I’ve often wondered if they check for injection attacks between character recognition and storing it in their database.
Another edit: An attacker wouldn’t even need to put the sticker on their own vehicle. And a $20 thermal receipt printer (a “cat printer” as they’re known because the most popular model has cat ears and a cute cat face on it) can print on rolls of adhesive paper. I honestly wonder why no one uses them for sticker-based graffiti already. Probably because thermal prints don’t last long in sunlight.
Just use a brother P-Touch with the 24mm rolls. They are pretty weather proof from my experience.
I want to make this clear: I was not speaking about myself, but a hypothetical attacker. I don’t even know if such an attack would be effective.
That said, the rolls on the cat printer are 57mm and would probably be easier to resolve on a moving vehicle, and it would only need to last long enough to be read by one camera. Plus, the P-Touch doesn’t look like a kitty cat.
But then you’d be the owner of something called a Brother P-Touch
(I know it’s a great label maker, I just can’t pass up a chance at low brow humor when it presents itself)
Wait till you hear about the germans Brothers Love Beard Jizz
Reminds me of a Cory Doctorow story.
You might find this interesting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_F4rEaRduk&t=644
Edit: wrong timestamp
I mean the whole point of flock is that they can track you everywhere. Destroying their cameras doesn’t destroy the footage.
If you destroy their cameras they will just trace your movements backwards until they find a way to identify you.
You need to find a way to do it surreptitiously so it’s not clear who is doing it, and they won’t be able to figure it out by process of elimination by seeing who is commonly present when a camera iss destroyed.
If this were really true, there would be no crime right now. Nancy Guthrie has been missing for months now despite the perpetrator being caught on camera in an affluent neighborhood where there would be many Ring, Flock etc. cameras. These companies overpromise and underdeliver as they all do. Their main purpose is get people to pay them. They are much less competent than they claim to be.
The easiest way to best an opponent is to always assume they have the upper hand. If flock cameras are half as good as they say they are then approaching it as if it were twice as good means it will be good enough to match.
Being over prepared will never cost you as much as being under prepared.
Possibly, but I don’t wanna risk my freedom on them being incompetent rather than corrupt.
I just want to counter their propaganda is all
Fair
I think drone usage could solve some issues.
Idk, I think they can probably do a reasonable job tracing a drone back to it’s takeoff location, and then tracking the person who brought it there back to their home, with decent coverage.
That said I don’t know if I’m overestimating their ability regarding machine learning and AI - this is probably fairly labour intensive unless they’ve done a good job preparing all their data and they have plenty of compute.
Depends on the drone.
DJI, yes.
Self builf without GPS or telemetry…probably not.
I mean if they can track a car around the city using their cameras, they can probably do the same for a drone. Even if you fly up out of view they could look for drones in a radius flying down into view and connect the dots.
Resolution of those cameras is limited and they are usually angled down. Also they are not on private property. So it can be assumed that max detection rate of a average sized done is maybe 80m tops, after that the drone itself is smaller than a singular pixel of the cam. Meanwhile range of those drones can be multiple km.
If u had said they can use the integrated wide band SDR recordings of cell towers to triangulate the remote controller…i would have given u a point, but triangulating a drone using cameras that look down is not credible.
One of the big controversies is that these companies do have access to cameras on private property, using things like ring doorbell cameras.
And depending on conditions, you can still track the movement of something smaller than a pixel. Smaller than a pixel doesn’t mean invisible, it affects the color of that pixel and you can track the movement of the disrupted pixel.
And you have to actually get close enough you the camera lens to damage it, so there is continuity; they’re not just looking at a strange color pixel and leaping to the conclusion that it is a drone, they see the drone flying off into the distance (in reverse) and cross reference it with other cameras to track the movement at a distance.It’s a lot of effort, but protecting the investments of the wealthy is one of the only things that will mobilize both the finances of the wealthy and the actual effort of the police.
I wonder how hard it would be to rig up a teeny drone with a bit of thermite?
That’s an expensive way to get rid of a single camera, and they could theoretically track a drone around the city like they track people, and they’d track it back to you.
I assume it’s mostly Americans affected by this so, genuine question. Why buy a laser when one of your regular guns will do a better job, with the same legal ramifications?
Lasering a camera absolutely does not have the same legal ramifications as shooting a gun in public, to say nothing of the safety concerns that come with shooting bullets into the air.
While I 100% agree, shooting a laser powerful enough to burn camera sensors sounds like something dangerous enough that I’d be worried of a reflection blinding someone
High-power lasers are dangerous and you certainly should not operate them if you don’t know what you’re doing, but they are not in the same ballpark as bullets from guns. And if we’re talking strictly about legal jeopardy, IDK I’m not a lawyer but I imagine a prosecutor would have a hard time convincing a jury that a laser is as dangerous as a gun. Not saying it couldn’t happen, but if I had to go to trial with one or the other I know what my preference would be.
“Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I’d like to present you with evidence of why a laser is, in fact, more dangerous than a gun. Please turn your attention to the screen:”
A laser won’t kill me if it hits my stomach. A bullet very much might.
On the other hand, a bullet won’t blind a dozen people if it hits a reflective surface. A laser might.
OK, I hear you. How bout baseball bats? They’re something every American has.
My point is that they don’t look too hard to destroy. Why fuck about with lasers?
They’re usually high up enough that baseball bats would be tough, but they’re an option for some situations. Lasers are nice because they’re inexpensive(ish) and can be operated from a vehicle, e.g. just roll up on a bike, blast the sensor, and scram. There are other options, but if you have a high-power laser already and want to strike a blow for freedom, this is one way to do it.
Generally they’re mounted high enough you can’t hit them with a stick (totally sincere here: I am so curious where the idea that every american has a baseball bat came from. We don’t, that’s like assuming every canadian has a hockey stick). The best method of physically damaging them is just to loop a chain around them and pull them down then hit them with your standard-issue Size 2 Louisville Slugger. But that takes time and several people, so for a quick & clean takedown laser pointers are fairly effective.
Idk, if your laser misses and hits an aircraft you’re in for a much worse time than simply firing a gun in public (as long as your bullet doesn’t hit someone)
That may be the stupidest justification for shooting a gun in the air that I’ve ever heard, and I have heard some doozies. The odds that you’ll accidentally intersect an aircraft are astronomically low, and even if you do, it’ll only be for a fraction of a second at most unless you are intentionally tracking the aircraft. To compare that to the danger of firing bullets in the air is absurd. If your best plan for disabling flock cameras is to shoot them with guns, please redirect your activism elsewhere because that is dangerously irresponsible.
Whoa there, chill out. I’m not trying to justify anything and I didn’t say anything about shooting a gun into the air at an airplane.
My point was that hitting aircraft with a laser is pretty much a fuck you in the ass federal offense, whereas firing a gun in public, into the ground for example, will most likely only be a local or state level charge, if anything at all, especially if there’s no injuries or proved intent of harm.
Also, IANAL.
I am chill, but I have no interest in mincing words: what you said was very stupid and can (and does) get people killed. Don’t shoot guns in the air. If that’s the only plan you can think of, do nothing until you think of a better plan.
👍
Pointing laser pointers at planes is a federal crime because air traffic is federally regulated. Reckless discharge (steady lads) in a high traffic area, which is where flock cameras are located, falls under state jurisdiction because those laws are state regulated.
The jurisdiction in which a crime is committed does not dictate the severity of the punishment - while lasering a plane generally carries a severe punishment, it’s unlikely it would even be noticed by the crew unless you’re specifically targeting that plane. It’s certainly going to carry a lower sentence than reckless discharge (steady) in a populated area during the commission of a crime.
What?! Lol. No man. Just no
Because not only are guns expensive and quite difficult to learn to shoot accurately, shooting at things in crowded areas is likely going to kill someone? And is much more illegal than using a laser pointer for vandalism, even if you don’t hit someone?
Guns are loud and draw attention. Also, in addition to Flock cameras, Flock also installs gunshot detectors all over the place that detect and triangulate gunshots.
Sound.
OK, but, to shoot a handheld laser at a camera and hit the CCD, you have to be in it’s field of view. You could shoot it with a gun outside of it’s field of view. So, is it a greater risk to make a noise, and not be capture on CCTV, or be silent in full view of a law enforcement camera? All things to bear in mind when you’re figuring out the best ways to destroy these things.
This seems
almost dishonestreal unfamiliar with the subject in how it’s presented. The immediacy of the attention you get is really important: A gunshot can be heard for over a kilometer in any direction, even through walls. A laser pointer is both much less noticible and much less dangerous to bystanders.edit: wow, I phrased that like an asshole, sorry.
You’d be better off calling in a drone strike. Capable of hitting the target from beyond visual range (over the horizon) with a low risk of missing due to the explosive payload, and zero chance of being heard or seen by any camera in the area.
Sarcasm aside, a gun is loud enough to cause permanent hearing damage to those around you, and the bullet will over penetrate the camera, continue to fly, and possibly hit someone downrange of the camera. Especially since cameras like that are obviously located in high traffic areas with a large number of people passing through. So under ideal conditions where you hit your target, odds are good that you will also hit a person. And in the event that you miss? Well, you most likely just shot someone. Isaac Newton is the meanest son of a bitch in space for a reason and 9mm is the preferred pistol round for the police and military because its generally larger size and smaller powder charge compared to other rounds means that it has a lower velocity and is therefore less likely to pass through a target and the wall behind them and hit somebody in an adjacent room.
Yeah well the otherwise very pro 2nd amendment rural locality of my childhood had a law on the books saying the sheriff could refuse to issue a gun license without stating their reason. I was told by a libertarian relative that the subtext there was that it was a law that had managed to slip by the civil rights movement by not explicitly specifying race. The second amendment, like many things in this country, is not actually executed equally.
It’s one of those things where I definitely think libertarians are missing the whole picture but also that relative “shot themselves in the head” during the tea party / occupy wall street movement. Now they were a veteran with a TBI and a lot of undiagnosed emotional problems, so I’ll at least give it a coinflip that they really did shoot themselves. I also hadn’t spoken with them for a few months leading up to that so 🫴🪙
Because it sounds cool, and people who don’t know any better imagine that you’ll instantly be able to invisible fry the thing rather than having to stand there with a bright green beam illuminating the thing so brightly you can’t look directly at it until it starts smoking, and meanwhile the reflections have blinded everyone in the street almost instantly.
I want to be able to avoid these. Is this one that I should not use?
Lasers on AliExpress might be 1% or 100.000% of the listed power. It might be super dangerous when you think it’s safe, or vice versa.
Never use AliExpress when it comes to things that need to keep you safe, or that go into your body.
I appreciate the warning. Thank you.
Also you have no idea what wavelength they actually are, so your safety gear (you do have safety gear, right?) may be totally worthless!
Another commenter recommends a NUBM44-V2 laser diode from ebay such as this one:
This is pretty cool but I should probably stick with a pre-built, off-the-shelf device. I like being able to see.
i’m all for guerilla destruction of flock cameras
or you can saw of the pole its attached to, like they did elsewhere, or throw objects at it to break it.
Old school shit is usually the best shit.
Any body has a link to which lasers to avoid just so I don’t even come close?
well that sucks, i was planning to do that later. there goes my night 🫤
