4um: Hidden Cameras in DTV Converters? YouTube Hoax Fans Conspiracy Fears. Thank you Alex Jones. What did you say about it?

Title: Hidden Cameras in DTV Converters? YouTube Hoax Fans Conspiracy Fears. Thank you Alex Jones. What did you say about it?
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2009/02/dtv-converters.html
Published: Feb 24, 2009
Author: .
Post Date: 2009-02-24 12:26:42 by PSUSA
Keywords: None
Views: 598
Comments: 30

Ever wonder what the government is really up to paying for all those digital TV converter boxes? Last week a Spokane, Washington man claimed he'd discovered the horrifying truth, and he produced a YouTube video to prove it.

In a 90-second video that's popping up on tin-foil-hat sites everywhere, 28-year-old software engineer Adam Chronister is seen cracking open his government-subsidized Magnavox converter, and revealing to the world the tiny video camera and microphone hidden inside.

"I had a friend who was trying to tell me that they put cameras in these things," Chronister narrates in a deadly-serious monotone. "So what I did was open it up to prove them wrong, and lo and behold ... this thing does in fact have both a camera and a microphone. " His finger points at a small lens attached to a transformer in the guts of the unit.

The video instantly went viral, tapping into a current of DTV conspiracy theory that's been building online since the government started issuing $40 converter box coupons last summer.

So far, the U.S. has spent $1.3 billion subsidizing the boxes that will keep TV lovers watching CSI when the last broadcasters shut off their analog transmissions in June. The huge government effort to put a -- mysterious, to many -- piece of technology in millions of American homes has spurred conspiracy theories ranging from a mind control experiments to mass telescreen surveillance.

Last week Chronister's video was promoted on the conspiracy-friendly Alex Jones radio show, and as of Monday the clip has chalked up almost 200,000 views and over 850 comments, many skeptical, but an equal number expressing alarm. "This is nuts! I had an odd feeling when the government planned to pay for everyone [to] get one of these," wrote one viewer. "Yup, that's a camera, and a mic. Holy shit. I am taking my DVR apart tonight," added another.

In an interview with Threat Level, Chronister admits the whole thing was a hoax, concocted in about five minutes with a hot glue gun and parts from an old cell phone. The reaction surprised even him.

"I was listening to the Alex Jones show ... and I heard him mention the video," Chronister says. "I just about fell out of the shower."

Chronister says the video is partially true: A friend really did share the rumor about hidden camera in the DTV converters. "I originally opened up the device with the intention of proving him wrong," says Chronister. "At which point the thought popped in my head, wouldn't it be funny if I proved him right instead?"

Observers in more technical forums like BroadbandReports.com have dissected the video and easily discerned that it's a hoax, with some taking apart their own converter boxes to provide proof. But even as posts debunking the clip roll into his YouTube comments, some remain convinced of its veracity. "There are still people defending the video," he says.

As a sometimes-believer of conspiracy theories himself, Chronister is sympathetic. But critics charge that Chronister's prank only provides a smoke screen for genuine government wrongdoing.

"I've seen videos go viral before, but I never thought some stupid little video I did would get popular like that," he says. "I'm waiting for the Magnavox police to come and haul me off or something." (1 image)

Did AJ give this any credibility? I dont know, I don't listen to his show. But I have a pretty good idea that he probably did...

Erectus Walks Amongst Us
I will not go to Auschwitz. I have ordered the book. Da-do-run-run-run Da-do-run-run.

Law Enforcement Against Prohibition

"Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." ~~ IndieTx

You think the people of this country exist to provide you with position. I think your position exists to provide those people with freedom.~~William Wallace

He does have good info, IMO. But he is getting sloppy. He needs to a much better job of verifying info BEFORE he opens his mouth or puts it on his sites.

How this hoax got past him, I dont know. It's so easy to verify as a hoax. It's not as if there is only 1 converter box out there.

~ bingo as with all 'conspiracies' - a lil dis-info goes a long way if they start puttin cameras in em tomorrow, who would believe you now? or better, the real camera is in there now and could be seen ifin the magician wasn't so good at getting us to look at his other hand *s oh yea, FYI - the tinfoil doesn't help

I don't feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. (Galileo Galilei)

He predicted the WTC attacks two months before they happened. (You can check his archives.)

AND PLEASE NOTE: ALEX DEBUNKED THIS ON HIS SHOW AS I WAS LISTENING AND REFERENCED AN ENGINEER WHO HAD TAKEN ONE OF THESE CONVERTORS APART AND FOUND THAT THE SNOOP CAMERA LENS REFERRED TO IN THIS HOAX WAS IN FACT AN INFRARED SENSOR LIKE THAT FOUND IN ANY ORDINARY CABLE BOX OR DVD PLAYER.

I'd advise my friends here to be alert for similars ops. The target of such hoaxes is the credibility and independence of the internet.

With the current crowd of crooks and liars and enemies of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights in office, you can be sure that further attacks on facts and truth are in the pipeline.

Like I said, he provides some good info. His movies are good too. But I have also caught him being careless about the articles he posts. Do I have specifics available? No links, not offhand. I remember one was a bill that obamessiah liked that wanted to disarm us, and arms weren't even mentioned, it was a UN charity fund bill IIRC. Then there was a recent one by Paul Roberts (I think) that was totally bogus (It was satire, not news, regarding omamessiah demanding a military loyalty oath to himself). There have been others, but who can remember all that. I haven't even been to his site lately.

I listen to AJ's show regularly and heard him debunk this video, as randge said 'in no uncertain terms'. he actually spent a lot of time on it, discussing false stories that discredit in the minds of the public, real facts such as those he covers.

Also, since the WIRED column had to iss e a correction about what Jones said, I doubt that infowars ever 'promoted' any 'hoax'. I would like to find the actual url and title of the video they posted. I bet it says hoax in the title.

I actually assumed these devices were tracking devices until I heard his take on it. Not that i gave it a lot of thought since i dont even watch tv, but why would the government pay everyone to buy a box and attach it to their tv? I'm still not convinced it's benevolent, regardless of what anyone says. I know people who dont even believe in conspiracies say that that is suspicious.

Glory to God in the highest, and Peace to His people on Earth.
"I don't know where Bin Laden is. I truly am not that concerned about him"
George W, Bush, 3/13/02 http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html

http://www.prisonplanet.com/hidden-spy-camera-mic-found-inside-digital-tv- box.html

and here is the mirrored, google cache of the original article, (linked from the wired blog,) which AJ scrapped after realizing it was a hoax:

But even the orignal story states that the disputed validity of this youtube vid does not take away from the proven facts:

A popular video circulating on You Tube shows the discovery of a spy camera and a microphone hidden inside a digital TV converter box. Such devices are part of a government and industry surveillance program that is undoubtedly connected to the forced digital TV switchover being rolled out in the UK and US.

“I could not believe my eyes,” states the blurb accompanying the video clip, “I have a friend who is kind of a conspiracy theorist. He was trying to convince me that many of the digital TV convert boxes that are coming out have microphones and cameras built into them. Knowing a bit about electronics I bought one of these devices opened it up fully intending on proving him wrong. To my surprise he was right. This device has both a miniature camera lens and what looks like a microphone. I was so shocked I took pictures and video. Please send this out to everyone you know who is using one of these devices.”

The camera and microphone were hidden inside a MAGNAVOX TB110MW9 Digital to Analog Converter box. We are not suggesting that every digital cable box has a spy camera and microphone inside, so ripping open your cable box is not a good way to prove this one way or another - but the fact remains that companies like Google and Comcast have openly announced that they plan to use hidden cameras and microphones inside their products to spy on consumers.

Broadband sees key to home security. (News).

There's more than just entertainment coming down the broadband highway into consumers' homes. Broadband-linked homes could also be a lot safer in the not-too-distant future.

"Traditional home security systems are connected from the home to the security company or a police station via an RF connection over a phone or power line, but a broadband link versus a dial-up connection definitely provides value to consumers for home security," says Navin Sabharwal, director-residential and networking technologies at Allied Business Intelligence.

"Using the Internet as a gateway to the home security system is nothing new -- ADT's been doing it for some time now," Sabharwal adds. "What is new is what broadband brings to the table. While security data packets only require low bandwidth to be transmitted, the advantage to broadband is it's always on -- other connections are more vulnerable. Broadband also easily facilitates access to closed circuit televisions or streaming video. This offers more convenience to consumers, as they want the flexibility to control their home networks remotely."

That's what attracted Jerry Lindauer and William Glasgow, two former Prime Cable executives, to launch @Security Broadband in June 1999. Cox Communications recently began testing their broadband-based security technology in Las Vegas with the goal of introducing the @Security service later this year.

"Our system doesn't tie up the phone line," says @Security CEO Glasgow. "We will provide a new, non-competing revenue stream while enabling [cable operators] to provide a service that will enhance their value proposition to their customers."

"Cox believes the cable market is ready for this technology," says Jeff Brown, Cox director-business development. "Leveraging off our broadband investment, we hope to deliver a new, state-of-the-art product."

The Austin, Texas-based startup aims to create the next generation of home security products by tapping into high-speed broadband Internet's audio and video capabilities. Besides offering audio and video alarm verification, @Security provides Web- ready in-home cameras and two-way microphones along with 24-hour monitoring and a secure password-protected Web site with a remote system.

The service allows cable broadband subscribers to arm or disarm their systems by accessing up to four cameras to monitor their homes via an Internet connection. The system could also be used to monitor caregivers or elderly family members at home.

Glasgow and Lindauer estimate their add-on security feature could provide as much as $100 incremental cash flow per cable customer.

Security's founders have raised more than $14 million from venture capitalists and cable operators to fund technology research and integration, conduct consumer research and explore security and safety content opportunities.

Cable investors include Cox Communications, Comcast, Adelphia Communications, Cablevision Systems and Charter Communications.

Lindauer and Glasgow aren't the only ones plying the broadband home security market. At this year's Consumer Electronics Show, Home Director unveiled the software applications it is developing for security and other networking features via gateway and set-top boxes.

The Morrisville, N.C.-based company is creating home networking integration products -- software and hardware -- for cable modem systems and advanced digital set-top boxes. The company is working with Motorola to integrate its software applications in DCT-5000+set-top boxes.

Home Director's software allows users to connect to and control a home's networked systems via the Internet. Users have live access to their at- home security devices along with entertainment and communications features.

"Packaged solutions make home networking easy," says Mary Walker, Home Director's president/CEO. "By developing product bundles that build off a home networking foundation, we are able to offer solutions that give homeowners the useful applications they want at the prices they can afford."

The company's communication networking hardware and software package is available now, while its home security and entertainment packages are slated for release by the end of the first quarter of 2001, according to Home Director public relations manager Scott Yates.

Erectus Walks Amongst Us
I will not go to Auschwitz. I have ordered the book. Da-do-run-run-run Da-do-run-run.

Oh really? Where is this open announcement? This is completely different from what JT posted.

The reason I'm not a conspiracist is because I have a brain. Conspiracists fall for anything, the most stupid it is, the more ridiculous, the more outrageous, and they get sucked right in.

As we highlighted three years ago, private industry and eventually government is planning to use microphones in the computers of an estimated 150 million-plus Internet active Americans, as well as similar devices installed inside digital TV boxes, to spy on their lifestyle choices and build psychological profiles which will be used for surveillance and minority report style invasive advertising and data mining.

Digital cable TV boxes, such as Scientific Atlanta, have had secret in-built microphones inside them since their inception in the late 199057;s and these originally dormant devices were planned to be activated when the invasive advertising revolution was being rolled out, a watershed that is quickly becoming a reality.

The advent of digital video recording devices such as TiVo (Sky Plus in the UK) introduced the creation of psychological algorithm profiles - databases on what programs you watched, how long you watched them for, and which adverts you liked or didn57;t like. This information was retained by TiVo and sold to the highest bidders - an example being Janet Jackson’s wardrobe malfunction during the 2003 Super Bowl half-time show; TiVo were able to compile lists of how many people had rewound the clip and how many times they had replayed it.

In 2006, Google announced that they would use in-built computer microphones to listen in on user57;s background noise, be it television, music or radio - and then direct advertising at them based on their preferences.

The cameras would use body-form recognition to confirm who was in the room and then tailor program recommendations, as well as commercials, to target that member of the family.

The first thing that came out of our mouths when we heard that Google is working on a system that listens to what's on your TV playing in the background, and then serves you relevant adverts, was "that's cool, but dangerous".

The idea appeared in Technology Review citing Peter Norvig, director of research at Google, who says these ideas will show up eventually in real Google products - sooner rather than later.

The idea is to use the existing PC microphone to listen to whatever is heard in the background, be it music, your phone going off or the TV turned down. The PC then identifies it, using fingerprinting, and then shows you relevant content, whether that's adverts or search results, or a chat room on the subject.

And, of course, we wouldn’t put it past Google to store that information away, along with the search terms it keeps that you've used, and the web pages you have visited, to help it create a personalised profile that feeds you just the right kind of adverts/content. And given that it is trying to develop alternative approaches to TV advertising, it could go the extra step and help send "content relevant" advertising to your TV as well.

We suspect that such a world would be rather eerie, with a constant feeling of déjà vu every time anyone watched TV.

Technology Review said Google talked about this software in Europe last June, and that it breaks sound into a five-second snippets to pick out audio from a TV, reducing the snippet to a digital "fingerprint", which it matches on an internet server.

Given the furore caused when AOL released searches on the internet, there might be more than a few civil liberties activists less than happy for Google to put this idea into practice. Also, given that Google provides the software link between its search software and the microphone, it's a small step to making the same link to any webcams attached to the PC.

Pretty soon the security industry is going to find a way to hijack the Google feed and use it for full on espionage.

Google says that its fingerprinting technology makes it impossible for the company (or anyone else) to eavesdrop on other sounds in the room, such as personal conversations, because the conversion to a fingerprint is made on the PC, and a fingerprint can't be reversed, as it's only an identity.

But we should think that "spyware" might take on an extra meaning if someone less scrupulous decided on a similar piece of software.

The Google program converts sound into graphs, weeds out background noise, and reduces the graphs to key features that can then be translated into just four bytes of information, so that the fingerprints for an entire year of television programming would add up to no more than a few gigabytes, the company said.

Meanwhile, in an unconnected announcement this week, Google said it has signed a multi-year agreement with online auction giant eBay, to provide text-based advertising outside the US.

The companies also plan to launch a "click-to-call" advertising function on eBay using Skype and Google Talk.

Comcast Cameras to Start Watching You? If you have some tinfoil handy, now might be a good time to fashion a hat. At the Digital Living Room conference today, Gerard Kunkel, Comcast’s senior VP of user experience, told me the cable company is experimenting with different camera technologies built into devices so it can know who’s in your living room.

The idea being that if you turn on your cable box, it recognizes you and pulls up shows already in your profile or makes recommendations. If parents are watching TV with their children, for example, parental controls could appear to block certain content from appearing on the screen. Kunkel also said this type of monitoring is the “holy grail” because it could help serve up specifically tailored ads. Yikes.

Kunkel said the system wouldn’t be based on facial recognition, so there wouldn’t be a picture of you on file (we hope). Instead, it would distinguish between different members of your household by recognizing body forms. He stressed that the system is still in the experimental phase, that there hasn’t been consumer testing, and that any rollout “must add value” to the viewing experience beyond serving ads.

Perhaps I’ve seen Enemy of the State too many times, or perhaps I’m just naive about the depths to which Comcast currently tracks my every move. I can’t trust Comcast with BitTorrent, so why should I trust them with my must-be-kept- secret, DVR-clogging addiction to Keeping Up with the Kardashians?

Kunkel also spoke on camera with me about fixing bad Comcast user experiences, the ongoing BitTorrent battle and VOD. But he mostly towed the corporate line on these issues (the monitoring your living room came up after my camera was put away).

Update: Comcast Responds to Camera Story The story of Comcast’s desire to know who’s in your living room has certainly touched off a web-wide frenzy, starting in our comments section and finding its way into The New York Times.

Gerard Kunkel, Comcast senior vice president of user experience, and the man interviewed for the original story, responded in our post comments section. In the interest of fairness, we wanted to give Mr. Kunkel’s response more prominence.

Your article on “Comcast Cameras to Start Watching You” portrayed some assumptions that require correction and clarification. I want to be clear that in no way are we exploring any camera devices that would monitor customer behavior.

To gather information for your article on Comcast’s exploration of cameras you picked up on my conversation with another conference attendee. The other attendee and I were deep in a conversation discussing a variety of input devices offered by a variety of vendors that Comcast is reviewing.

The camera-based gesture recognition device is in no way designed to – or capable of – monitoring your living room. These technologies are designed to allow simple navigation on a television set just as the Wii remote uses a camera to manage its much heralded gesture-based interactivity.

We are constantly exploring new technologies that better serve our customers. The goal is simple – a better user experience that allows the consumer to get ever increasing value out of their Comcast products.

As with any new technology, we carefully consider the consumer benefits. In fact, we do an enormous amount of consumer testing in advance of making a product decision such as this. I’m confident that a new technology like gesture- based navigation will be fully explored with consumers to understand the product’s feature benefits – and of course, the value to the consumer.

Sincerely, Gerard Kunkel I responded to Mr. Kunkel in our comment with the following:

Just to further clarify. After you granted me our initial video interview, you brought up the topic of Comcast knowing who was in the living room in a conversation between you, myself and another conference attendee.

I actually left and came back to follow up on this point while you were talking with that same attendee. At this point, you were aware that I was a reporter and I took handwritten notes in front of you as we talked to make sure I had an accurate accounting of what you were saying.

I’d love to talk further with either you or someone else at Comcast to follow up on this story.

Thank you! It's older info but it was news to me. Especially the comcast article.

I already have the cam built in to my laptop taped over knowing how (probably) easy it could be activated without my knowing it. I know, call me paranoid... Living in a police state will do that.

I appreciate the fact that you don't blindly believe 'anyone', and i know his style seems exagerated at times and he skims over details . But I think Alex is great. He always says research it for yourself. I listen to his show daily via cell phone now, it's very entertaining. 512-646-5000 24 hour listen line

That comcast article was, IMO, a little weak. Not to say it's not true, but in checking a little deeper it might have been misinterpreted. All articles I found linked back to that story. Comcast might be a rotting corpse full of maggots, but this story, IMO, isnt the one to prove it.

I've listened to him on coast-to-coast. But every time I went thru Austin I couldnt find his broadcast. So either he isn't on AM, or FM, or my timing was off.

no, i wouldn't. i'm not one to wear t-shirts with any kind of logo on them. i don't want to draw attention to myself when out in public in that mannner.

interesting. my wife is the same way. I'm sort of the opposite, I'm gonna wear a 911 inside job t shirt next time i go to traffic court just for fun. lol! ;-)

I like that anti bush/obama shirt. i have found that shirts, bottons and stickers are a great way to start convos and find they often lead to meeting like minded new people. Patriots often speculate that very few think like them, but i dont think that is true.

Just last night i was in a rstaurant and there were 3 friends having dinner at a table. One was a chiropractor, one an engineer and the 3rd guy i dont know his career. They struck up a convo about something else, but by the end of 5 minutes we had begun a convo about 911 inside job and they occultists who run our govt. These were 3 complete strangers yet they knew all about it!

I have no desire to listen to them because I just dont trust them. I have a problem with the reliability of the info some of them present. Hal Turner, for example.