• fiat_lux@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 hours ago

    It’s a wonder people haven’t started throwing water balloons filled with mud and flour at the cameras. Perhaps he should be grateful that’s not a trend?

    • phutatorius@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      7 hours ago

      I think a drone with a remotely-actuated spray can of black paint would be more fun. Come down from above so nothing is caught by the camera. Control it by a fiber link so that there’s no signal to identify the drone.

      Funny you should ask, yeah, I was discussing this the other day with some fellow techies down the pub.

      • bluesheep@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        7 hours ago

        I would’ve guessed that wireless would be the way to go since a fiber cable is quite literally a physical trace to your position. Are drones that easily identified by their wireless signal?

        • Tiger_Man_@szmer.info
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 hours ago

          setting up 2 recievers to calculate the signal source position is significantly easier than tracing a cable as thick as spider’s web

          • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 hours ago

            So don’t do it from your house, go to a remote, unrelated location. By the time they get the video, analyze it, track back the signal, the camera is painted, and you’re long gone.

            Of course there may be cameras near that remote, unrelated location, so be careful of anything identifying, like a vehicle or your face.