Personal Black Box? Vuze+ Camera MAY do much of the work?

[jim bell]

 I posted this a few days ago, but that was during a time in which some people (including me) were having problems with the CP list.
              Jim Bell

    On Thursday, June 18, 2020, 12:15:14 AM PDT, jim bell <jdb10987 at yahoo.com> wrote:  
 
  I am still waiting for a response from Vuze, the camera manufacturer.  It (Vuze+) may do almost everything necessary to acquire the images and process them into  stereoscopic 3D.  I didn't start out wanting full stereoscopic recording, but it's an interesting feature nevertheless.
The amount of data to be outputted in rather large:  80-120 megabytes per second.  Merely storing it into a SSD would probably not take a lot of CPU effort, since the compression should already have been done.  80 megabytes per second would allow 12,500 seconds of video for each 1 terabyte of SSD storage.  SSD's of 2+ terabytes seem to be readily available.  
I have seen the specs for various WiFi levels:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wi-Fi


Wi-Fi generations| Generation/IEEE Standard | Maximum Linkrate | Adopted | Frequency |
| Wi‑Fi 6 (802.11ax) | 600–9608 Mbit/s | 2019 | 2.4/5 GHz
1–6 GHz ISM
 |
| Wi‑Fi 5 (802.11ac) | 433–6933 Mbit/s | 2014 | 5 GHz |
| Wi‑Fi 4 (802.11n) | 72–600 Mbit/s | 2009 | 2.4/5 GHz |
| Wi‑Fi 3 (802.11g) | 3–54 Mbit/s | 2003 | 2.4 GHz |
| Wi‑Fi 2 (802.11a) | 1.5 to 54 Mbit/s | 1999 | 5 GHz |
| Wi‑Fi 1 (802.11b) | 1 to 11 Mbit/s | 1999 | 2.4 GHz |


If I am understanding this correctly, WiFi 4 would ALMOST transfer 80 megabytes/second.  WiFi 5 and WiFi 6 would have plenty of capacity to transfer the camera's output from one cell phone to one nearby, perhaps 10s of meters away, to ensure that all the data is safely stored at the scene.    
I assume that these data throughput numbers are based on no other device nearby using a part of the WiFi bands.  
I certainly hope that the Vuze+ camera system allows the data to be split up, say on a frame-by-frame basis.  The 4G or 5G might be used to transfer as many frames as possible on a second-by-second basis, to a remote location.   

Once I get a good picture of the feasibility of this concept, I will be able to look for money to finance it.  This might be called a "political" idea, because as America has seen over the last few months, video provides the impetus to publicize events.  I think there will probably be many people who want this idea to succeed.  GoFundMe is an option, as well.
           Jim Bell


    On Monday, June 15, 2020, 04:58:07 PM PDT, jim bell <jdb10987 at yahoo.com> wrote:  
 
 I've done some more research, and it seems that existing components could do a substantial part of this project.  Consider the Vuze camera, specifically the Vuze+.    https://vuze.camera/  
It has 8 cameras, in four pairs, aiming in the horizontal plane, and is able to use them to record stereoscopic views.   https://vuze.camera/camera/vuze-plus-camera  
   This MIGHT be even better than I anticipated.  This device refers to recording data on SD cards.   Great, unless the device is smashed or stolen.  I consider it to be an essential part of this device that it port a substantial fraction of the data away from the cameraman, perhaps many tens of meters away.  But it mentions WiFi:  Does that mean that the entire data stream can be transmitted?   Even if the data can be only transmitted 'nearby', say 30-100 meters away, by WiFi, that would be a great feature.  
The specification sheet      https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/91Hcr5ModJL.pdf   mentions a data rate of 120 MB/second or 80MB/second.  Note that it's MB, meaning megaBYTE per second, not merely megabit/second.  
The specs say that the data is written to a SD card.  Can this be expanded using a 1 terabyte (or  larger) SSD?  Unclear.  The data is compressed to MP4.
It also mentions:   WiFi IEEE 802.11b/g/n 2.4 GHZ
I can tell, from:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wi-Fi     that WiFi4, 802.11n can do a link from:  "72-600 million bits per second".
Already, I see a hitch:  Does this mean that this device can transmit 80MB x 8 bits, or 640 megabits/second, since the link can only go to "600 million bits per second".  
While it would be nice to be able to transmit the entire data stream locally, as long as all that stream goes into a local SSD, I suppose it would be okay if "only" half the data, say 320 megabits/second, were transmitted by WiFi to another portable system carried by a different person a few tens of meters away.   But one question I have is this:  Can the data stream be readily 'split up', so that only a portion of it is transmitted?  Or is it an 'all or nothing' sort of thing?
And I think it's important that a smaller fraction of the data be transmitted by 4G or 5G cell data.  
                         Jim Bell

    
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 14871 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20200621/e0584172/attachment.txt>