"Blinking"

[nbk2000]

With the prices of digital cameras plummeting by the hour (OK, slight exageration), their quality and usefulness increases by similar leaps and bounds.

With all the laws passed since 9/11, not just in the US but also most of the world, police and government agents are now being allowed to covertly enter your home to fiddle with your computer, plant hidden surveillance devices, and otherwise snoop around. And they don't have to tell you that they've done this...ever.

With these facts in mind, the idea of using Time Compression (fancy words for time lapse) photography came to mind, as a way of catching the snoops snooping.

See, if you try to remember how things were placed when you leave, you'll invariably miss the small signs of snooping since it's SOP for them to take polaroids to ensure things are emplaced as they were before the snooping.

However, no matter how much they try to replace things exactly as they were, it's impossible to do. There will ALWAYS be some deviation, no matter how slight, from original placement.

But, even with two side by side photos, the eye can't tell the difference if the difference is small enough.

That's where "Blinking" comes in. This is a technique used by astronomers who are looking for deep space objects (asteroids, whatnot). They take pictures of the same space, but at widely seperated times, and then compare the two pictures using a "blinker". This is an optical device that rapidly switches back and forth between the two pictures.

The human eye, being that of a predatory animal, is keyed to the detection of movement. While we can't see stationary objects very well, we can detect minute movement quite easily. By rapidly switching between the two pictures, this creates the illusion of movement that allows for easy detection.

We'd use the same principle, using our computers, to detect the snoops.

This is done by using a digital camera to take a picture of (whatever), then taking another picture at a later time from the EXACT same spot, and using your computer to rapidly flash back and forth between the two pictures. ANY movement will become evident.

For this to work, the pictures have to be taken from the EXACT same place, at seperate times, otherwise any detected movement may simply be a shift in perspective caused by the slightly shifted camera position.

To ensure exact placement, the area to be protected by blinking can have some immovable object used as a fixed point of reference. This could be something like a mounted frame into which the camera would be placed when "blinking", or several holes drilled into a large piece of furntiture into which a camera mounted stud fitting would fit into to ensure exact alingment.

Since the camera is digital, and the media is likely to be removable and the size of a small coin, you can leave the camera hidden at home and just take the media with you. Before leaving, you "blink" the scene, then take the media with you so it can't be tampered with. When you get back, you "blink" it again and compare the images.

The resolution of detection would be dependant on the cameras resolution, and the distance of the moved object from the POV of the camera. The closer the camera is to the moved object, the better the camera resolution, the more precisely the object has to be replaced to avoid "blink" detection.

At macro ranges, you could "blink" your computers motherboard (assuming open case, like mine) and compare it over time to ensure that nothing "extra" has been added to it that might be transmitting what you're typing to FBI surveillance crews.

This could be used for non-TFH (Tin Foil Hat) purposes, like telling if the motel maid went through your luggage, or such.

[Rat Bastard]

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica"> With all the laws passed since 9/11, not just in the US but also most of the world, police and government agents are now being allowed to covertly enter your home to fiddle with your computer, plant hidden surveillance devices, and otherwise snoop around. And they don't have to tell you that they've done this...ever. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">Christ this is 1984!

I should try that with my camera (Nikon CoolPix 995)
<img src="http://krimzonpyro.com/rat/photo/coolpix-995.gif" alt=" - " />

I never knew about this "blinking technique" untill now; thanks.

[Eliteforum]

Not related to "blinking" but I thought this might prove intresting reading.

DIRT stands for Data Interception by Remote Transmission (or Terminal not sure).

It is a program that allows the spooks and law enforcement to monitor your online computer activity from a remote location. With this, there is no need to break into your home/office and monkey around with your box.

Beware IIRC, it also has an option to UPLOAD evidence without leaving evidence of the act.

Even in your own home your not secure..!

Edit: <a href="http://www.codexdatasystems.com/menu.html" target="_blank">Link</a>

<small>[ January 18, 2003, 10:36 AM: Message edited by: Eliteforum ]</small>

[Machiavelli]

DIRT is just another crappy trojan, but if you want to know more about it, this link is far better than linking to the manufacturer:
<a href="http://cryptome.org/dirt-files.htm" target="_blank">http://cryptome.org/dirt-files.htm</a>

[nbk2000]

Visual aids are obviously needed here.

This is two pictures taken at seperate times. An object in view has been moved 1/2". Can you tell what the object is?

<img src="http://nbk2000.freeyellow.com/blink.jpg" alt=" - " />

Once you've given up, click on <a href="http://nbk2000.freeyellow.com/blinking.gif" target="_blank">this link</a> to see "blinking" in action. Much easier, isn't it?

With a 1/8" movement, it looks like it's shivering. :D

After furthur testing, I've figured out that, for the scene above, the lowest detectable movement is about the thickness of a penny or two. :)

However, the movement of this small of a distance is only possible when the object is moved across the FOV. A movement of more than 1/2" is required to be detectable when the object is moved in line, towards or away from, the camera. :(

So, to maximize detectability, you'd want to "blink" the same scene from two POV, at 90&deg angles to each other. Thus, no matter which way something is moved, it'll be moved across the FOV of at least one of the POVs. :)

Another use would be to see if a cache or drop has been tampered with before going to collect it. It's been known for the FBI to follow a person, wait for them to finish doing the drop, then dig it up and swap out the contents for tampered/altered contents.

If you took a picture of the drop when you were done with it, and e-mailed it to the receiver, they could take a picture themselves (using the same type of camera from a marked location) so they could "blink" it before retrieval to detect possible tampering. :)

D.I.R.T. has absolutely nothing to do with this topic, thank you very much "elite", for trying to sidetrack my topic with OLD news. :mad:

<small>[ January 19, 2003, 03:44 AM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]</small>

[zeocrash]

thats amazing, i never thought it'd be that obvious, but that really does show movement

[metafractal]

While this is impressive, if one is to take this seriously will you really want to do this every day? Or what? You only check them when you think that your under suspicion? I'd say that it will be no conincadence that the day they do search your house will be the day that you dont check...
Dont bring in the element of human laziness: god invented computers for a reason. I'd say that it would be much more feasable to have a dedicated system with a few webcams coming out of it. Then, write a program to automatically take pictures either at set times or on demand of these spots, and warn you if the two pictures dont match. Only then would you analyze them in the manner that NBK showed. Of course, it would not be a simple pixel for pixel match, but it would not be terribly difficult to write an algorithm to detect the movement of whowle objects, even if only a quick and dirty edge detection and then the use of the 'magic wand' technique seen in many of todays graphic manipulation programs. If done elegantly, it could be failsafe and as easy as the press of the button. Neither the system nor the webcams would have to be of high standards. While we leave behind the Pentium Is and IIs of yesterday and sell them for 1/4 oz of pocket lint, the fact remains that they are still cabable of an enormous amount of data processing, especially when you take away all of the operating system's 'user friendly-ness'. And as for the webcams- they dont need to be 'pretty', as long as reasonably clear shapes can be made out.
I suspect that such a system could be built for under AU$1000 (thats about US$500), and it may well save you your freedom. I will certainly research further into the area, and if there is any support may even write some software to do the task.

[Jhonbus]

Striking demo, NBK.
Just some thoughts on why this is so much easier to see. As NBK said, it is clearly because of the movement factor. IE it is not just easy to see because one photo is overlaid on top of the other. So it must be because of our innate ability to detect movement. To demonstrate this, insert a blank frame, even for a short time, between the two frames you are "blinking". This disrupts the image, so the brain interprets it as two separate images rather than as one moving image. Doing this can make differences that would normaly be very obvious, become extremely difficult to see. Take a look at <a href="http://www.boomspeed.com/jhonbus/kayakflick.gif" target="_blank">http://www.boomspeed.com/jhonbus/kayakflick.gif</a> and see how long it takes you to figure out the difference between the two frames. Let it load first. (the server is extremely slow so it may take a while)

<small>[ January 19, 2003, 12:16 PM: Message edited by: Jhonbus ]</small>

[nbk2000]

Indeed, webcams are getting to the point of being free, after rebates and all that. :)

If you had several installed in various places around the house, you could simply use them as video surveillance cameras, since there's plenty of programs out there that'll activate the recording once they detect motion in their FOV. But that's not blinking.

See, if the computer is on the scene, and you're not, then that leaves it open to tampering which could remove any traces of the intrusion. But that'd be only if you relied on what was stored on the computer. If you copied snapshots off the webcams onto (for instance) a USB thumbdrive, and took it with you, then "they" couldn't fiddle with anything. :)

However, for us broke dicks, we'd just have to rely on a really cheap digital camera to do the same thing. The camera I used cost me $40 almost 2 years ago. I've seen them for $15 now.

I'm assuming that a person doesn't leave their "lair of evil" <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> very often, so they wouldn't have to do this every day, just on those odd days when they actually have to leave to go do something.

If the camera has a built in display, you might not even need to use a computer, if you can switch between the pictures fast enough.

Also, for our younger members still living at home, you could use this to tell if your siblings or parents have been poking through your chemical/porn stash. :p

Jhonbus, I tried that GIF you upped. It took me a couple minutes to figure it out. :o Then I removed the blank frames and blinked it. The difference between the two pictures was instantly obvious. :)

<small>[ January 19, 2003, 06:19 PM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]</small>

[A-BOMB]

I mean who doesn't have a "lair of evil" :D ,and alot of those webcams/cheap still camera can be easily free. If you know what I mean, I just got 2 new 1.3mega pixel AIPTEK DV2 for free, you just need to find the stores cameras blind spot(its usually in the appliance section or in desks/chairs, they think who is going to shoplift a desk)

[nbk2000]

As a demonstration of real world applicability, I took my crappy digicam to the nearby car dealership.

I know from having talked to one of them that there are rent-a-cops who are paid to sit in the parking lot all night and watch the place.

Since they have different guys, and different cars, you couldn't depend on recognizing the car he's sitting in. Usually they sit for an hour or so, then do a lap around the lot. And they're not there every night, just a few nights a week.

So, tonight I went out and took a picture of the lot, then came back 4 hours later to take another picture. Below is the result.

<a href="http://nbk2000.freeyellow.com/Blinking_Car.gif" target="_blank">http://nbk2000.freeyellow.com/Blinking_Car.gif</a>

Notice anything? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> :)

I tried showing the picture here, but it blinks too fast in the browser. Save it to your computer and use an image viewer to see the blink.

<small>[ February 03, 2003, 04:04 AM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]</small>

[Nico]

This camera has a 'surveillance mode' ... you can set it to snap pics at regular intervals, up to 19 days in a row apparently.
Other cameras may have this function too, this is just the first one I saw it at.

This still has the problem of the camera being physically onsite, and thus subject to tampering, but I figured y'all love hearing about a 'James Bond' camera! ;)

http://www.thinkgeek.com/electronics/cameras/655e/
http://www.thinkgeek.com/images/products/front/007camera-front.jpg

[Jacks Complete]

NBK2000,

I did a demo of this at Christmas for my other half! It is a very effective technique. I would recommend using a tripod mount fixed somewhere, and leaving the camera behind if you can. Best is a concealed camera, which can be toggled via your PC. That way, you can check in every so often, and the PC never forgets. It would also help with shifting light sources, as you will find that as the day passes, the shadows shift, and things seem to move.

Another thing to note is that many of the little webcams come with motion detection software now, which lets you set up a secure perimeter. I did one which was for "TrampWatchUK". If the PIR in the garden came on, it started recording ten seconds BEFORE the light came on, using a digital record-to-disk delay. My card (PCI) will take 4 cameras, and they spiral up to taking 16, and you can use multiple cards (6 PCI slots * 16 = 96 cameras!)

There is an email alert facility, as well as audio and visual. Hooked to a modem and a cable/LAN connection, you could also check the cameras remotely.

The disk and video compression used means the images can't be used in a UK court, but that really wouldn't matter for most of us.

[Nico]

A combo of techniques is probably best. Have obvious cameras, hidden cameras, and a camera you take with you. Obvious ones are meant to be bypassed, the hidden ones are for less skilled infiltrators, and the on-person one is the backup in case pros are on to ya.

[NightStalker]

I just tried using NBK's 'blinking' technique, and I must say I'm very impressed!

I took two pictures about 1 minute apart. I moved only 1 object in the picture on purpose. I moved it the width of my comb, which I've measured at 1/8" thick. The object I moved on purpose was about 10 feet away from the cameras position. And it's noticeable for NOT moving.

See, considering how the technique picked up the minute difference in camera position from my pressing the shutter button, and the tiny difference in the entire scene from the resulting perspective change, the change of the objects position in the animation appears to be still, while everything else is moving just slightly.

Mind you, I had the camera set on a large table and pressed the shutter button as gently as possible, to minimize movement.

Also, there was a thing I didn't notice (until I 'blinked' the pictures) that shows quite obviously just how powerful NBK's idea can be if used properly, as it'd be impossible to move across a room with a certain thing in it without revealing that someone had been there.

I'll not reveal the secret here. Just download the attachment, let it play for a bit, zoom in if you need to, and you'll see it for yourself.

If you're still stumped, read the TXT file included in the .ZIP file called "How I Did It", for the 'secret'.

[Jacks Complete]

I will have to guess until your attachment gets allowed...

Is it dust? Or a random collection of sticks that are on the floor? Or a sheepskin rug?

Any of those things will leave a telltale sign of movement or disturbance behind. Heck, even a thick pile carpet will!

Dust will not be under things that were moved a little, and fingers will remove that dust when the item is moved.
A collection of sticks would be impossible to change and replace, as they all rely on each other to form a rough pile, and couldn't be replicated even with a picture. (though they might give false positives!)
The rug or carpet would change due to the effect of feet on the pile. This would be very obvious on something like a well-fluffed rug. Kind of like the ploughed areas used to detect fence climbers at high security sites...

:)

[KAROMESIS]

any way that the authorities can be defeated is of significant use to those that would defy big brother and his tyrannical laws and eavesdropping methods.

That being said I beleive it is also highly relevant to use ones 5 senses or 6 depending on who you are to their optimum capacity.

there are different ways of increasing your sensory perceptions,wether through deprivation of certain senses as in the case with certain blind individuals who have almost superhuman hearing and touch. I myself can smell if something is diffferent in my habitat,even if it occured hours or even days beforehand.which would almost certainly lead to a frustrated and dead end investigation :D .

nbk2000's blinking thread and it's NASA related technical origins, along with other sophisticated counter-suviellance would defintitley be complemented by enhanced sensory perceptions of a most primitive sort. :)

[Jacks Complete]

Recent research has shown that people actually have a built in sense of "something changed" and can spot it quite often long before they place it.

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994638

<p>
<b class="newsarthead">'Mindsight' could explain sixth sense</b>
</p>
<small class="blu">19:00&nbsp;04&nbsp;February&nbsp;04</small>

<small class="red">Exclusive from New Scientist Print Edition. <a class="red" href="/subscribe/subs_home.jsp?promcode=nsnews">Subscribe</a> and get 4 free issues.</small> <p>Some people may be aware that a scene they are looking at has changed without being able to identify what that change is. This could be a newly discovered mode of conscious visual perception, according to the psychologist who discovered it. He has dubbed the phenomenon "mindsight".</p><p>Ronald Rensink, based at the University of British Columbia in Canada, showed 40 people a series of photographic images flickering on a computer screen. Each image was shown for around a quarter of a second and followed by a brief blank grey screen. Sometimes the image would remain the same throughout the trial; in other trials, after a time the initial image would be alternated with a subtly different one.</p><p>In trials where the researchers manipulated the image, around a third of the people tested reported feeling that the image had changed before they could identify what the change was. In control trials, the same people were confident that no change had occurred. The response to a change in image and control trials was reliably different. </p><p>Our visual system can produce a strong gut feeling that something has changed, Rensink says, even if we cannot visualise that change in our minds and cannot say what was altered or where the alteration occurred. </p><p>"I think this effect explains a lot of the belief in a sixth sense." He has no idea what physical processes generate mindsight, but says it may be possible to confirm it exists using brain scanners.</p><b class="newscrosshead">Attentional mechanism</b><p>Mindsight is not simply a precursor to normal visual perception, he argues, because there seems to be no correlation between how long it takes someone to feel the change, and the time taken to identify what it is. The two sometimes happened almost simultaneously, while at other times the subjects did not report seeing any difference until seconds after they were aware of it.</p><p>Vision researcher Dan Simons of the University of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign says Rensink's finding "suggests the existence of an interesting and previously unknown attentional mechanism". </p>

[nbk2000]

KAROMESIS:

What you're describing sounds like a TV series here in America called "The Sentinel". Dude has "super" senses, like his eyes are telephoto zoom lenses, ears are parabolic supermicrophones, tongue a mass spectrometer, nose like a bloodhound, and touch like a nanoprobe.

Too much B.S.. :rolleyes:

Though there's nothing wrong with improving your general level of awareness, rather than blissfully cruising through life on cruise control, not paying attention to your surroundings.

NightStalker:

That was a very interesting demonstration you provide there. :)

Gave me the thought of whether blinking could be used to detect underground subsidence (covert tunneling/sinkholes/graves) from the slight depression of earth being removed.

I've found that the main problem with using the technique outside of your own home, especially over a period of time, is maintaining the alignment exactly the same.

While you can set up mounts in your house, or use a tripod in a non-adversarial enviroment, it's not going to be possible to do so if you were using it somewhere that is under constant surveillance/security.

Though this may not be a big issue since there's now the "007" :rolleyes: camera linked to.

Surely there's got to be some way to mod' it so that it doesn't have to be opened to work. Like drill a small hole through the case exactly over the lens so it can see through the pinhole. And the shutter button needs to mod'd to be pressable without opening. THEN you'd have something cool.

Imagine leaving the little bugger stuck to the underside of table at a bank just before closing...who knows what you might see? A small FM transmitter tuned to the aircraft band could be time synched with the pictures for more information.

Guard schedules, whatever.

Also, what about stashing it somewhere in a car, like behind a radiator or such, so that, when your slutty girlfriend goes "out", you know where she's going, and who with.

300 pictures, once every minute, equals five hours. :)

Might even work attached to armored cars. ;)

Anyways, back to the aligment issue, I've found that using a laser pointer in a home-made mounting that attaches to the tripod screwhole in my camera allows the autofocus to work in low light (otherwise pictures come out fuzzy), and also to chose a particular point as a constant target reference for multiple pictures over time.

As long as you stand in the same general spot, and aim the camera at the same exact target point (using the laser), then you're pictures are almost exactly identical, without need of a tripod. If I could split the beam into multiple parts then I could arrange them to fit on marks on the building/ground so they'd form a "virtual" tripod.

Though, again, taking pictures looks strange if you're standing in front of a bank while doing so.

One thing I've tried lately is the use of split mirrors for producing 3D stereophotographs.

Using sterophotography not only can provide the blink effect (though rather straining on the eyes after a few seconds), but also depth, which would detect the otherwise nearly impossible to detect slight to/from movement, in relation to the cameras perspective.

And stereomacrography provides a very interesting effect when used for photographing things like cutaway locks, as the depth provides for a much greater understanding of the relationship of the parts to one another.

Similar types of depth effects can be provided by multiple photos, each with a different focus, and then stacking them using a special program which assigns a color value to each pixel, with those of farthest focus being a color at one end of the spectrum, and those nearest another. It ends up looking like one of those radar topography maps you see of mars, with peaks being red and valleys blue.

Way cool! :D

As per RTPB "Stay informed of the latest technologies", I feel that there's a lot of untapped potential in photographic techniques that are not being used by the pyro/crim.

Why taking a BORING picture of a crater, when you can take a sterograph of the same crater and we can all see HOW deep the rabbit hole goes for ourselves. :)

Schlieren photography allows visualization of shockwaves. Where's our schlieren photos of COB's exploding, or penny EFP platters zipping along at Mach3? Obviously we have yet to reach "The Next Level" in skills.

Though one day...:D

[dinkydexy]

Okay, so one way or another you rig up a 'blinking' orientated surveillance and security system so you'll know when anything in your house has been moved.

Then what do you do?

[NightStalker]

I would imagine the suitable response would be to toss up everything to figure out either what's missing or what has been added.

Missing means stolen, added means planted.

If, after continued blinking, the missing item "reappears", then that means it's either been copied or tampered with.

Imagine blinking one of those keyring boxes that hold all the keys for a large business/apartment complex.

You are the owner of said business.

You suspect someone of being a thief.

What better way to set them up than to accidently (on purpose), leave the box unlocked with a day for them to do whatever they'd do with an open keybox while they think you're out of town?

You blink the box before, and after, and ask them if they knew the keybox was open. They say no, but keys have been moved, you know they're lying sacks 'o shit, and fire their asses (after changing the locks).

You could do the same thing in your own home. Have a big jar full of change sitting in plain sight. Blink before someone (neighbors kids, your own kids, repair people, etc) come over, and after they leave.

People who are dishonest wouldn't hesitate to tap a couple of dollars out of a jar of coins when they're sure you wouldn't "notice" the theft. The loss of a couple of dollars early on means saving money later on down the road by having kicked the thief out of your house before they have opportunity to take anything big.

Hotel rooms...maids...obvious.

[dinkydexy]

Yes, that was pretty much the kind of reply I was expecting.

i. I would advise any employer who was considering using the 'blinking' method you describe to think again. The method proves only that the keys (or whatever) have been moved, not that he was responsible for that movement or that he has subsequently done anything that would legally entitle you to fire him. As for the fact that he denied any knowledge...well, excuse me, but he may well be telling the truth. ANYONE could have done it; even an LEA!

ii. If you seriously advocate setting up blinking observation traps to monitor the behaviour of your friends, neighbours and even your own kids to prevent the theft of a few coins, then I think you are in need of counselling. This behaviour is paranoid and antisocial.

[NightStalker]

Obviously someone missed the point.

The loss of a few bucks worth of coins isn't the objective. The goal is to test the honesty of the people you let into your home, or entrust with your business.

If you find that a person cannot be trusted to not help themselves to a few dollars in PETTY change, then why on earth would you trust them in your home with your family/irreplaceable possessions?

Lord, protect me from my friends; I can take care of my enemies.
Voltaire

The smiling neighbor you think you can trust with your house keys just might plant hidden cameras in your bedroom and bathroom to peep on you. Don't think it can happen? It has to numerous people, much to their horror.

Not just peeping, but all manner of gross, rude, vulgar and bizarre things happen when people think they're not being watched. Anything from drinking out of your milk carton to jacking off into your food, sniffing your wifes dirty underwear, or your 6 year old sons underwear! :eek:

Full video would be preferable, followed by time lapse, and lastly blinking. But blinking is within the reach of anyone with a $20 digital camera, compared to hundreds for video, and ANYTHING that warns you is better than being blissfully unaware.

The keys were just a quick example. Obviously, you'd want to arrange situations so that ONLY he could be responsible for (whatever), and have NO legit reason for doing (whatever) with it. Oh, and make it tempting, of course, to goad any larceny to the surface if it's there to begin with. ;)

"Counselling" is where some fruitcake tells you you've got "issues to resolve" and proceeds to get you doped up on pscyhotropic medications while draining your wallet, all to tell you that you've been lusting after you mother since you were a child. :p

[Jacks Complete]

So I guessed right with the carpet...

Nightstalker, that's a nice example. I played with your two frames a bit.

Attached is the result of a two layer "difference" effect in PSP7. It is easy to see the footprints here. It also allowed me to line the picture up a fraction better than is possible with the naked eye. White means a difference, pure black means identical.

Note that now the larger change, is harder to see than the really subtle bulk change of the carpet!

A combination of these techniques might be really useful!

By the way, you should save pictures like that as JPEG or PNG as you get much smaller sizes than with a gif.

NBK2000, can we have the ability to upload PNG files? All vaguely new browsers handle them, and the file sizes are much better if you know what you are doing.

If you or anyone you know is still struggling with the rather old IE6, get a copy of Firefox 0.8 (the latest version of Firebird) from http://www.mozilla.org/

[NightStalker]

You can't animate JPEG's like you can with GIF's. :(

Otherwise I would use JPEG because I know JPEG is for photos of real things, GIF for computer graphics and screenshots.

Interesting technique using the Difference in PS7. I'd forgotten that was even there! :o I'll try blinking the carpet again using this instead, and see how well it works, since I'd be starting with the much better megapixel JPEGs rather than highly lossy GIF frames. :)

[dinkydexy]

"Not just peeping, but all manner of gross, rude, vulgar and bizarre things happen when people think they're not being watched. Anything from drinking out of your milk carton to jacking off into your food, sniffing your wifes dirty underwear, or your 6 year old sons underwear! "

I have completely changed my mind about the whole 'family surveillance' issue and I accept that you are right. As I type I am installing such a surveillance system in my adolescent son's bedroom to see if he masturbates.

[NightStalker]

Sarcasm only works if you've got skill.

Maybe your posts are just reflections of your stunted capacity for learning? (That's belittling, not sarcasm, FYI).

Obviously you can't differentiate between a non-family member doing "all manner of gross, rude, vulgar and bizarre things" in your home, and your own family doing this, since I'm sure it's common in your family for your adolescent son to sniff your wifes panties, as well as masturbating into the underwear of his six year old brother, all while your daughter is on her knees waiting for your nut.

So naturally you'd want to document all this family lovin' for sharing with the rest of the online community at alt.incest.porn.

:D

[dinkydexy]

Like I said, you need counselling.

[NightStalker]

I'm not the one who is "installing such a surveillance system in my adolescent son's bedroom to see if he masturbates.".

:eek:

No doubt leading to your own "little" ;) session. :p