Camera phones, the complications of technology.

As the world change, technology change. Camera, a incredibily bulky material where people have to freeze their face for minutes (perhaps even hours) are now transformed into miniture size that is 1/10th the size of what it originally was. Not to mention, photos can be developed almost instantly, as cameras now have the ability to print wirelessly, via blu-tooth or whatever else they might use, unthinkable when Johann Zahn created the camera back in 1685, and when Joseph Nicéphore Niépce created the first ever permenant photo in 1826. Now, handphones, even MP3s players, come with inbuilt camera function, allowing people to take photos, anytime, anywhere, without the hassle of actually carrying one.

And with it, comes complications.

Even in the movies, spies have been known to capture secret documents on films, saving them the trouble of carrying the huge blue-print of the evil minion's super duper nuclear plant which will cause the world to tremble when unleashed.

Thus, naturally, cameras are banned. As handphones start to have this feature, handphones with cameras are banned in areas where it could become a "threat to security".

However, as handphone companies start producing handphones, cheaply, I must add, which scream of their camera functions (2/5 MegaPixel! \o\), one cannot confisciate all the handphones of the employees in the company. After all, a handphone is considered close to a "basic necessity" these days. Imagine the look on your friend's face when you tell him "I don't have a handphone."

And so, it isn't long before some major issue appeared. Straits Times reported some poor fella got his $500 handphone confiscated because he didn't report it. Keep in mind that this is his 1st time. Story was that he got his visitor's pass on his first visit, but didn't bring his handphone. As he had to make a second delivery later that day, he didn't exchange his visitor's pass for his IC and went home to get his mobile phone. As he was heading out after his second delivery, his handphone got discovered, and confiscated.

Now, here's the question. That guy didn't take any pictures, so why was the handphone confiscated? Like what the lawyers say, it's his first time, and so, he is unfamilar with the area. A quick check on the phone would show that he has taken none. So why, was it confiscated?

I think it would have been so much better if the phone was checked instead. True, security guards arn't that free, however, what about a master reset instead? Ensuring that nothing gets out. If there's still doubts, then the handphone can be kept for a week or two to do a through scan, ensuring terrorists or whoever will not have anything in hidden folders. This is so much better than confiscating the handphone, because it is expensive, and it could hold special memories.

Even as a punishment, confiscating is a little too much. This isn't primary school where a $2 toy gets confiscated, because $2 is rather cheap (I'm not trying to sound rich here. >_>). We are talking about things that are in hundreds of dollars here. It is way too harsh. Perhaps, it's time to look at how people should treat handphones with cameras, since around 70% of the handphones have camera, especially those newer ones.