BEWARE---Precrime is Here---'Minority Report' From the Screen to Real Life
Posted by Zenphamy 8 years, 4 months ago to Government
I've watched small info releases and publication of work on this system and it's type over the last several years, but it's now moved into a Police Department near you and me--Now. From the article:
"According to a report from the Washington Post, when Fresno police received a 911 call about a man threatening his ex-girlfriend, they consulted the “Beware” software, which “scoured billions of data points, including arrest reports, property records, commercial databases, deep Web searches and the man’s social media postings.”
The software search found that the man had both a “firearm conviction” and a “gang association,” which put his “threat level” at the highest of three possible color-coded scores."
And:
"“It’s trying to forecast based on maybe your past behavior, or what is seen in your social media – a change in behavior or a change in the things you’re posting about,” Smith said. “They say ‘maybe this person is going to perpetrate a crime in the future,’ and then they want prevention from police officers.”"
I'd guess in 2yrs or less, we'll see legislation to enable a pre-crime intervention law and I'd bet we'll see it offered as justification on a Pre-Crime Police Killing "mistake".
"According to a report from the Washington Post, when Fresno police received a 911 call about a man threatening his ex-girlfriend, they consulted the “Beware” software, which “scoured billions of data points, including arrest reports, property records, commercial databases, deep Web searches and the man’s social media postings.”
The software search found that the man had both a “firearm conviction” and a “gang association,” which put his “threat level” at the highest of three possible color-coded scores."
And:
"“It’s trying to forecast based on maybe your past behavior, or what is seen in your social media – a change in behavior or a change in the things you’re posting about,” Smith said. “They say ‘maybe this person is going to perpetrate a crime in the future,’ and then they want prevention from police officers.”"
I'd guess in 2yrs or less, we'll see legislation to enable a pre-crime intervention law and I'd bet we'll see it offered as justification on a Pre-Crime Police Killing "mistake".
I propose a new amendment "The right to keep and bear software". This time with a clause that the government is prohibited from the same.
The right to vote should be earned before every election; no exceptions. Universal unearned suffrage is the most grievous error.
.
They "ought" not. And they do. They have power and cover.
The trick is to make people hate it - so they hesitate to use it. They still will, but if they hesitate, it will only be the tall poppies that get cut down.
Not that I am cynical about this or anything.
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted—and you create a nation of law-breakers—and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."
Fascistic - 1
police - 2
terrorist x2 - 3
and, perhaps my comments add to your score.
Me? I am already screwed.
We now live in a state of 'preventive surveillance' and spying since the 90's.
It also builds acceptance both by people and governmental units. I was elected to county government for 4 years and I can't begin to count the number of times I heard board members say, "what are the rest of the counties doing". If someone else was doing it we better be too. Most freedoms that have been lost in this country started somewhere and spread across the country. Just saying.
Taxpayers and voters have given in to more and more police funding, federal, local, and state, in the name of law and order. In return we have a police state that ignores the Bill of Rights and entraps and blames innocent people in order to create the statistics for more funding.
Today's police are not the local police of the early 20th century who mostly cared about the community they patrol and live in. Many believe they are under siege by the people they are supposed to be protecting.
This invasion of privacy is unconstitutional and despicable.
The origination of the problem goes back to the end of prohibition when FDR decided to maintain the federal police force that was created to enforce prohibition. They should have been fired and the G-men should never again have darkened the doors of Americans, much less kicked them down wearing masks.
The arrest record of a subject or his son is no ones business--maybe his conviction record is, but not just his arrest record. Guns in the house--a cop should assume that every house in the nation has guns, and act accordingly in a professional, non threatening manner. Previous incidents at the address then calls into play previous acts by previous residents, not necessarily the current one.
And whether the system could 'probably' be helpful or 'might have been handy' is irrelevant when considering the loss of individual rights and the protections afforded them.
If I look outside my door and see a cop that's being calm and professional--that's one thing. If I look out the door and see several with their guns drawn acting nervous and itchy--that's another. In this current environment, one of the most dangerous situations a citizen faces is a Police interaction. 2015, 2012 citizens dead by police vs 40 some police.
I don't want their job being easier or safer. I want them to be trained to be calm, courteous, and professional and only reacting as proper rights protecting laws allow them to, to the situation that is currently playing out and not a previous one or a screw-up in data coding or any other weather vane. I want them approaching my home and me as I would approach a stranger in real life.
I don't disagree, I'm just saying that for $600k, you are not talking realtime facial recognition with 1500 cameras around the town.
In the example you gave, I fail to see the difference in how the officer would respond with the tools and procedures they have now - they would look up the individual's arrest record from the laptop in their car, they would check California DoJ for firearms registered at the address, and the individual doesn't have a record they would look at previous incidents at the address in records (and catch that yellow probably).
It might have been handy for San Bernardino when the jihadis are professing ISIS allegiance on Facebook before taking off to shoot up the Christmas party...
Load more comments...