Data Mining, Cocaine and Secrecy

hightimes writes: "Business 2.0 uncovers one of the world's most sophisticated IT network in where else, Colombia. According to the story, Colombian drug cartels have spent billions of dollars to build a huge infrastructure that's helping them smuggle more dope than ever before." Even though this is about a raid that took place most of a decade ago, it's an interesting example of the power (and potential abuse) of large-scale data mining.

Comments

This plays into govt's hands...

[Audent]

I'd be sceptical about any claims in this piece about "highly classified documents"... surely this is something the guys in grey suits would love to see as it gives them the perfect ammunition to enact all kinds of new and exciting laws. Buying a router? register with your local cop shop. Using an IP address? register with your local cop shop... Here in NZ we're getting new laws to deal with criminals using technology because apparently it's going to be a big issue one day. One day. I asked how many crimes were committed using text messaging or email and the answer is: none. Not one. Which begs the question: why are these laws necessary yet? It's not like govts have a good track record on being pro-active when it comes to legislation so why this time?
I know I'm preaching to the choir here ... well, some of you anyway.

MOD PARENT DOWN

[pengu911]

Please, His "datamining link" was to a disgusting porn site, but he later changed it to a legit info site. He controls the site he linked too, and therefore can change his page back to the porn picture. Please mods, listen to me, I saw the same picture that the anonymous coward saw. Halgary is putting fake comments below to keep his post modded up. thank you.

This isn't real data mining

[CySurflex]

Searching for matching records in a database (phone call logs) with known values (phone #'s of known agents) is not data mining. It's simply setting up an indexed data warehouse and issuing queries.

Data Mining is looking for UNKNOWN relationships between that data, not KNOWN relationships. So although referring to it as Data Mining may make it sound advanced and exotic, it's incorrect.

- CySurflex

Re:Technology is NOT the problem ..

[doorbot.com]

Mod the parent down. Porn picture or no porn picture, the last thing we need is a link to a personal site with ads which simply redirects to the actual site provided. If you have a link to post, post the real thing. We don't need your redirects. Thankfully it was blocked by my anti-banner ad HOSTS file.

The datamining link should be:
www.ccsu.edu/datamining/resources.html

Re:Dopewars

[zerocool^]

I remember playing this on my TI-85 calculator...

I found a TI-86 version here.

~Will

Fake liberal!

[sonamchauhan]

> Do drugs deystroy lives. Certainly. However,
> this is mostly a result of legal and economic
> consequences of the drug war.

Do drugs destroy people? Yes, drugs *do* destroy people by making them *slaves*to*the*drug*habit*. Do you condone slavery? Why do you oppose the government clamping down on extremely addictive drugs then?

My point briefly is this:

1. Illicit drugs (including tobacco) damage you physically. Yes, there is enough research backing this. And you don't believe it - quote me the *peer-reviewed* research that says it *doesn't* harm. Not about previous studies being "flawed" (which many can be), but about drug habits NOT harming people. Hey, at the very least, even "just smoking hash" is "just *smoking* hash".
2. The more important justification for government supression of illicit drugs is the protection of the general public from a slavery that is just as physical as the real thing.
3. Hey, we *all* have our anecdotes of hash-smoking friends living "long, fulfilled lives" and who gave up quite it easily. Hey, the point is not about those who survived! Its about protecting those who would perish: the "one-trip" teenagers, the "irreversibly changed" innocents, the ones whose first puffs dragged them uncontrollaby down in a never-ending spiral towards death. They exist(ed) too. Did these people not count because they were't *your* friends. Should we legalize slavery because Jenny likes to play S&M games and it doesnt "harm *her*"!?

   Hey, maybe you're a "liberal". Maybe you say that "Hands-off! People are solely responsible for what they do to their own bodies"

   Hey, just maybe, a few centuries back, you'd be one of those unsavory Europeans making a fortune trading booze to native Americans.

   A true liberal is kind and loving to people. You probably are a fake liberal - the type who puts his own desires first and assuages your own conscience by throwing money at problems... yours and other's tax dollars.

Re:Just wait till they get the bill from Oracle...

[DaEvOsH]

COLOMBIA, not columbia. Typical american. Its quite different one and the other.

Re:Article Revealing

[stoolpigeon]

I've had a ton of responses to my post and I'm going to reply to various items, at different places.

I have thought about it. How come my not agreeing w/you means I haven't thought about it? That I'm stupid or gullible or in some other way deficient? This intolerance for other opinions is not as strong anywhere as it is in the "free speech- free ideas" community.

It is interesting how so many of the responses are almost identical. That's when you know you are not necessarily dealing w/something that's been thought out by the individual but rather the rhetoric of some position or party. But that's just a side thing.

Your post is one of the more rational- (by rational I don't mean you agree w/me more but that it's just not a knee jerk reaction- you use facts, a little less insulting/emotional rhetoric). My question to you first is--

How would legalizing some drugs help? You say that some drugs are harmful to the user and will wreck their brain/kill them. (Maybe you think that's o.k. Then we are at a bit of an impasse as we've reached what is a pretty fundamental difference of opinion.) But if some drugs are still illegal you still have the war on drugs.

A common theme to all the replys is- Drugs wont be expensive when they are manufactured by large companies and their wont be dangerous meth labs in your community any more.

This must be considered a pretty strong argument because just about everyone here used it. This surprises me because the problems with this idea are so obvious. (Not to mention how completely contradictory this is to so many other championed 'ideas' around here)

What large company is going to manufacture and retail a product that has already been proven to be lethal to the consumer? Phillip-Morris? Maybe- they've got lots of action fighting class action suits. It would be economic suicide.

This is a pipe dream (sorry - not trying to be funny) that this kind of thing would take place. Lets say that the big companies only produce the harmless narcotics. (I'm going to look more into this I don't buy it completely- the physical damage may be minimal but there are other kinds of harm that it causes) There will still be a heavy cost to society as a whole. You wont save money you'll just shift the allocation to different places.

There are many employers who will not want their employees working while impaired. If for no other reason- liability. There will be the cost of trying to make sure that doesn't happen. Then there will be the time lost in productivity- the sick time, etc.

Someone may be able to function while actively using some drugs but there is no way they can keep that up for an extended period of time. I would also have questions in regard to the quality of what they produce. The only high/inebreated person who thinks that they are 'good to go' is that person. Sober people around them can see that they are not functioning in a normal manner.

Just one quick last note- I've got some other replys to make and I can't do this all day. You state, "Do drugs destroy lives. Certainly. However, this is mostly a result of legal and economic consequences fo the drug war."

I just don't buy it. I meet people all the time in work I do at a homeless shelter who have had their lives ruined and it all revolves around drug use. Many of them have never been arrested or had trouble with the law. Many don't like what drugs do to them. But they are hooked and they can't quit. They cannot maintain healthy interpersonal relationships w/family and loved ones, they cannot hold onto jobs or housing.
They hit rock bottom. Live at the shelter for a while. Clean up. Get a job- get a place- get some friends- get high- end up back at the shelter. I see some of these same guys over and over.

I'm not defending the drug war as THE solution. But I'm not just tossing it out the window because it seems unwinnable. I don't know that there is any kind of society/govt. imposed kind of solution that exists. But I do believe that humans have a moral obligation to try and stop evil and promote good. Just sitting there and watching is not acceptable to me.

.