Slashdot Mirror


Law Enforcement by Machines

Inst1gator writes "Nowadays, it seems as if more and more law enforcement is being done by machines. Unfortunately, they don't seem to be up to the job. And the humans don't want to take responsibility, either. This is a great "wakeup call" for those of you who are not aware."

16 of 339 comments (clear)

  1. Everyone needs to be better informed by liquidice5 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Not only does the robots need to get better at law enforcement,
    so do the Humans involved

    At the bail hearing for Johnston, Tinney and three other defendants in Houston, the FBI's Kristen Sheldon ... testified that an IP address is, "in very simple terms, a Social Security number. Only one person at one specific time can have that number." In fact, an IP address identifies a computer, rather than a person, and may not even consistently map to a particular machine in networks that use dynamic IP addressing.

    any one that is even allowed to even get near law enforcement in this area show have some kind of technology background, judges and jury included

    The brief also identifies a file entitled "harry potter book report.rtf" whose name and tiny size (1K) make obvious that it is not an illegal copy of the Harry Potter movie. Obvious to anyone who looks, anyway. But why should the record and movie companies bother to look? They're unlikely to suffer any damages if ISPs take down the wrong files, and the consumers involved are unlikely to sue them. (In filing with the Internet Service Providers, a company representative even certified in writing "that we have a good faith belief that use of the material ... is not authorized by Warner Bros. ... or the law."

    a person was definately involved in this situation, yet it was allowed to get this far
    this should let everyone know that we have a problem, and that the "general public" is not as informed as we had hoped/thought

    --

    Conscience is the inner voice that warns us somebody is looking - H.L. Mencken
  2. One near me by Xtraneous · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There is one of these devices near my house. Although it does not give tickets still ellicits a Pavlovian response. Going more than 5 milez per hour over the speed limit, triggers a siren noise, and a "strobe" light until you decrease speed back to the psudo-legal range (Max MPH+5).

    For the first few weeks of it being there, brake lights were flashing like none other (people tend to go very fast in this area), but now about 4 months later, the speeds in the area are back to the legal (and slow) speeds.

    --
    .noitacidem deen uoy siht daer nac uoy fI
    1. Re:One near me by psych031337 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      We have something similar around here (.de). It consists of the standard laser speed pistol cops use and a special sign that has a display built in, showing you the measured speed in real time while you are approaching.

      This is used as a educational approach of getting the speeders to comply in residential areas which allow only a slow speed.

      What happens is this:
      a) People use it to measure how accurate their speedometer is displaying their speed, and how much speed "buffer" they have before a "live" system will trigger and take a picture.

      b) People just plainly ignore it

      c) Kids take their cars to the area where the system currently sits and while one takes off from the beginning of the road the other one wait by the sign to produce a nice picture of his buddy's taillights and the sign saying "83".

      --
      +++ath0
    2. Re:One near me by Stealthey · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Two things, 1. you are lucky, you got away and COP didn't give you a ticket, cause he could have given it you. 2. Keep in mind the warning, I don't know about states, but in Canada I think roughly put; A cop's word becomes the law, basically if he asks you to do something, you have to comply; otherwise there can be consequences.

      --
      I am at loss with words...
  3. Computer Mug Shots by Stinson · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In my local town, we have a new system that is this giant red box thats a combo mug shot taker, fingerprint scanner, and general data entry system. I got arrested recently for posession and i noticed how inaccurate it kept records of me, screwed up my photo a few times, and how compared with previous ink fingerprints i've had done in the past, it picked up the smallest details, like the incredably small scar thats hard to see by eye and made it a HUGE black line across my print, almost to the point that it could have voided that print invalid due to lack of comparison points. Technology should be curtailed to jobs they can do well

  4. Well we have a choice by sielwolf · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Go with humans, who are known fallable and subjective, or machines, who are known fallable and too objective. In the name of jusice (being blind and all) I think most of us would agree we would prefer an emotionally-inert policing force. The problem is then this: how do we trust them? Are they just being unilaterally fair or inept?

    Cops now might pick up someone for Driving while Black but a machine wouldn't differentiate between the lunatic going 125 and the man rushing to get his dying wife to the hospital.

    In the end we all assume we have a good idea how people are going to act. Thus we will always distrust machines to watch over us. These story remind me of Skynet from the Terminator. "Afterwards all stealth bombers flew with perfect operational records."

    How did that story turn out? Man, out of fear, turns against the Machine. The Machine retaliates. Funny thing is that I think most people would agree with the story. In our heart of hearts all of us are Luddites. Heck, just read the poster's last comment: "This is a great "wakeup call" for those of you who are not aware."

    --
    What is music when you despise all sound?
    1. Re:Well we have a choice by TRACK-YOUR-POSITION · · Score: 2, Interesting
      For me, it's a matter of dignity, not utilitarianism. Machines are beneath humans. Not necessarily in terms of ability, but in terms of respect. Being arrested by a machine is like being arrested by a child--except much worse, because children are humans, and, as blindly asserted above, machines are beneath humans.

      Not to mention in the future we might see a prior restriant issue. In courts, "prior restraint" only applies to First Amendment issues (which you'd think would render unconstitutional the RIAA's proposed laws--man, we should see some good lawsuits after this law passes...) but I'm afraid of seeing prior restrain extended to the physical world--like remotely deactivated cars or even bionic limbs.

    2. Re:Well we have a choice by Best_Username_Ever · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think most of us would agree we would prefer an emotionally-inert policing force.

      I don't agree. I think society is already too dominated by stiff rules and regulations. To further remove judgement from the equation of law enforcement doesn't sound like a good idea to me. I would prefer to see justice upheld than the law, and there is a difference between the two sometimes. That is where a good cop will always be better able to deal justice than any tool that man can devise.

      An example, I live in Australia and we had an infamous case where a model was brutally raped and murdered by some low lifes, "the Murphy brothers". Apparently when they were caught by the police they were beaten to a pulp, I can vaguely recall an onlooker descibing how horrified she was at the brutality of the police. Good on them I say ;-)

    3. Re:Well we have a choice by ShadowBlasko · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why I like *real* cops. (A True story)

      In 1998 I was driving out west to see some friends, it was my first time out in the "Wide Open" and I loved ever second of it. Driving through Bonneville it took every bit of control I had not to try to peg the needle. (145). Anyway, I get into Nevada, and I pretty much lost that self control as soon as I saw the "Speed Limit 75" signs. It was early in the morning, traffic was very light and I was making up for lost time.

      Well, whilst crusing into Elko Nevada, I was barrelling down a long straightaway, and saw the outline of a cruiser on the top of an overpass. I looked down, and realized I was at damned near 140. His lights came on, and I thought, oh hell... I'm going to jail in Nevada.

      Well, by the time he caught up with me I was already pulled *well* off the side of the highway, sitting on the hood, with my hands in plain sight, and my license and registration sitting next to me. The officer looked *very* unhappy with me, and said "You are going to KILL someone driving like that". My reply. "Who? there is no one else out here but me and you, and you were not even on this road!" He calmed down a bit and said "Ummmm, Yourself for starters?" I asked him if I could get something out of my wallet for him, he agreed, and I showed him my (quite expired) SCCA Racing Permit.

      He says "So? whats this? I said "Look, I was speeding, I don't deny that" He says "Son, 136MPH is not speeding, it's murder using a slightly slower bullet" I said, "Well, maybe, but you've driven that fast right? (Yeah.. he had) okay then. That SCCA license means I have taken and passed the same type of schooling you have to take, High speed maneuvering, collision avoidance, road condition anticipation .. etc... And I would NEVER drive that fast if there was other traffic. He seemed to calm down more, (He had actually taken the Skip Barber School classes in Nevada) and we had a rather interesting conversation about my Acura that had almost 200,000 miles on it at the time (345,000 on it now)

      Yeah, I still got the ticket. BUT, the ticket he wrote me was for 94 in a 75 (the fastest speed ticket you can get, and not have to make a manditory court appearance) He also told me where the other speed traps were in the state, and on 410(I think thats the road) up into Oregon.

      Had he been a photocop unit, well... I might be writing this from a jail cell instead of my home.

      Don't take the human nature out of traffic enforcement. *please... at least... for my sake!*

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order- Ed Howdershelt Via Tass
  5. Beware lazy people by bigberk · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The article uses the example of a web crawler that uses a simple match of keywords to identify copyrighted material. But it's not the web crawler itself that's the problem... the problem is that the people who are running the operation are unwilling to invest the time and resources to (1) improve their software, and (2) verify results by human experts.

    Like so many other things, it comes down to human laziness and apathy. We use automated systems to help generate solutions to problems in science and engineering... but all results are verified by intelligent people before they are put to real use. Software and other automation tricks are used to HELP people decide, not to replace people in the decision process.

  6. Look to Europe? by small_dick · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The motorcyclists in Europe have been hit hard by the ticketing machines, or so I've heard.

    Not only do they have limits by age and displacement, now this big brother stuff...cameras mounted in trees, etc.

    From what I've heard, some people are wearing masks and sneaking up to the cams and wrenching them...black spray paint over the lens or a strategic hammer blow, etc.

    --


    Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
    See my user info for links.
  7. Presaged? by Srin+Tuar · · Score: 5, Interesting


    Isnt this what Lawrence Lessig was talking about in his big code is law rant?


    Its makes sense, that if some piece of software is going to make legally binding judgements against you, that you should at least get to see the source code.
    If not, then how the hell do you really know what the law is...

  8. Re:the problem is by topham · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Under Canadian law, Manitoba law atleast, it is a legal requirement that you proceed into an intersection on a green light if you are making a left turn and it is safe to enter the intersection.

    It is NOT relevent whether it is safe to proceed THROUGH the intersection.

    I know of more than 1 person who failed their drivers test for not following this particular requirement.

    On the other hand, it is a rare occasion when you cannot leave the intersection on the yellow/amber, asuming your stuck making a left for that long.

  9. A story in law automation: the downtown project by fireboy1919 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I worked in a computer vision lab that was commissioned to invent a vision system for downtown Orlando that would detect violence or possibly disturbing behavior. Actually, about all we got was a heck of a lot of publicity, and an agreement that when we finished our research, the city would buy the hardware.

    Anyway, we called it the downtown project because most of the rest of our work was for the academic community, Darpa, or Lockheed-Martin.

    Our goal was similar to most such projects: to allow policemen to focus on suspicious activity, and to ignore what isn't. You've heard the phrase "a policeman on every street corner?" Why have them there if nothing is happening?

    We're not talking about putting these in neighborhoods; not it private areas - in fact, this came up during the conversations we had with local government and they were very much against it -we're talking about putting them in very public places. This is a measure which is intended to save lives and potentially lower the cost of law enforcement.

    One of the things I like best about this is that unlike policemen, cameras are colorblind. They don't care if you're homeless, or a minority, rich or poor. They only look at what you're doing. A policemen's attention won't be tuned to an area because he doesn't like the color of skin of its inhabitants (which has a lot to do with how it works right now), he'll be doing it because he got an impartial warning. Seems like a good idea to me.

    --
    Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
  10. Fun with traffic cameras... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The UK has a proliferation of speed and traffic light cameras.

    The later I agree with having been almost in collision with drivers who have jumped the lights both at the start and end of the sequence. Here in the UK the sequence is red, red+amber, green, amber red. The rules of the road state the following meanings:

    o Red means stop
    o Amber means stop if it is safe to do so
    o Green means proceed if it is safe to do so.

    So you shouldn't enter an intersection if you'll just block it.

    We also have what's known as a box junction. These have yellow hashing on the road and you are only allowed to enter the box if your exit is clear. In London they have started putting cameras on these too.

    As for speed cameras. Many of these are inappropriately set and positioned. The speed someone drives at should be appropriate to the road and conditions. A motor/freeway with a speed limit of 70mph doesn't mean you should drive at 70mph in the rain and fog on that road. Cameras don't generally take advantage of this.

    There is one exception. The London orbital motorway has cameras linked to the speed limit which is adjustable with road conditions. These are fair.

    Our older cameras use film which run out. There was also a problem that you need to identify the driver as well as the car and the old cameras point at the rear of the car. New digital cameras have been introduced which can fine you before you even realise (using image recognition to read the number/licence plate). These point at the front of the car to recognise the driver.

    There are a small number of individuals who have a campaign against cameras, they spray the lenses, set fire to them and in some cases cut through the pole with a grinder and steal them!

    As for me. I'm a biker. By pulling along side a car while going through the camera zone you can confuse it. You can dummy them in to taking pictures of the car behind. The new digital ones are useless as bikes don't have a front plate and can't see your face through your visor (full face helmet of course). I have some friends who purposely set them off by wheelying at speed through the camera zone with digitus impudicous aloft. There must be many of these photos laying on police desks. Finally, it's stupid, but the fine for not having a licence plate on your vehicle is less that the one for speeding and it doesn't affect your driving licence, so if you plan on having some fun, take it off.

  11. Re:The solution by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Actually I see law enforcement as a "Shaker Stool", with 3 legs, not 2. There is the legal system, with procedure and objectivity. There is the enforcement officer, with on the spot judgement and the ability to handle extraordinary cases. The third leg is the citizens themselves!

    Folks, our job is to follow the law and let the police focus on nabbing the real criminals out there.

    I am one of those luddites who use those stubby things for walking. People in general drive like ass, and most are blissfully ignorant of how often they nearly kill themselves or other people. Nothing is funnier than hearing a suit or a soccer mom try to explain that the accident could not have been their fault. After all they he/she is such a good person...

    Most americans do not know how to set their own boundaries. We eat whatever size steak the resteraunt serves, no matter how obsurdly huge. We pay for our Schooling, no matter how obsurdly expensive. We gun our engines at a green light, and bitch loudly about having to stop again in 40 feet, and what crappy gas mileage we get.

    Face it, an automated traffic monitoring system may finally convince people that there are laws to obey beyond the laws of physics! Innocent people may occasionally get a speeding ticket, but it sure beats innocent people being taken out by some car crossing the median after losing control from driving to fast!

    --
    "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
    --Dr.W.Edwards Deming