Slashdot Mirror
DHS Goes Ahead With 'Pre-Crime' Detection Project
suraj.sun tips news that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security has begun testing its project to predict future crimes on members of the public. The Future Attribute Screening Technology (FAST) project is "designed to track and monitor, among other inputs, body movements, voice pitch changes, prosody changes (alterations in the rhythm and intonation of speech), eye movements, body heat changes, and breathing patterns." A field test was performed at a large venue earlier this year, and documents recently obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request indicate that testing is proceeding on other members of the public as well. "It's not clear whether these people were informed that they're participating in a FAST study."
would make nazi weep.
Read radical news here
We're probably 20 years away from that if you consider how much testing will need to be done prior to extensive legal challenges and official tests in various cities and states. It will be the greatest legal tool for oppression mankind has ever known.
Who needs to see your papers? We already know you're a criminal, now look directly into the camera so we can determine just what you're guilty of...
Thank you for your forced compliance.
Sincerely,
DHS.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
So what they're doing is taking variables that are innocent and legal (changing the pitch of one's voice is not an inherently criminal act), and using it to justify increased surveillance of that individual. And naturally, everyone will be okay with this because "only criminals have anything to hide".
Everyone forgets, of course, that you don't need to be watched for very long before you break a law. It's so hopelessly complex that even lawyers, who spend several years learning about it, are unable to avoid being ensnared against a determined law enforcement effort. If they want you, they will get you. So basically, this system is selecting people to turn into criminals. There is no preventative value here... increased surveillance on anyone will eventually yield evidence that can be used for criminal prosecution.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
It can't happen as long as we presume innocence until proven guilty.
The DHS is reaching for new ways to achieve visible results without doing the hard work of battling for the budget needed to hire and train really smart, perceptive people for sensitive posts like TSA agents at airports.
When machines get smart enough to predict someone's future crimes, we're all going to be unemployed, anyway.
it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
Where did they find so many criminals to be able to test out these detection methods to be able to say that they work? I mean, considering that they haven't actually caught ONE terrorist yet (PS - the ones that make it onto the plane and are taken down by passengers a crew don't count). This is probably just another expensive DHS money pit. So now not only will you get cancer from going through the "super safe" scanners that have never been rated or tested for use on humans, but you might just be accused of terrorism because of your social phobia.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
I REALLY hope somebody in the higher echelons of the DHS sits down to read a copy of The Minority Report by Phillip Dick. Like the movie based upon it, the story explores the implications of enacting just what the DHS is suggesting. Granted, they're using cameras and screening tech instead of pre-cogs, but IMO they are still are promoting a powerful military force to reach a similar end game. What's happening to this country?
Anyone with outlier body problems is a suspect now.
DHS is now waging war against the disabled
Since the thread was already Godwinned in the first post, I'm going to say that the Nazis also did similar things to the mentally and physically disabled. It's just a jump from detecting and classifying people like this to eugenics.
Thanks, DHS.
Go fuck yourselves.
--
BMO
My Slashdot Moderation Predictor (Patent Pending) predicts this post will be modded down!
With just a little tweaking it will also detect incorrect meta moderation.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
The terrorists have won.
There's zero chance this will work how they think it will. From a great presentation at this year's DefCon:
Why Airport Security Can’t Be Done FAST
very simple, it'd probably go nuts on every JGO (junk grabbing official) at the airport screening center...
maybe the operators should point this technology at themselves... before using it on the public.
It should be installed in Congress, the White House and every major bank, for a start.
It can't happen as long as we presume innocence until proven guilty.
Ah, well, you Americans are already screwed then. See Guantanamo Bay.
I hope not. Part of the usefulness of research and trials is to avoid bias by letting your subjects know what is being tested.
I and, however, surprised that nobody is screaming "Racial Profiling" when the system uses ethnicity as a tracking factor, unless it's used to simply filer out societal norms.
What I find funniest is that this is EXACTLY what every law enforcement and security guard is trained in for crowd surveillance and operations. These are the clues a human looks for in determining which people might be a problem. If I were smart, I'd file a patent for this ASAP, and then add "by a computer" to make it a novel idea.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Well, "we" did just assassinate an American citizen without due process of law... Just saying.
He once inserted random mutations into his code, just so he could have the experience of debugging.
It can't happen as long as we presume innocence until proven guilty.
Anyone who's ever gotten a ticket in the mail; nay, been to court period, would argue that we're already far beyond that point.
Innocence is measured in fiscal wealth these days, I'm afraid.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
This sounds like the next generation of the same dubious technology that is know as the "lie detector."
Basically, if someone is nervous or in pain, they show heightened levels of distress in behavior.
And that's now probable cause.
If you predict that I won't do any crime, I will do it!
Wat now bitches?
... go nuts ...
HAH!
pun intended?
"Lame" - Galaxar
^ this. Also, there are plenty of sci-fi examples of why this is a bad idea.
"One can not truly appreciate Shakespeare until you have heard it in it's original Klingon" -Star Trek
This is observation, and nothing more. They're just teaching a computer how to do what every good cop does.
Call me when they find reliable precognitives; until then, don't call it pre-crime detection.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
without doing the hard work of battling for the budget needed to hire and train really smart, perceptive people for sensitive posts like TSA agents at airports
There's not enough money in the world to accomplish this. As the jobs are currently defined, anybody who takes the job would immediately be unable to be described with those terms (or they'd lose their job for not doing it and thus be unable to be described as being in that job).
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
We need to stop funding these kinds of studies. And by that I mean we should get rid of DHS!
But first all potential pre-criminals should be readily identifiable to the common population. I suggest a yellow star of david on their clothes, or perhaps a yellow crescent moon? Then it will become easier to prevent people from doing business with them or having sex with them.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Just invent pre-cogs... problem solved.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Ok, I didn't RTFA because I want to whip this off before I go out the door but...
Instead of the "security theater" that passes for inspections at American airports, shouldn't we be emulating the much less intrusive Israeli model? From what I understand (I admit I'm an amateur), instead of passing people through body scanners and whatnot, the Israelis use well trained people to basically talk to people entering the "sterile" zone and WATCH THEIR REACTION. I guess it almost impossible to teach someone not to show outward signs of nervousness especially if they're going to end their life by blowing themselves up (or carrying illegal drugs I suppose). The results speak for themselves, when was the last time you've heard of an Israeli airport or airplane being blown up? Don't tell me it's from lack of fanatical enemies!
Of course, DHS' attempt to use technology instead of well trained PEOPLE could be a fatal flaw but the essential idea, of pre-screening people based on their autonomous reflexes, is not to be dismissed outright.
It's happening now. Don't you listen on the news? More and more often you hear people talking about "prove his innocence".
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Now combine it with the George Clooney goat killing method. The DHS could simply step to one side and glower at the bad guys as they make their way to the terminal, telepathically forcing terrorists to simply die on the spot. I think they could demonstrate about the same success rate as the current, more invasive program we have today.
Nullius in verba
As soon as you find three people with reliable precognition abilities. I'm betting in "not in the next two hundred generations".
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
This metric exists to try to prevent future crime, not point out ongoing ones.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
In a field test you want a test group that is capable of producing a range of results that may appear in actual use. A group of DHS agents isn't exactly a snapshot of your average group of travelers -- not enough Muslim terrorist types, far too many jackboot Nazi types.
In Congress they would be testing the only "native American criminal class" so results would be highly skewed there too.
The Future Attribute Screening Technology (FAST) project is "designed to track and monitor, among other inputs, body movements, voice pitch changes, prosody changes (alterations in the rhythm and intonation of speech), eye movements, body heat changes, and breathing patterns
It sounds like this is detecting signs of people's behavior changing as they sidestep their inhibitory mechanisms, or in basic terms that they're nervous doing something they know is wrong and the system is detecting their nervousness. Any ideas on how will this pre-screening work on sociopaths, who don't feel any remorse or commitment to societal morals or societal norms? Someone who doesn't experience the human inhibitory reflex? Someone with an anxiety disorder, or otherwise has a (non-criminal) reason to be nervous?
I have a crime predictor that boasts better than 99.9% accuracy. It always returns "not a criminal."
Seriously, in order for utterly dystopian concept to have any benefits, you'd need a false alarm rate much lower than 0.1%. Even at .01%, for anti-terrorism applications the ratio of false alarms to actual terrorists would be something like 10,000 to 1 -- assuming it had a 100% detection accuracy, which is of course preposterous.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
It's already there, just a low-tech version. Look at the RC plane bomber. A man with a dangerously nutty mind but not guilty of anything. The feds baited him into committing all his "crimes" so that they could lock up a potentially dangerous, but innocent man. It's entrapment, even if we feel good about putting the nutball behind bars.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Fast? I can't wait for the "furious" part. Will they plant weapons or contraband in the subject's home to make sure they have a high success rate?
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
... go nuts ...
HAH! pun intended?
never...
You know, I've given up on puns. So far I've made about ten puns on slashdot to see if at least one of them would cause a humorous reply, but alas no pun in ten did.
Not only that, but the precedent for confiscating property (and charging the property as an accessory to the crime, not the _person_) is well established for things like money. It's easy to destroy someone's life without technically violating _their_ rights. Sadly, your property doesn't have rights, and oh look now people who meet [some shadiness criteria set by fearful politicians] can no longer live within X yards of a Y, which happen to be everywhere, so have fun living under a bridge.
Its a little farfetched, but not as farfetched as I'd like.
Can we use this on politicians before they are elected?
we have Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash. Now we have no jobs, no hope and no cash.
New Economic Perspectives
"The DHS is reaching for new ways to achieve visible results without doing the hard work of battling for the budget needed"
Oh, did you mean DHS is trying deperately to justify their existence?
Like every other agency should do. We could hope that performance would be clear evidence of need, but in DHS' case, this is not at all that simple. No successful incidents seems to indicate DHS is doing the job, but reality shows that travelers have so far stopped all attempts, and on the plane at that.
Sadly, knowing the head of the department's history, we will get the sad song-and-dance about how they can't really tell us of their successful intercepts of attempted attacks. Nice work if you can get it, I think.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
That's not efficient enough, just put booths everywhere and arrest anybody that can't pass the credit check. I mean that is the whole point, right? Relegate the poor to work farms so that the rich don't have to do a damned thing.
Well, the DHS head was all in favor of speed cameras and tickets-by-mail in Arizona. Those cameras are largely turned off now, as it was apparent that not only was there no due process, but anyone with any pull at all could escape the system entirely. Oh, and if you ignored the tickets, enforcement was at best spotty, and at worst arbitrary. Pathetic. It could have worked, but apparently there wasn't enough profit in it.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
This isn't any different from parking tickets, you have the right to challenge it in court, but it's frequently more efficient to just waive that right and pay the ticket.
Innocent until proven guilty? What country are you talking about? Certainly not the US!!
--- If the bible proves the existence of God, then Superman comics prove the existence of Superman.
"Innocence is measured in fiscal wealth these days, I'm afraid."
Or celebrity.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
"...it should be possible to pinpoint potential "troublemakers" and neutralize them."
So long as we agree on the definition of 'troublemakers'. I, for one, don't have a problem labeling you as a troublemaker.
Next?
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
I sure hope this system will take the shape of people's heads into account when determining future criminal intent.
It may look like I'm doing nothing, but I'm actively waiting for my problems to go away.
--Scott Adams
(FAST) project is "designed to track and monitor, among other inputs, body movements, voice pitch changes, prosody changes (alterations in the rhythm and intonation of speech), eye movements, body heat changes, and breathing patterns."
That sounds more like the effect a semi-attractive girl has on a slash dotter than a terrorist response.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
Well, "we" did just assassinate an American citizen without due process of law... Just saying.
Law? They didn't charge him with anything, law never even entered into it. They just murdered him. One of their own citizens. And we all know how the US looks after their own, or at least the top 1%. The other 99% are expendable.
Same thing they did to Bin Laden, they had him in custody even, and just murdered him. Probably didn't want anyone to hear anything he might have to say.
Who knows? You could be next.
It can't happen as long as we presume innocence until proven guilty.
The DHS is reaching for new ways to achieve visible results without doing the hard work of battling for the budget needed to hire and train really smart, perceptive people for sensitive posts like TSA agents at airports.
When machines get smart enough to predict someone's future crimes, we're all going to be unemployed, anyway.
When I read the summary, the first thing I thought was that if they are working on this then they have too big a budget now.
That's not efficient enough, just put booths everywhere and arrest anybody that can't pass
Of course, any commie traitor should report themselves at the booth to the Computer. The computer is your friend. Trust the computer.
Not to mention the obvious way this singles out folks who glance at attractive women a little "too long" or have developmental handicaps.. how will it single out "non-standard" folks like yogis, swamis, gurus, monks, and the like? "unusual breathing pattern detected" in the sense that unusual would be consciously breathing since the norm is to unconsciously breath! Or enlightened folks who have personal reasons for establishing patterns of eye contact, etc, I can't begin to describe how fool-hearty this en-devour is... these lazy bastards want to do everything from the comfort of a remote terminal or hope an algorithm does it for them. Maybe the DHS already has a category for these folk and will simply place them in it, but the very act of categorizing has unknown effects itself! Also, algorithms and pre-cogs might not be so separate as one would naively think. See http://tgd.wippiespace.com/public_html/pdfpool/timesc.pdf and if you don't read anything else in the paper, at least check the references, and before you say it, no, I am not interested in discussing the "speculative" nature of the contents of the paper or discussing any aspect of the author of the paper, that is all, have a nice day ya'll :)
i meant nazi.
Read radical news here
Is it the sentencing of a person for a crime not yet committed, or is it the investigation into crimes not yet committed? If it's not the latter, then this isn't really precrime, more just a potentially dodgy way of investigation.
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
So you advocate murder for anyone who advocates murder? Or does your rule only apply to people with dark skin and beards?
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
this time there will be no minority report..
Assuming it were even possible, I believe what would have to happen for it to be remotely viable is for the police to arrest people *as* the crimes are being committed, ideally before any permanent damage is done, although that unfortunately may not always be possible.
Any attempt whatsoever to arrest people before a crime is actually committed regardless of the alleged certainty of it is in all ways wholly unfair and unjust. It is tantamount to arresting somebody for something that they did in an alternate universe.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
With any power or technology, there will be those who abuse it. Something with this ability to invade privacy is screaming to be abused. That's all there is to it.
Rivera
You're giving the Communist way too much credibility here with regards to religion. The reason Communists don't like religion is because it's a culture that provides self governance. They absolutely hate that. They hate the idea of anyone not looking to them as the solution and focal point in their lives. To the Communist, there is no God, only man. The closest you get to God *IS* the Government. It's your mother, father, and absolute provider. It also provides the Communist absolute power to the point of being demi-gods themselves.
N. Korea is textbook case of this. The Kim Il family is practically worshipped.
Life is not for the lazy.
Why are you so sure that YOU will get moderated down with your view? Look at my comment, it's 50% troll, 50% offtopic.
OFFTOPIC? TROLL?
Dude, don't worry, /. is on your side. You can kill all the Americans you like, you'll just get a nice loud round of applause.
Oh, BTW, I am an atheist. I also never did any drugs, so unfortunately I wouldn't be putting that in my pipe, so to speak.
But you are wrong of-course, but if your position is really what you just espoused there, I can't even start.
You can't handle the truth.
Go fuck yourselves, America.
Sent from my Blackberry
But I went and ordered 24709000000 litres of concrete to fill North America. We're going to try again from scratch and see if we can do better the 2nd time.
You mean, to calibrate the MAX setting?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
The DHS is still dicking around with anti-terrorism techniques when our country's economy is being flushed down the toilet at a good rate. Soon, the US will be worthless and no terrorist in their right mind would have any interest in us. It would be akin to stepping on a mole hill.
Advocating peace, low taxes, or economic responsibility on slashdot is seemingly always modded down. Apparently it's trolling and flamebait.
Apparently you have to simultaneously support big government and less government involvement in our personal lives, as if that will ever fucking happen.
I wonder if my sig will work...
How does it feel to be a liar with pants constantly on fire?
Few people understand statistics - but everything the parent says is absolutely correct! To be useful, *most* of the people you identify as potential terrorists must actually turn out to *be* terrorists. Since terrorists are kind of rare, this means that you need an absolutely impossible accuracy rate.
Otherwise, most of your time will be spent interrogating people who are scared of flying, people who just broke up with their girlfriends, people whose pet just died, etc, etc.
If you've pissed off the military enough for them to launch a rocket at you, being a citizen isn't a concern.
So say you're Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich or Cindy Sheehan, all of whom have definitely pissed off the military quite a bit by advocating significantly reducing their funding or ordering them to stop engaging the enemy. Some of those military guys might think it's OK to launch a rocket at them to eliminate the problem of anti-military activity in the US. Does them all being US citizens make it a concern? Do you still see no problem?
The whole point of having a court system is that we can't trust the executive branch to decide who's a Good Guy and who's a Bad Guy.
I am officially gone from
Your post is a troll because Ron Paul is a batshit crazy lunatic with nothing but archaic, 19th century ideas when it comes to global political and economic policy.
The funniest part about people referring to McCarthyism is that they do not seem to be aware that the people who actually did the things that are considered the abuses of "McCarthyism" were Democrats.
Do we really need the petty partisan politics here? He was a paranoid wingnut who very nearly did a lot of damage to the country. Does it really matter what side of the fence he started on if he was so far around the bend that he couldn't see sanity on a clear day?
Uh yeah, because under McCain and the dud bombshell it would have been SO much better.
Face it, as long as the voting system is broken and you are locked in a two party dictatorship, the difference between dropping that paper slip in the ballot or using it as toilet paper is the amount of shit on your hands.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Somehow, this should extend to politicians vis-a-vis voting machines.
He was quoting, actually. From a COINTELPRO report. Made famous by the Rage Against the Machine song, which was featured in The Matrix. The actual line can be heard at about 5 minutes in.
...and the government labels every foreign student from an Asian or Middle East country as a potential terrorist/spy just because they apply for grad school, work, or research with a professor, university, or company that does work that may or may not lead back to the DoD. When you expect to see the boogie man in every corner your eyes will start playing tricks on you and you will see things moving.
My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
I almost choked on lunch. Kudos to you sir.
Belief? Hope? Preference?The Existential Vortex
It's only a matter of time before Tom Cruise runs in and ruins it anyway, although maybe they will be able to see that coming this time
You see no problem with the military becoming involved in what is essentially a police action (by definition, war is declared on nations, so what nation is "al Qaeda"?), and committing a summary execution upon U.S. citizens without providing the Constitutionally guaranteed right to a hearing to determine if there is enough evidence to charge -- much less convict -- him of the crimes of which he has been accused?!?!
I think you might be in need of a remedial civics class.
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
Anyone who's ever gotten a ticket in the mail...would argue that we're already far beyond that point.
Hey, look -- I'm admittedly as paranoid and leery of government as anyone else here on /., but I gotta say that you are mistaken on that point. About ten or fifteen years ago here in Anchorage, Alaska, they tried setting up photo radar to catch people speeding in school zones. IIRC, EVERYONE who challenged the photo radar tickets in court beat the accusation.
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
In related news, it has been found easier to determine from a person's actions, body language, and speech patterns that they will indulge only in perfectly legitimate fully approved activities. The new Pre-Legitmate behavior detector will eliminate these persons from the list of pre-criminals and likely pre-criminals. Everyone else will be forcibly rounded up for processing and confinement, with no more than the necessary amount of brutality and humiliation. The Pre-Crime division is apparently undeterred by the fact that more than 90% of the population must be thus interned...
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
So how soon till we have a fully functional pre-crime police department where they arrest and try people before crimes are even commited?
Will never happen. The lawyers and politicians would be the first to get arrested so you know they will never allow this...
Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is the headlight of an oncoming train.
I haven't followed the story close enough to be 100% certain of the facts in the case, but I understand it, this was not entrapment. The FBI did not present him with an idea and then a means to accomplish it; he started looking around on his own, and someone he knew alerted the FBI who THEN placed bait somewhere that someone who was ALREADY LOOKING for the means to carry out the plot would find it. By definition, that's not "entrapment". That's a legitimate sting operation.
Look at it this way...if you have never considered hiring a hooker, and a sexy, undercover cop approaches you and offers to have sex for money, that's entrapment. If, however, you are cruising the red light district in your town, asking "how much?" to every prospect that catches your eye, and one of them is an undercover cop, that's NOT entrapment...and that is more or less what I understand happened in this incident (piped to sed "s/prostitution/plot to blow things up/g" of course).
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
Can we use this on politicians to tell when they are lying?
I mean, those guys are worse than the terrorists, they've destroyed way more lives in the past 5 years than 9/11 ever did (George W. Bush has killed more than 100,000 civilians around the world).
Maybe if the politicos knew that their heart rate, eye movements, and breathing patterns were being monitored all the time, maybe, just maybe they'd let their brains get ahead of their mouths, and actually consider what crap it is they are spouting.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
I was looking forward to sleeping in a warm pool of water, and getting paid for it.
It's a made up cover story for the real project.
Those bastards have contracted to have ceiling cat watch all of us!
There is no expectation to file charges on the battlefield before pulling the trigger, that is just daft. He was in Yemen, where he was a wanted criminal, actively and openly plotting against both the US and Yemen and openly recruiting people for a job described by the Geneva Conventions as an illegal combatant.
So presumably you think in the Civil War both sides, when attacked, should have filed court papers asking permission to shoot at each person involved?
As for Bin Laden... stfu, terrorist.
Why exactly does it have to have anything to do with dark skin and beards? It doesn't. You're trying to make it about race and creed when that has nothing to do with it.
The guy screams at the top of his lungs to as many people as can listen to kill innocent people as possible, he's not joking, he's not just rallying, he really means for people to go out and kill other innocent people. Thats all that is needed. This isn't a peaceful protest by some guy trying to get his voice heard, this is a guy who wants to kill others without any concern over what the outcome will be or why its being done.
If he wanted a trial, he might have considered turning himself in. He could have claimed asylum elsewhere, plenty of countries would have taken him and not have turned him over to the US. He didn't want that, he wanted to keep gaining new killers for his cause.
What he did instead was to continue doing EXACTLY what got him put on the shit list in the first place.
Cause, reaction. Race and creed need not be brought into this discussion, there is plenty of reason to go after him without being a racist fuck.
Now, STOP BEING A RACIST FUCK. Bringing race up as if its the cause of everything just shows your own racism and ignorance, not anyone elses.
The fact that you want to defend him like he was innocent just makes you look fucking stupid.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Here in Oregon we have traffic cameras (mostly to catch people running red lights) that are very effective and make use of the same legal process as any other ticket.
Not really sure how DHS could be involved, though. We wouldn't allow them to be, here.
"Innocence is measured in fiscal wealth these days, I'm afraid."
Or celebrity.
Tell that to Bernie Madoff, Mike Tyson, or Michael Vick.
so that the rich don't have to do a damned thing.
What are they doing now? For the past 200 years?
Yeah, the courts correctly find that photo radar tickets don't have proper evidence, but they also usually find that photo red light cameras do in fact have good evidence because you can tell from the photo that the violation really happened.
Seems to be working.
Yea, except breathing isn't the only attribute it looks at, and it wouldn't take too many people going through before it became useless if all it took was asthma to set it off as thats a rather common aliment.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Fear is a really useful tool, especially in controlling information. Imagine if you will what fuckery could be accomplished under these circumstances, never mind the Minority Report crap. Think for a minute about who is controlling this information and the processes around it. This is in direct violation of our constitutional rights and more importantly our human rights. Do I want murderers, rapists or terrorist walking the streets? Heck no - but I am unwilling to segregate a population simply because I *think* they will do something bad. On the political side, I have to say there are no real checks and balances of the DHS and it needs to be stopped, chopped up and shut down. From a more important and ethical perspective, this is a point where technology is being used not for good, but for questionable purposes.
The first amendment as well as the ninth amendment are supposed to protect freedom of expression. This is why white supremacists are not summarily executed for instance. Someone could say, "Can someone please nuke the USA out of existence? They are the new Nazi Germany." and that should be protected speech.
Just because someone advocates murder does not make them a murderer. To me, someone like you who advocates murder for someone who advocates murder is guilty of the same crime of advocating murder. Because speech is not a crime. Maybe that is the part you are not getting.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
You story is interesting. Your actual experience that you relate is that you've never had any problems in the area that you're paranoid about. You seem to believe that because it didn't use to be a problem, and now you fear it, that it has become a problem. Beyond that, you're not just concerned that it might have arisen as a problem, you're "sure they have found reasons to grab it."
But lets stick to the facts to which you testified; you have experience in this area and in fact did not have a problem.
It is in fact illegal to plan a crime. You can fantasize for free, but the difference between a legal fantasy and a criminal conspiracy is exactly 1(one) physical act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
With all due respect, if you think it's a good idea for any government agency to kill *even a single person* without any oversight whatsoever, then I humbly submit that you, sir, are either an idiot or you are completely ignorant of what has historically happened when any person or group of people has acquired unlimited authority. It has *ALWAYS* been a bad thing, and it always will.
Your prejudiced rantings against religion -- and I'll agree that many, many evil things have been done in the name of religion, but so have many, many good things -- only suggest that it is more likely idiocy than ignorance...although I sincerely hope I am wrong. If it's merely ignorance, than education can fix the problem, but if it's idiocy? Not so much.
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
"Innocence is measured in fiscal wealth these days, I'm afraid."
Or celebrity.
Tell that to Bernie Madoff, Mike Tyson, or Michael Vick.
First off, those three examples may have gotten punished, but their punishment pales in comparison to what the rest of us would be sentenced to for the same crimes. Especially Madoff.
But nah, I'll let O.J. Simpson, Paris Hilton, Tiger Woods, Lindsey Lohan, Nichole Richie, Kenneth Lay, Dick Cheney,and uncountable others tell them for me.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Anyone who's ever gotten a ticket in the mail...would argue that we're already far beyond that point.
IIRC, EVERYONE who challenged the photo radar tickets in court beat the accusation.
Right; but they had to challenge it. Otherwise, guilt is implied.
Not what you would expect the process to be in an 'innocent until proven guilty' society.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
What battlefield? Did we declare war on Yemen? Do you have information on that drone strike that others don't have? How do you know there was a battle? Murdering a US citizen is OK as long as he's a "wanted criminal"? Where is your respect for the constitution?
He once inserted random mutations into his code, just so he could have the experience of debugging.
So you advocate murder for anyone who advocates murder? Or does your rule only apply to people with dark skin and beards?
DHS has some other word for bearded darkies, terrorists are just the bearded olives.
I challenged a ticket in court back in 1997. Long story short, the police office on an overpass clocked the guy next to me going 70 in 55. I was innocent. I had what I considered plenty of evidence--weather reports showing that visibility that day was less than 1/4 mile (normal visibility is around 20 miles), and I even caught the cop in an outright lie. He said that he identified my car by the license plate number, even though I had photographs that clearly showed that from his vantage point, this was impossible.
The end result was unsurprising. The judge wouldn't allow any of my evidence, and after finding me guilt, as I was walking in front of the bench, the judge leaned over, covered the microphone so that the court reporter wouldn't hear, and said, "You know, you never had a chance."
Unfortunately, I was a dirt poor college student with barely enough money to buy gas, let alone hire a lawyer to help me appeal the case, or else I would have. Of course, the judge knew this. This is also the same judge who, when I had asked for a jury trial before, told me, "You can't have a jury trial, this is a traffic violation. It has to be resolved in traffic court," which I still think is bogus, but then, IANAL.
So yeah, that "right to challenge it in court?" Not so much useful. It is also why I have pretty much zero respect for our judicial system or its ability to actually serve justice. It's not just a matter of being "more efficient" to waive your rights. You HAVE no rights, and it's just a question of how much your existence tax is going to be.
As a short P.S., before that trial, I was always careful about obeying the speed limit, or at worst, driving within 5 MPH or so of it. Nowadays, I don't care. I drive as fast as I want to and that I feel is safe given whatever conditions I'm driving in. I figure that since the truth doesn't matter and I don't have a chance anyway, I might as well at least get places faster.
Of course Phillip Dick's story is relevant, but I'm not sure anyone in DHS has an attention span of more than "He looks like a bad guy," much less reading a novel.
I wonder if the new show 'Person of Interest' gave them some ideas, since TV shows come in easy to digest 8 minute chunks?
Not a bad show, by the way (I gloss over the technical details while watching it).
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
Great stuff, but I didn't need a song, no matter how inspired, to figure this out. More or less.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
Ron Paul knows very little about real economics
- aha, is that why he predicted the incoming economic collapse and has been talking about the role that Fed is playing in destruction of US economy since 1971?
Is that why his worst stock pick since 1993 made only 300% and his best stocks are up 1000% and 2000%?
Ron Paul invests against USA Fed, but Ron Paulâ(TM)s policies are AGAINST HIS OWN INVESTMENT.
In over 10 years that Ron Paul owns these stocks they are ALL UP:
GG up 1000%
ABX up 300%
NEM up 300%
AEM up 700%
AU up 300%
IAG up 1000%
MVG up over 1000%
PAAS up 1000%
SLW up over 2000%
Which other candidate can boast the same economic foresight? Wouldnâ(TM)t you want one that CAN?
even international politics
- aha, is that why he is against US participating in all these so called 'free trade agreements', is against UN participation, because it goes against sovereignty of USA and he wants to stop all of the foreign aid that goes to the Middle East based on the fact that (USA is broke) but that USA gives 9 times as much aid to the enemies of Israel as it gives to Israel? Is that why he was against going into the Iraq war? (Well, he is against going into any undeclared and thus unconstitutional war for that matter), but is that why he was specifically talking about going to Pakistan to catch Bin Laden with a small number of people 8 years ago instead of wasting time everywhere else? Why he is against helping Pakistan with bombs and bribes? Is that why he is against he drug war, asserting that this war is detrimental to US/Mexico relations because it undermines Mexican ability to control the cartels among other things? Is that why he is for peaceful trade rather than for eternal war? Yeah, he knows nothing.
You can't handle the truth.
The head of DHS was previously our Governor. She really liked the cameras.
We still have red light cameras, and if you ignore those tickets you get your license suspended. And bigger fines. Arizona once has the highest rate of fatalities from failure to stop of any state. We're just plain bad.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
In that study you mention, where did they get the photos of the criminals? Were they mug shots, or did they actually get the criminals family photos? Photos from before or after they'd gone to prison? Did they do a control where they asked things like "does this person look happy or unhappy?" as opposed to "does this person look like a criminal or not?"
The head of DHS was previously our Governor. She really liked the cameras.
So the DHS thing wasn't true at all. Got it.
IIRC, it wasn't a matter of proving whether or not the violation actually happened; it was a matter of positively identifying the driver of the vehicle. But, as I said, it was over a decade ago, so take that with NaCl as required ;)
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
As the news of pre-crime detection projects are coming out, the other news about US government operations came out, showing just how good US government is at technology and this is a proof that nothing will go wrong with the pre-crime stuff, especially nothing will go wrong with it, if it's connected to some automatic killer drones, to kill you, before you commit a crime
Virus Hits Drone Fleet.
A computer virus has infected the cockpits of Americaâ(TM)s Predator and Reaper drones, logging pilotsâ(TM) every keystroke as they remotely fly missions over Afghanistan and other warzones.
The virus, first detected nearly two weeks ago by the militaryâ(TM)s Host-Based Security System, has not prevented pilots at Creech Air Force Base in Nevada from flying their missions overseas. Nor have there been any confirmed incidents of classified information being lost or sent to an outside source. But the virus has resisted multiple efforts to remove it from Creechâ(TM)s computers, network security specialists say. And the infection underscores the ongoing security risks in what has become the U.S. militaryâ(TM)s most important weapons system.
âoeWe keep wiping it off, and it keeps coming back,â says a source familiar with the network infection, one of three that told Danger Room about the virus. âoeWe think itâ(TM)s benign. But we just donâ(TM)t know.â. ........
You can't handle the truth.
True, but what is the alternative? If simply not showing up in court was all that was required to beat a conviction, then how many criminals (not just traffic misdemeanors, but real crime) would show up in court?
I honestly don't see a problem with having to challenge an allegation to have it overturned. If you were truly guilty until proven innocent, then the photo radar tickets would all have returned guilty verdicts because the drivers did not prove that they were either not driving the car or driving the car but not speeding when the violation occurred. What actually happened -- in Anchorage, at least -- was that the photo radar couldn't positively identify the driver, and since the owner of the car was not necessarily the driver of the car at the time and date of the alleged infraction, the tickets were thrown out.
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
There are some cases where that is an issue, but in typical cases that is not a problem because the owner of the car can make the defense that they loaned out the car... by saying who they loaned it to, who then will get the ticket. Key to that part is that driving is not a right, it is a privilege, and technically you're not supposed to loan out a car without knowing who you loaned it to and making sure they are properly licensed and covered by insurance.
There wasnt one for Anderton in the movie, either.
There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
Have gnu, will travel.
The return of the Inquisition!
We KNOW that you're going be a TERRORIST, so we are going to torture you until you confess!
Oh wait! Obamemall says that "we don't torture", we send you to Kazakhstan and THEY torture you.
No "Habeas Corpus"
No "Presumption of innocence"
No "Right against self incrimination"
In other words, No rights, AND you can be terminated (killed) because some bureaucrat decides that you (might) be a TERRORIST!
And who, in fact, are the REAL terrorists?
I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
.. Politicians and other GOVcorps personnel are moved to the FEMA Detention camps in large quantities.
uhm... yeah, but Anderton was framed.
I would not rule out the chance to preserve a nucleus of human specimens. It would be quite easy at the bottom of some of our deeper mine shafts. .
This sounds a little like the concept for the movie "City of Ember". It is about a colony of humans sealed away under a mountain for hundreds of years until the surface became better again for human habitation. Unfortunately, the secret of the outside world was lost and as everything started to fall apart and they ran out of food... well it is is not a bad movie and worth watching it for yourself.
Obviously, the parent was describing a completely self sufficient colony where they could sustain the population indefinitely. The comment just made me think about the movie and you can call it off topic!
I love the sound of distortion in the morning -- webcommando
What DHS thing? You think I was claiming that DHS wanted to run speed cams in Arizona? Our federal government doesn;t like Airxona much, but it's not at that level.
Wait, you didn't know Janet Napolitano was previously the governor of Arizona?
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
True, but what is the alternative? If simply not showing up in court was all that was required to beat a conviction, then how many criminals (not just traffic misdemeanors, but real crime) would show up in court?
The obvious (to me, at least) alternative would be to fight any and every 'law' on the books that violates your rights, regardless of whether or not you, personally, have been charged. We Americans have a duty to oppose tyranny and protect our republic and our Constitution, a duty I feel many take for granted.
Real criminals, i.e. people who commit acts of violence against others, are arrested by the police and held until trial... unless, of course, they happen to have a lot of cash on hand (or friends with cash) with which to post bail, while those who cannot afford bail have to sit and rot awaiting trial.
I honestly don't see a problem with having to challenge an allegation to have it overturned. If you were truly guilty until proven innocent, then the photo radar tickets would all have returned guilty verdicts because the drivers did not prove that they were either not driving the car or driving the car but not speeding when the violation occurred. What actually happened -- in Anchorage, at least -- was that the photo radar couldn't positively identify the driver, and since the owner of the car was not necessarily the driver of the car at the time and date of the alleged infraction, the tickets were thrown out.
The local government here in Springfield, MO, attempted a similar tactic - put the camera's up and ticket the owner of the car, regardless of who was driving. The cameras ended up being shut off because the city was violating citizens' right to due process (the ticket came in the mail and there was no option to dispute it), but it took months and a decision by the state Supreme Court to make it happen.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
He isn't a wanted criminal. He's just a citizen, that's the point. He isn't charged with anything, he's just this guy you know?
...and technically you're not supposed to loan out a car without knowing who you loaned it to...
While I am having a hard time coming up with an example of when and why you might do this, I am having an equally hard time finding any laws that require you to know to whom it was loaned. Do you have a reference for that statement?
...and making sure they are properly licensed and covered by insurance.
And that's just flat-out wrong. 1) You don't have to have a license to drive a car. You just have to have a license to drive on a public road. Consequently, I can very easily come up with examples of where you potentially might not need to make sure that a driver is properly licensed (although you might be required to do so by your insurance company; see item #2). 2) At least in my state, you don't license the driver; you license the CAR. Therefore, although it is necessary for me to insure that my car is properly insured*, there is no requirement for me to verify that the driver is properly insured, because you CAN'T insure the driver here.
*In some states, there is no requirement for insurance at all. Hawaii, for example, does not require insurance because their laws state that, regardless of who was at fault for the accident, you pay for repairs to your car, and the owner(s) of the other vehicle(s) pay for repairs to that/those car(s).
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
Gotta say, I pretty much agree with everything you said here, although if you aren't rich enough to post your own bail, there are bail-bond companies that will gladly front you the money (with interest, of course) until your trial, when the court returns the bond money. If you skip out on that, however, you've got bounty hunters chasing after you, because the company that bailed you out wants their money back, so you might not choose that option unless you were looking at life in prison or the death penalty...
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
That's the beauty of Common Law: Everybody is simultaneously guilty and not guilty of some crime, thanks to judicial precedence.
See for yourself
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/201103/criminals-look-different-noncriminals
I know this'll get lost in the mass of comments, but I wonder when people will realize this seems to be just another implementation of the classic so-called lie detector?
It's well known that the so-called lie detector is junk science because they cannot establish any physiological connection between an emotional 'spike' and a lie. That doesn't stop the Feds from relying on polygraphs, however, even though they've failed in spectacular ways in the past and continue to do so.
FBI dude: "Yes, his heart rate is accelerated and he's walking funny and carrying a large parcel! He fits a profile! Let's bring him in!"
Guy: "I was just in an argument with my girlfriend and I'm carrying my stuff back to my own apartment. I walk funny because I've got jock itch. Anything else you really need to know?"
I mean, seriously. Can anyone give any scientifically-based, sound reasoning about how this can actually work without trampling everyone's rights?
Besides, ultimately it's not going to work on a huge number of antisocial psychotics. You know the ones I'm talking about: they wake up, go to their jobs and embezzle a few hundred million, fire 8,000 more workers, and finish R&D on a new missile technology. The ones who end up doing massive social and financial damage and get paid to do it with smiles on their faces.
"A government is a body of people usually -- notably -- ungoverned." -Shepherd Book
I admire one thing about Communists. They appreciated the toxicity of religion and weren't shy about pulling a trigger on the primitives who espouse it. I want my government to kill them and I support legislators who facilitate killing them.
I'm going to assume you mean followers of violent, destructive religions based on your prior comment of
Awlaki etc are superstitionists whose supersition is vastly worse than any ideology that has come before.
But just in case... it doesn't make sense for a government to destroy a religion that aspouses peace, love, generosity, etc unless the government in question wants absolute control.
John Shirley wrote in the 90s about just such systems, and how terrorists/freedom fighters* can and will game them.
Eclipse: http://www.amazon.com/Eclipse-Song-Called-Youth-Book/dp/1930235003
* Depends on your point of view, innit? (Well, if you're willing to disregard little niceties like the distinction between "combatant" and "civilian".)
He declared that all not of Islam were his enemies and that USA was evil and that he wished to strike it's head and heart. He invented and discussed a plan to blow up the damned Pentagon and assault it with ground troops, and then procured the materials required to do so. He was in no way an innocent man.
Or, let me put it another way. What is "attempted murder"?
Excellent. A little more government control, and I can begin gaming them into acting my enemies.
I am John Hurt.
You're correct of course, which is why I put wanted criminal in quotes. The point is that even if he were a wanted criminal, it wouldn't change anything. He'd still deserve a fair trial before he was executed. That's due process. A hit list is the opposite.
He once inserted random mutations into his code, just so he could have the experience of debugging.
Person of Interest, anyone? :P
Yeah, I suspected that.
Interesting how Americans throw basic human rights out the window if you can convince them that there was the opportunity to kick some bad guy ass. Even if the "bad" hasn't even been remotely determined.
We're American, we kick butt, if you don't like it kiss my ass.
Guess what? We don't like it. Even when they are murdering their own. It's still murder and Obama has lost the miniscule amount of respect I had left for him.
DHS did it's job, and now is way too large in number of employees, so there is a make work project to help insure that in 20 years from now, that these surplus employees could retire with a reasonable pension.
Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
The above comment should be moderated to +100000000000 trillion.
Terrible information coming out on what really happens when the US government wants to kill a person, a US citizen in this case.
You can't handle the truth.
that is an awesome movie. I don't care what anyone else says, I loved it.
Operation Guillotine is in effect.
I will not be adjudged on a scale of "normality" against a scale drawn from the mean of a profoundly sick society.
Operation Guillotine is in effect.
if they can track down and listen to everything, but they cant detect/stop find the spam bot control servers?
Who profits from spam?
They could arrest them all in one day and have zero spam.
Get of yer ass DHS, do your job, virus's come in spam, they can do evil things.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
Dude, forget it. Jesus himself could be running for Prez, but if he's neither Dem nor Rep he wouldn't win. The last time a third party candidate was more than a comic foil was almost a century ago, and even then it was a former president, and a quite popular one, and still he couldn't come close to even thinking of winning the election.
Find a way out of this two party dictatorship, then you can start thinking about bringing sensible alternatives into the game.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Planning isn't doing. I think about suicide a lot.
I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
The fact that you want to defend him like he was innocent just makes you look fucking stupid.
Aaaand, the fact that you "know" he's guilty without him having gone through a court trial to prove his guilt or lack thereof, says basically the same thing about you.
I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
Ok, so the non-criminal pictures come from the "NimStim" photo catalogue of headshots of various emotional states and are selected for Caucasian males between 20 and 25 with little or no facial hairs and no scars, facial markings or tattoos. For each head, they chose the "neutral" expression. The criminal photographs came from the Missouri, Montana, Michigan, and Florida online criminal offender databases. The photos were edited to remove backgrounds and to "maintain a consistent photo quality, and remove differences in lighting, graininess, photo quality, etc."
So, basically, it was mug shots versus model shots. They did ask some participants if it was obvious that some of the pictures were mug shots. Since their theory is that people have a subconscious ability to recognise criminals by facial features, it seems odd that they believe that their subjects would be able to consciously tell that some pictures were mug shots.
In any case, I went through the pictures myself and made some observations. It seems that, although there were some false positives, I was able to determine which were criminals and which were not based on cues in the pictures very well. The method I used wasn't subconscious, however, it was a very conscious method. I looked for light glare. Turns out that the amount of light glare, especially on the forehead, is a very good indicator of whether or not someone is a criminal.
Anyway, there might be something to the study. The results about women being less likely to identify rapists as criminals suggests that there's at least something there, although that could have more to do with the attractiveness criteria they used to select images in the first place. There might be something in people's appearance that makes them more likely to be criminals, although if there is, it's probably a self-fulfilling prophecy. In any case, the study has too many problems with it to list here. Selection bias is just the start. Trouble is, even if there is something to the study, the effect isn't strong enough to be reliably used for any sort of crime detection. False positive rate would be through the roof.
Janet Napolitano was interviewed by Charlie Rose a couple of weeks ago and I was floored when she started talking about how DHS was going after domestic 'persons of interest' (the illegal enemy combatant ) who lurk withing our borders with their "IED's"
Considering that a cherry bomb or M80 could be an IED, or just about anything really, it spooked me that her fervor seemed to be focused on citizens.
Adding the sprinkles of tech, 50 or more 'fusion centers' and laws like this turd make me suspect that the U.S. is soon going the China route of totalitarianism; and sooner than later.
resist propaganda
She's been doing that for two years.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.