Slashdot Mirror
Boston Tech Vs. the Bomber
An anonymous reader writes "Amid rumors of an impending arrest in the Boston Marathon bombing, Xconomy has a rundown of local companies working on technologies relevant to the investigation and aftermath. The approaches include Web analytics to identify communication patterns, image and video analysis of the crime scene, surveillance camera hardware and software, and smart prosthetic devices for amputees. A big challenge the authorities face is the sheer volume and different proprietary formats of video from security cameras, mobile devices, and media groups. Ultimately this will be a case study in whether an individual bent on destruction can remain anonymous in an era of digital surveillance, social media, and crowdsourcing."
Hell there's already been that fake image floating around on facebook of a "man" blob added in with photoshop on a roof then zoomed in and blocky graphics added to it.
Well, the emergency response seemed to be on the ball, minimizing the damage. Now we get to see whether the surveillance technologies are up to scratch after the fact.
Prevention is probably impossible.
Not in the article: Success rates and false positives.
The problem with these type of technologies is that even if they're 99% effective, that still means they're useless. You need to be about 99.9% effective before the false positive rate drops to a point where it is investigationally useful. If these technologies happen to finger the person who did this, everyone will point to it as proof that it works. But I can tell you right now, there won't be any news stories of the dozens to hundreds detained, questioned, and humiliated by simply matching an arbitrary profile -- because in both the media's eyes and the general public, that would be flinging mud on a "hero".
I'm all for investigation into these technologies... but none of them are mature enough yet to be used in criminal investigations responsibly.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
If a person is reasonable intelligent, and a loner, I have no doubt that covering tracks would be possible if one really wanted to.
Don't talk on social media.
Don't tell anyone.
Buy supplies with cash in different locations, spread over significant time.
Wear different clothing/hat/sunglasses and don't ever use them before of after the event.
Die your hair, shave, obscure your style and gender.
Don't drive a car, anywhere.
Don't do obvious stuff like use cellphones in the operation.
Fortunately, the type of people capable of this kind of stuff tend not to be the brightest bulbs.
4chan may have found them... http://imgur.com/a/sUrnA
Computer, enhance!
I wonder if they tried. I know from various TV documentaries that it works.
So far the most noticeable thing to me is what seems like an amplified rumor mill. In the old days, when news traveled at the speed of ink, they had more time to verify. Now the rumor mill goes directly to Twitter and gets amplified. We had: 1. rumor of bomb at another location. 2. rumor of suspect being taken to courthouse. 3. rumor of Saudi national being a suspect (AFAIK he's still just a witness).
Any one of us can report; but most of us will spend 99.999... % consuming. The biggest impact for me is that I look at new information and think, "OK, let's let this season for a while before we actually consume it as fact". That "seasoning" used to be built into the slow news cycle. Now you have to do it manually, individually. Maybe that's a good thing. It might result in the cultivation of more "street smarts" and questioning the media.
I would think most video would be from iPhone or Android devices, neither of which shoots in a proprietary video format.
Unless you are talking about something like a Red? But even those use industry standard raw digital video formats.
At this point there are really only a handful of video formats and codecs in wide use, none proprietary.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Aren't some security cameras Android based?
But even then, it seems like most security cameras use standard formats. So the question stands.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The person buying supplies would also be well advised to get what he/she can at second-hand places. A pressure cooker or other parts from the local Goodwill is not only cheaper than buying new, but almost certainly full of many irrelevant fingerprints. Ditto some electronic parts.
At this point I wonder if someone is quietly burning a white cap and gray hoodie (and adding water and stirring ashes)? Of course, the official
description is likely wrong on this point to reassure a possible culprit.
The point about no car is well taken. In Boston a car is pretty well a disadvantage anyway, there being so few places to park.
I agree with most of this but you don't need to kill your hair, simply coloring it would be enough.
"Ultimately this will be a case study in whether an individual bent on destruction can remain anonymous in an era of digital surveillance"
I would say that someone bent on destruction and bent on anonymity stands a very good chance of achieving both if they are canny and use commodity goods like pressure cookers, nails and match heads. I am preparing myself for the possibility that the perpetrator/s may never be identified. Depressing.
The nature of this thread disturbs me. That we somehow might get a jump on perceived opponents and/or frank miscreants with technology. What say Robert S, McNamara? Vietnam? Iraq, anyone?
During the late 70s I worked in an emergency room in Boston (my bittersweet home town). A regular visitor was a nervous, disturbing cop who had been farmed out to the graveyard shift after killing an innocent citizen, James Bowden, in Mission Hill. We had to put up with "Eddie" because we depended on the local police district when things got out of control.
But the number of criminal suspects (mostly minorities) they brought us who "fell down the stairs" never inspired confidence. As the city then waded through the racist swamp of the Charles Stuart case, that confidence only decreased. Police seemed much more interested in arresting "them" than solving crimes. I hear things have improved since I left Boston in the late 80s. I hope so.
So how about we put all of the technology in its proper perspective and lets see if the FBI and Boston PD can move beyond their checkered past and deliver some police work.
I would say that the person(s) that did this was/were quite intelligent probably does not live in boston and had to stay in a hotel. May have been part of the race. Also were the bombs timed how did he/she know the best time to strike? Wore the detonation devices specific or just something of the shelf like a stop watch? This shows that as we loose more rights this does nothing how many of us are probably watched 24/7 for not being of sertain group, emails read, and people talk about our personal things like nothing. Also now if your an isolated person cause you do not want to talk to the average idiot you may be even more of a person of interest. I say we have the new gustapo and it has not stoped anything. Look at TSA when was the last time that you heard that they cought a terrorist? This may have been organized plot why did American Airlines shutdown on tuesday which sounds like a very skilled attack, why the fire in the library a few blocks away? Why the letters with ricin? When you have multiple people doing these then you have a conspiracy. Why did no one group say they had done this act? Billion spent, bill of rights raped, no privacy, people coming in and out of your residence like its their duty to look at every detail of your life. Don't forget all the non lethal weapons that give people cancer daily used by the new gustapo. When you look at all the evidence its all a stage for a police state, regardless if the new gustapo caused it or failed to catch it. This is insane since the definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results. Look at countries in the past what has transpired with police states, why are we okay with allowing the bill of rights to be raped daily? Do we have to belong to a certain group to be free what is this? Anyway posted by White hispanic of european decent.
But then what is the payoff for the killer? Presumably the same drives that lead people to this kind of act also helps ensure that they will get caught, sometimes through a subconscious slip-up. If they wait until they're about to die of old age and then publish a memoir claiming responsibility, people will say, Right. What a desperate old windbag.
marathon run...
bomb goes off...
hundreds injured...
into hospital...
in come the businessmen...
"here's your free treatment, ma'am"...
fleet of cyborgs now living in downtown Boston...
The Boston Marathon Bombing was White House directed op involving units from DHS and Justice. The bombing and the Racine laced letters, also part the White House directed op were intended to scare Congress into passing bills aimed at increasing background checks on weapons ownership applications and the ban of civilian owned assault weapons. In President Obama's words on the steps of the White House, with guests ferried the White House despite the Sequestration (rather Sequestration Theater) he said, "This is a shameful day."
Don't talk on social media.
Don't tell anyone.
Buy supplies with cash in different locations, spread over significant time.
Wear different clothing/hat/sunglasses and don't ever use them before of after the event.
Die your hair, shave, obscure your style and gender.
Don't drive a car, anywhere.
Don't do obvious stuff like use cellphones in the operation.
You do realize that everything you just listed is what the Department of Homeland Security trains people are the things terrorists do, right? Let me tell you something about walking through the woods unnoticed; Don't try and cover your tracks. Every attempt to cover them is, in actuality, disturbing the surroundings even more. It makes you easier to track. If you want to go unseen in the world, step lightly and deliberately, and don't move in a straight line towards your destination. Take a circular route. Walk where others have walked (deer trails, for example). Disturb little, move erratically, sleep lightly, and nobody will find you.
Which is what anyone who's spent any amount of time outdoors can tell you. It's common sense. The advice you're offering, if followed, would be like shooting a flare up, saying "Hi, I'm over here!" Terrorists aren't stupid. They aren't exactly smart either, but they do plan. A lot. In detail. Because they know what's coming after them when they're done: A bunch of very pissed off Marines. And intelligence isn't really important, not nearly as much as planning. That's why 9/11 happened. That's why terrorism survives to this day, despite all our efforts to stop it. They aren't stupid.
Never underestimate your opponent. If you're going to catch terrorists, you have to think like one. And you sir, are a terrible impersonation of a terrorist. The real ones know better. Which is unfortunate. If they were more like you, we'd have won the war on terror by now.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
Well, the emergency response seemed to be on the ball, minimizing the damage.
Circumstances greatly facilitated that. There were doctors, nurses and medical personnel on site near the finish line. Marathon organizers put together a huge medical team. The minutes saved by being very near to the attack site surely saved lives.
Now we get to see whether the surveillance technologies are up to scratch after the fact.
At an event like this I'd wager cell phone photos and videos dwarf the traditional surveillance cameras.
"Shave" is terrible advice. 1) It's the kind of change that people notice, and 2) it's a relatively long-lasting change.
In this time and age, I would not count on that last statement holding true. How many bright people were swindled out of their money, home and future by the irresponsibility of banks?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Why brag about it at all? I certainly wouldn't. Although I'd probably make sure some kind of statement finds its way into the press to make sure people understand why I did it.
Though... it ain't my style. It sure isn't really an interesting target. The chance to hit someone who can be exploited to make me look like a monster is far too high.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Depends on your usual facial hair. Sure, if you usually run around like Santa's come to town, it is a long lasting change.
The opposite seems to be more suitable. If you get away from the public for 2 weeks or so, it should allow you to grow a nice beard that is easily removed again once you're done.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
This is the ultimate game of "where's waldo?".
If a person is reasonable intelligent, and a loner, I have no doubt that covering tracks would be possible if one really wanted to.
Don't talk on social media.
Don't tell anyone.
Buy supplies with cash in different locations, spread over significant time.
Wear different clothing/hat/sunglasses and don't ever use them before of after the event.
Die your hair, shave, obscure your style and gender.
Don't drive a car, anywhere.
Don't do obvious stuff like use cellphones in the operation.
Fortunately, the type of people capable of this kind of stuff tend not to be the brightest bulbs.
What you described has little to do with intelligence and everything to do with discipline. Fortunately most criminals lack that as well.
Since you did go Godwin, let me say this: There was a time here in America pre 1865, when the majority of (white) men thought that those of African descent and those of the female gender (heaven forbid if you were both female and African!) were inferior folks and no better than property. Just because a majority feels something is right and good does not mean it is. That is why very few pure Democracies have stood the test of time. This is also the whole reason for the existence of the scientific method. You need empirical evidence, true proof if you will, that something is or is not. Emotions fool us all the time. The laws of physics are a cold hearted bitch though.
Also be aware when you say "predispositon to violence" you walk that razor's edge of falling prey to stereotypes. There is still plenty of conjecture and debate regarding Nature vs. Nurture because that happens to be an area where easy math formulae such as E=mc^2 just don't seem manifest. For instance, I grew up poor. I am not poor any longer. In your words, "most other rational thinking people" often throw the stereotype around that if you grew up poor then you will be poor your whole life, that you will end up in jail as a criminal most likely for drugs or gang violence, an so on. A person should not be judged on where they came from, grew up, race, etc. Their own merits speak all on their own. Look at that.
I have not researched this particular killer in any detail. This is actually the first time I have heard of him. However, his military career was evidently impeccable, all previous evaluations of him seemed normal, there were no issues with law enforcement at any time previous to the shooting then up to that point, "most rational people" would have called him an upstanding citizen and hero. But he knew something was wrong, he knew he was fucked up, and when he did the rational thing and sought medical help, he got turned away. That tumor continued unabated and we have known for ages that tumors can cause you to go crazy, lose motor functions, sieze, etc. Well look what the evidence shows us: a man that wasn't crazy, who goes crazy, and upon autopsy find a tumor in his brain in an area that we now know today controls your aggressive behaviors. That's a walking, quacking duck right there. So let's call it a duck ummkay?
I can tell why you seem so incensed and defensive in your response. You feel that by girlintraining's & my stance that we will be soft on criminals, that we will excuse thier behavior, and by being this way "justice" won't be served (check out her paragraph on bad things just happening and revenge). You may even believe that if we can't blame the bad man for being bad then we may blame you as in "society failed him." Speaking for myself, I can say that the act itself should not be excused. He killed alot of people and that is a heinous thing. However, those family's that lost people that day, still grieve today even though justice was served by his death. The best way to honor them, and make them feel that thier sacrifices were not in vain, would be to prevent this from happening again but as girl pointed out you simply can't effectively do that until you understand the problem.
So to answer your final question, why should we believe her over consensus? We shouldn't. We should give them equal consideration with the facts that we know. I know science and I know how mob rule works and mob rule is the last thing one should defer to.
"Don't do obvious stuff like use cellphones in the operation."
CBS News tonight:
"[CBS News correspondent Bob] Orr said authorities have video of a man in a black jacket on a cell phone, wearing a gray hoodie and a white baseball cap backwards placing a black bag at the second bomb site outside of the Forum restaurant on Boylston Street and then leaving the area before that explosion. Orr said the man was on the phone at the second bomb site when the first bomb exploded. Orr said the FBI determined the time the man was on his cell phone, then went back and scanned all the calls made in the area to track who they wanted to talk to."
http://boston.cbslocal.com/2013/04/17/cnn-boston-marathon-bombings-suspect-identified-in-surveillance-video/
We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
What makes you think it was an individual. Maybe it was a three letter government agency in want of funding.
You know, capitalist Russia style. (Chechenia war) ... or like was the case with the "underwear bomber" http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2012/05/tracing-cia-underwear-bomb-leak-back-white-house/52537/
Would you try to stop a brother or sister from dating someone who had previously been hospitalized for a suicide attempt?
No, why would I?
Would you be willing to closely work with a person who was rumored to have bipolar II disorder?
Of course as long as they could do the work.
If you were hiring a person for a job or renting a house, would it bother you if that person revealed an anxiety disorder? Depression? Schizophrenia? How would their compliance to medication affect your view?
I am in fact a landlord and I don't care about ANY of those things. At all. Again, why on earth would it?
If you knew a woman who had a mental illness, would you recommend an abortion if she became pregnant?
I think I'd let her decide what was right for her instead of forcing and pre-conceived notions I might have on her.
Do you think a person with a serious mental illness should be able to vote? To drive?
Sure if it does not affect the ability to do those things.
Do you think "due process" to contest confinement should be applicable to those who have been diagnosed with a mental illness?
Of course it should.
Your survey, as usual for that kind of things, reveals way more about YOUR perceptions of people than it does about how people actually react to mental illness. Very few people would answer any differently than myself for most of those questions.
Do YOU think that someone diagnosed with a mental illness should be able to buy a gun? I do, because I realize that the term "mental illness" is absurdly broad.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The only thing that would cause problems for a terrorist in that list is changing your hair colour. If you immediately show up with a different hairstyle and colour after a terrorist event, people are going to ask questions, much better to shave your head constantly and then wear a wig. The rest is either untraceable or useless even if it is traced. Of course it's barely a start if one really wanted to commit an act of terror, but in and of itself there isn't much wrong with it.
Because none of that would raise any suspicions with your family, friends, workmates or neighbours (if you had any). Your problem is that even though you have no social skills (ie a loner) the people in your community do, and part of those skills involve identifying strange behaviour in others.
Where do you live? Who do you pay rent to? Where do you buy your food? If you don't drive where do you buy your train/bus tickets? (all the transport and stations here have cameras), how do you research your masterplan with no phone or internet? You think the people at the library or internet cafe not going to think it strange when some androgynous weirdo comes in each day with different coloured hair doing google searches for home made bombs? How about the girl at the hair dye selling shop? It's a lot harder than you think to get "off the grid".
With cameras being mass produced, it difficult to imagine how the devices can have proprietary formats. Ultimately, an existing camera has to be converted into something Windows/Linux/HDTV can display.
But assuming it is true, the government will use this disaster to fund agencies to learn to use any camera for surveillance. George Orwell will be correct.
For the same reason that when we want to make fun of a woman, it's very common to call them manly. "She has a mustache", "Walks like a man", jokes about having a deep voice, hairy arms or legs, likes sports.... What, the worst thing a woman can do is act like a man? How insulted do you think men are about that?
Did you ever consider it's insulting to gays that women are insulted by men being called gay? That some people immediately associate "girly" traits with gay men, and try to act insulted?
Why is acting like the opposite sex the "worst" thing a man or woman can do? Because it's the opposite behavior of what is expected. It's "funny", unexpected, and through the ages people have laughed about men dressing up as women, and women dressing up as men, this is evident through even the most casual of glances at classic theater plays, movies and any other means of storytelling. I'm not saying it's right, because people have the right to dress and act any way they want in the real world, and this type of humor undermines their struggle. What I do have a problem with is with people being blind to the fact that this goes both ways! This is not an equality issue, or something feminists should get their gender-unspecific underwear in a bunch about.
Stop diluting the good work for actual, real life equality with these ridiculous made up "issues". The bigger the chisel you drive between the genders, the further away from that dream we get. Actually, the second biggest threat to gender equality or gender neutrality or what ever you want to call it; extreme feminists. They drive more and more people away from the cause to a more negative stance. It's like they're working for the straight white middle aged men that they proclaim to hate.
Your dumb tranny ass watches too much spy fiction.
Seriously. Do you?
Whenever we want to make fun of a woman, we call her mannish (Man Hands). As a man, I don't find that insulting to me at all. It's something she's not supposed to be; a denial of one of her defining features.
I keep thinking those that were literally raised in gun culture (and within the mist of lead it generates) can be explained by this phenomena. An enlightened society would conduct a thorough and statistically meaningful study of those that were 'gun raised' and ended up putting them to their inevitable use; I think the correlation between their actions (including domestic abuse) and their lead contaminated development would be very strong. Then again, an enlightened society wouldn't be awash in easily accessable weapons in the first place.
So, it is enough to filter people buying sunglasses, without car and facebook account?
839*929
1. A normal-looking, middle-aged. white, middle class guy with a travelling salsman-type job, car, suburban house and family. You can go most places without question, no one's going to remember a guy in a cheap suit eating a sandwich in his car at lunchtime (or whatever).
2. A youngish student in a student city. No matter what colour you dye your hair, or how late you wander around singing drunkenly, no one's going to bat an eyelid.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
couldn't help but think of this same reply...
We need a new law outlawing pressure cookers maybe background checks maybe mental checks.. Please won't some one think of the children
I often see your posts, and have had a fair bit of respect for you from most of them. Your last post undid most of that, shame...
The Arabic countries led by the Muslims were the most advanced scientists and engineers in the world, until they let the religious crazies take over.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_science_and_engineering_in_the_Islamic_world
Casteism
OH FAIL TROLL IS FAIL!
I didn't mention anything about the second amendment. We were talking about ways to prevent future crimes and I never once even typed the word "gun." I am not Leftwing. There is no party that represents me, though in social matters I am liberal. I hate the Fuck You I Got Mine mentality that is destroying us. I want to help raise up our nation, including assholes like you. I don't necessarily want gun control, I want the US to stop being the world's #1 incarcerator of its citizens, to rehabilitate instead of seek vengeance, and to return to the glory the old timers tell me stories about. I LOVE me some Constitution. It was a pretty good document as it was laid out, and I will argue TOO well written, since evidently the powers that be can't get what they want without utterly ignoring, twisting, or rewriting it! I served in this nation's military. Don't tell me I hate my country. And of course if you were too busy flying high in heaven "Archangel" then you need to come back down here to Earth and THANK ME for defending your right to spew your vitriol in my face.
I love how out of everything I wrote, you thought you found a weakness in my armor with the word majority. You failed. The US had slavery. This is a fact. It was not condoned by everyone, sure, but it took almost 100 years (1776-1861) before enough people finally got fed up with it enough to revolt. That is another fact. There were enough people who wanted it to remain the status quo that they started a civil war over it! Sure it was State's Rights: The State's right to own slaves. You can spin it all kinds of ways but that's just how it is. The results speak for themselves.
Even today, there are plenty of crimes that you can be convicted of for only KNOWING it was happening. Sure you may not have killed that guy, but you were there, you saw it, and you did nothing to stop it. That's accessory to murder, conspiracy to murder and a whole bunch of other crimes. A majority of the population knew and condoned the use of slaves for nearly 100 years. Finally that majority became the minority and we ousted that barbaric practice. That is a dark and evil blight on our nation and we should fight tooth and nail to ensure heinous things like that NEVER become reality again.
When I hear people screaming [Citation Needed], I prepare 2 responses. One, you are ignorant or lazy and I drop some education on ya. Or Two, you are being a fecetious troll, trying to make me appear ignorant so you can discredit me because you don't actually have any kind of logical argument to thwart my assertations. You failed on that account. I got history on my side.
You didn't call me out on any brain dead idea. I didn't propose ANY solution. I simply said that the key to prevention is learning the cause and understanding the process if you want success. You call that a brain dead idea? The American business & scientific community would beg to differ with you. That's the basis for the Scientific Method and ISO:9000 among many other types of Quality Control, Hazard Analysis, & Risk Management.
YOU made this a gun control debate. You ASSUMED (and assuming makes an ASS out of U and ME) I was talking about guns. I never even mentioned a gun. You're a Thread Hijacker and declare you to be an Internet Terrorist. How do you like dem apples?
I love me some statistics. So where we agree here is that statistically, the poor do have a higher probablity to stay poor. But then you claim my experience doesn't say anything about the staistics because you fire off the classic "You're an outlier" response. Do you actually do any statistics? So many folks throw out the outlier excuse that one could conceivably claim that anything not exactly on the median is an outlier! That's preposterous! That's the whole basis of the 3 & 6 Sigma rules. A guesstimation, because I don't have a spreadsheet full of figures available right now, is that I'm not even 1 sigma away from the mean. I make 70k a year for a family of 4. That isn't even double what the IRS claims is poverty level which I believe was 45k-ish for a family of 4. When you talk outliers you have to quantify that with your confidence level. 3 sigma confidence claims that all values will be within 3 standard deviations from the mean 99.7% of the time. What is that 0.3%? THOSE are the outliers. Yeah I got out of poverty, cause I make more than the poverty level, but I sure as hell didn't make it to the top!
SCIENCE BITCHES. IT. JUST. WORKS.
Same AC here. I wasn't ridiculing Bin Laden, I was making fun of your post by taking it to an extreme conclusion. I guess you got trolled, hard.