Slashdot Mirror
Uber Hires a Robot To Patrol Its Parking Lot and It's Way Cheaper Than a Security Guard (fusion.net)
Fusion's Kashmir Hill is reporting about a five-foot-tall, white, egg-shaped robot that one can find at the company's inspection lot near Mission Bay in San Francisco. The K5 robot is a stand-in for a human security guard, and it sports multiple high-definition cameras for 360-degree vision, a thermal camera, a laser rangefinder, a weather sensor, a license-plate recognition camera, four microphones, and person recognition capabilities. The report adds:If someone suspicious comes into the lot, or starts messing with a car, the robot can't tase them or break out any weapons. Instead the robot can set off an alarm, send a signal to human security personnel, and record everything that person does to be used against them later by police. Customers of Knightscope, the company that manufactures the aforementioned robot don't buy the machines. They rent them, usually two at a time, so one can charge its battery while the other patrols. The cost is $7 an hour. "For the cost of a single-shift security guard, you get a machine that will patrol for 24 hours a day 7 days a week," said Stephens, citing wages of $25 to $35 hour for a human security guard.
You're right, most career criminals will just blow it away, but I bet the vast majority of punks will be scared witless by one of these things.
Putting aside "we-will-all-be-replaced-by-robots-soon", this is actually a good idea, and the company making them has the right strategy; much better to charge an hourly rent instead of a huge upfront fee!
Apart from the employment issue, I can see a lot of benefits, robots aren't racist and robots aren't rude, and I assume security to actually be better with the robots in place.
The only problem with this patrol robot is, when someone steals it it won't be able to shoot them. Is it outfitted at least with the ability to zap the hell out of attackers? Or blast them with a massive amount of pepper spray?
Paralyze/incapacitate them until they can be arrested.
Can't do stairs
1. wait for SF to deploy these in all major parking locations
2. wait a few years for snow....http://snowbrains.com/san-francisco-ca-rarely-see-snow/
3. break into everything while the useless 400 sensor robot can't get to or from its charging station
4. profit
It will be better to purchase from an owner who is a good farmer and a good builder.
damage to property vs killing someone? The robots will get wasted
Really? "Security guards" are just put there as a deterrent. Most people in that line of work are on the low side of 80 IQ with no ambition or skills. This is a position that could easily be automated and improved upon in the process. I have no idea how it wasn't done sooner.
Brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.
That day when someone steals the security robot...
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Presumably, it will stay in regular contact with a head office so if anything goes wrong and the connection goes down, or it fails to report appropriately at the correct time, humans consisting of at least one security guard plus a tech be dispatched to investigate.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Most criminals won't think twice before blasting this thing into oblivion. Until they are given the same rights as people, these will never be as effective as there is no incentive to not take them out before or during the crime.
Well ... most criminals intent on stealing or vandalizing a car probably won't be armed. But they might learn to bring along a tarp to throw over the robot to blind it.
Probably contrasting the bill rate vs take home pay. The latter is what the guard gets, the former is what the contracting company gets, meaning it's all the money for benefits, taxes, and profit etc padded on to that. So yes, $25-35, though the guard actually only probably gets around $10 of that or so.
Doubtful. If CCTV type systems and bait cars don't stop punks from doing it now, this won't. If anything, they'll likely find it as a tempting target to attack, especially since it's an inanimate object and the crime of attacking/destroying/defacing/etc will be significantly lower then against a person. On the other hand, those punks won't try it with a real person or people around. The why is easy to figure out too, people are unpredictable, thus they could simply have the shit beaten out of them or in the worst case get shot. And the penalties for attacking a person are much higher.
Even dumb criminals have self preservation instincts.
Om, nomnomnom...
A robot is not an employee, it is a tool. You don't hire robots, you put them in service.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
The real cost of employment is closer to 3-4 times what the hourly employee makes. People complain about Minimum Wage jobs, have no idea that employing a person costs that much.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Destroying a giant robot alarm system which is bristling with cameras - a perfect strategy for crimes of subtlety.
The criminals who are most likely to stay out of jail are the ones smart enough to not bother with this parking lot when many, many others are unguarded.
But does a robot provide the same level of deterrence? And if not does it in any way provide better coverage then cctv?
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
The expense incurred by employing someone is much higher than their hourly wage.
And by the time the guard and tech get there several cars are either missing or vandalized.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
That's the part that has me confused.
Okay, so this is basically a mobile camera with enough intelligence to note when something is happening that is out of the ordinary. Not a bad thing.
But then this comes:
If someone suspicious comes into the lot, or starts messing with a car [...] the robot can set off an alarm, send a signal to human security personnel [...]
So, I still need to pay for a human being to sit around and wait for the robot to signal that something bad is happening.
I suppose I can hire one security guard to "monitor" two or three areas (i.e., wait around for the robot to signal that something suspicious may be happening) and then go check it out, rather than hiring 2 or 3 security guards.
So this seems like it makes more sense for larger areas where one security guard wouldn't be enough to patrol.
So I bring something to jam it's radio signal and then beat into parts. By the time they find it I am long gone. No muss no fuss no evidence pointing to me.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
salary, FICA and other taxes you pay to government for the employee, benefits, hiring costs, etc
Stage 1 - from out of site behind some bushes fire a mesh Faraday cage at and over the target. This way it cannot radio for police, upload video, etc.
Stage 2 - load the target onto a truck and drive away.
Now there is no security. Take what you want.
until the thieves steal the robot? I mean, faraday cage the thing, bring it to a metal warehouse, dismantle and sell it's parts. Easily enough done and at the same time you can be stealing the cars in the lot the robot used to patrol.
My not responding to your flame is in no way indicative of my submission to your statement, it just means I don't have t
At some point there will be robot rights and wasting a robot will be ruled a hate crime. We should all be treating these robot guys with respect, so when that day comes they don't waste us.
Instead the robot can set off an alarm
Which is known as a deterrent. A quite good one at that.
As for better than a security guard, that remains to be seen. But between an overweight, mouth drooler with a can of pepper spray meandering a parking lot and a mobile recording device capable of blaring noise, flashing lights and bringing lots of unwanted attention, the latter seems better to me.
Just for starters, the latter has a perfect recall of the preceding events. Good luck getting the height or sex or anything useful from the security guards story.
Brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.
If a robot costs $7/hour to rent, and you need two of them (for battery changes), that's $122K/year for 24x7 coverage.
Is this roving robot better than blanketing the lot with fixed security cameras? (other than acting as a honeypot to attract people that want to mess with the robot) Whatever logic the robot uses to determine if something warrants an alarm could be applied to the fixed camera feed as well. And you have fewer blind spots since the robot can't see what's happening over in the next row of cars and it's very apparent when you're in the line of sight of the robot.
Security guards have to be organised, have to be deployed, have to have people in the background they can phone to, have to have an uniform etc.pp.. There is much overhead to be paid until a security guard starts patroulling around.
Your average place that requires their parking lot monitored 24x7 hires more than one security guard to work each shift. As long as there's one human available, any damage to the robot will be acted on very quickly and the criminals will be put in jail. You still save some money because you can eliminate all but one security guard.
Just make sure you hang up signs saying there there's a human on duty as well as the robot.
Likely a difference between the cost of having an employee to the company vs. what the employee actually takes home. Very different numbers. But the cost of an employee is what drives the decision, not the take home pay which is less than half of that cost.
But you need other security personnel to actually triage the situation. And, if those other personnel aren't on-site, a criminal just needs to know what their response time is and plan accordingly.
This isn't going to deter real criminals - once the novelty wears off, it'll likely be less effective than a human. It probably will help with mindless vandalism, though... well, probably not. It WILL help catch them after the fact.
Like a lot of things we read about here, this tech is currently rather half baked. But it'll eventually get there, and we (as a society) really need to be discussing how we're going to handle that new world where most jobs have been automated.
#DeleteChrome
Assuming that a random thief actually knows how to disable a robot, it doesn't matter as robot suddenly going offline should immediately trigger a response.
And yet CCTV has been effective in deterring crime.
Drill baby drill - on Mars
The criminals who are most likely to stay out of jail ...
Work in the financial industry.
Drill baby drill - on Mars
So, I still need to pay for a human being to sit around and wait for the robot to signal that something bad is happening.
You can just call the police. Isn't this what alarm monitoring centers do?
Ezekiel 23:20
You can get a permit for outfitting it with some kind of area-denial device within your presumably fenced and clearly marked property.
If it can emit a painful ultrasonic shriek, fire off an omni-directional microwave that makes your skin feel like it's on fire, or blink a bajillion-candle strobe in your face to temporarily blind you... then it's suddenly useful.
Well ... most criminals intent on stealing or vandalizing a car probably won't be armed. But they might learn to bring along a tarp to throw over the robot to blind it.
Most criminals intent on vandalizing a car will be content with vandalizing an expensive security robot instead. In fact, I'd bet the robot would be even funner to vandalize than a car. It has all the thrill of damaging something expensive, plus the added benefits of reacting to the damage in a potentially funny way, and the ego boost from having messed with the thing that was supposed to stop them. Additionally, the robot is 100% safe. There's always some risk that if you mess with a human enough, they'll eventually snap and do something about it, even if it means getting fired or sued.
I came here to make a K9 reference, actually.
Ezekiel 23:20
I assume you have a low IQ, then.
Security guards are a psychological measure. You have a real human to confront, and it's beyond most people's ethics to just attack that person.
OTOH, if you're trying to steal from an establishment anyway, smashing up a mobile CCTV system with a motion sensor is not exactly a mental hurdle.
part it out on ebay
love is just extroverted narcissism
K5 was doing fine until the car thieves brought this along with them.
Have gnu, will travel.
Yeah. No. Tell that to the UK. Their hooligans routinely break the CCTVs. CCTV are for insurance only... as it proves your item was stolen and that they had to break into it to rob it. Nothing more nothing less.
It does not replace a guard who can chase away a would-be car jacker. BUT it is 'cheaper' to operate so that is something I guess... though as the owner of a car and not the parking lot that means jack all to me.
An alarm might be a deterrent, but only because of the unknowns. If a human guard raised the alarm, the burglar doesn't know if the guard is armed, or how many more guards will arrive, or if they are armed as well. With this weeble bot, a lot of those unknowns go out the window. We already know that the bot is not armed. If a company has one of these bots, then it means they wanted to save money on real human guards, so there will likely be quite a delay before any humans arrive after hearing the alarm.
I would gamble that criminals would TARGET places with these bots more than places with human guards.
Which is to deprive some family of their income to increase corporate profits regardless of the detrimental impacts to society. All hail our corporate overlords.
No its not. Car alarms have been proven to be poor deterrent. Their only benefit is to make the owner FEEL safer.
Good luck getting a usable video in the fog or rain or outside its very limited light range at night. CCTVs suck for IDing criminals.
Oh, so all you need is a gun capable of launching a giant wad of metal mesh, accurately and over a long distance?
And then you need to spend time loading a large machine onto a truck, taking care not to let the heavy metal blanket slip off of it even for a moment, and driving it away before you come back to take what it is you're actually after?
Great plan, Wiley. You'll catch that pesky roadrunner for sure this time.
Who pays for false alarms (other than the taxpayer)?
It's not the police's job to stop by for any potential crime an automated system may have picked up. Certainly they don't come to my home if a burglar alarm goes off. Presumably this would work similar to an alarm company which would monitor an alarm and decide whether to dispatch a person (or possibly call police) , possibly with a fee for dispatches. That centralises the personnel required and allows the robot security company to have only a few staff in addition to many robots.
I was able to find the Faraday Net Cannon for cheap on Amazon, but have you priced rental trucks lately? Totally impractical.
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
When they can die like humans do, then we can discuss rights for machines.
Only I can judge you.
When robots can die like humans die, then robots can have rights.
Only I can judge you.
"Gee, it couldn't possibly have occured to the development team there that the robot's vision could be impaired. I sure am smarter than those dumbasses."
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
Most punks tend to not be scared of CCTV cameras, as a hoodie and sunglasses tend to deal with those. I can see people just tossing a tarp over one of these robots, perhaps a tarp with a drawstring, and that is that.
Worst case, the smash and grab types will just kick the thing over.
This is not to say Knightscope units are not useful. The best thing is to have them supplement the live, armed guards on premises. This way, there is better coverage, and faster detection of would-be burglars.
A chicken with a badge would also cost less than a human security guard. Cost alone is not a great stat to compare competing solutions. How well does the robot do it's job compared to a human guard?
Depends on the alarm. The units that dump fog into the interior of the car and flash strobe lights do a lot more to stop an intrusion than the ones that just add to city noise pollution.
Cool. Guess that solves this problem and we will be back to human guards
Security guards are not just a deterrent, they are something that can go after a threat with the full force of the law on an active basis.
It also raises the level of the crime when live people get involved, from a crime against property to a violent felony, which is definitely going to earn a long prison sentence by any jury out there.
The criminals who are most likely to stay out of jail
are the Clintons
Use whatever id card to let the robot know you are not a suspicious person. It has to have some information for its basis of whether this is a suspicious situation/person or not. For best effect, get a locksmith or mechanic ID which allows you to choose any car in the lot. On your way out run the roving camera down or steal it.
Only I can judge you.
$25-$35 for a security guard?
Last time I checked, security guards were paid pretty much minimum wage, with armed security not a great deal more.
Note that this ISN'T even a security guard, this is simply a mobile alarm system that will call security - which you'd still have to have on hand. Sure, it would be a force multiplier, but I also see this silly thing being easily gamed.
-Styopa
What's the actual cost of the machine and how many hours of uptime is its cost spread over to get "$7/hour".
You can also have a $200,000 Ferrari for only $4.60/hour so long as you commit to paying that price every hour for 5 years.
Does it respond to the name Alexa? :D
Cops are too busy chasing after the guy with two doobies to deal with your petty little car theft. It's not like the cops get to keep your car, your house, and any cash you've got on you when they catch the guy who stole your car.
That is, I think, the entire point.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
RIP tazed guy, another victim of slashdot's inability to support unicode.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
I'm curious what Uber will do when we void out the need for humans to be passengers. Would robot travellers really need to travel, or to be passengers? So, after we have all our automated kiosks at fast-food restauraunts voiding otu the need for people to go to work there, and we've voided out the need for humans to go there to eat, and we're all stuck at home with nothing to do and nothing to eat, will there still be places to go, or will we void those out as well along with things to do when you get there?
When I saw the title, I was hoping for an ED-209.
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
I'm shocked at the idea that rent-a-goons get as much as $35/hr. It's more like minimum wage. I would expect the math of this to only work in places like San Francisco or Tokyo where the cost of everything (including labor) is ridiculously overpriced.
Plus, they're renting two of them. So that's $14 per hour. I don't think this idea is going to work at all in the flyover states.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
How can any human security company compete with this? they are held to a min wage, This is lower then that wage in effect cutting out all human competition.
Jack of all trades,master of none
Automating the primary tasks of a security guard were never difficult. A bunch of mounted cameras can do all of that.
Humans have always been better in two very important aspects. The first is the flexibility to handle something weird -- without completely losing functionality. Maybe that comes in the form of duct tape over the camera lense, or a bright flashlight into robot's lenses, or a bucket of water, or spray paint.
But the biggest reason for a human security guard has nothing to do with the human at all. It's the person that's significant. The person has legal rights. Huge legal rights. Like the legal right to not be beaten to a bloody pulp.
If a thief wants to steal a car, and winds up damaging a robot in the process, then grand theft auto becomes frand theft auto and destruction of property. Big deal. Compare that to grand theft auto and physical assault or grand theft auto and attempted murder. Most human thieves won't escalate to the next level of criminal behaviour. Most humans won't turn a verbal argument into a physical brawl.
But that doesn't exist with the robot.
So, the solution? Really simple: "Disabling a robot is tantamount to assault." Pass that law, and robotic security is an instant reality. Think real-life DRM circumvention laws.
Easy enough to deal with. 1 jam communications (not difficult for the tech savvy among us) or as someone mentioned earlier, use a tarp to cover it. 2 proceed to beat it with crowbars until you can see circuit boards.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
The problem with the robot as a security guard is that it is much more predictable than a human patrol - even if it does random walks, etc. you still know that it's not going to pull a .357 on you and plant a .22 in your hand after you're capped.
We need to separate into two countries, one which institutes a Universal Basic Income, and another which tells people who lose their job to go get an education (on their own dime, with no financial assistance).
We'll see within a decade I think which approach works better.
I'm shocked at the idea that rent-a-goons get as much as $35/hr. It's more like minimum wage.
It's the agency that gets paid the $25-$35 per hour. The actual guards are paid min wage.
Part of the rest of the $25-$35 goes to employer paid payroll taxes. Another portion might go to employee benefits (but all the security guards I know work less than 30 hours per week, so don't receive benefits). Another portion of it goes to liability insurance (which is a big reason that the vast majority of guards are not allowed to be armed (though some are, anyway)).
By limiting the functionality of their robots to setting off alarms and recording activity, Knightscope reduces their insurance costs.
While these robots might not be as effect as human guards, they are more cost effective. If nothing else, they could enable a single human guard to cover the jobs of several, so any would be thief could still find himself facing an unpredictable human.
Don't try to out wierd me, three-eyes. I get stranger things than you, free with my breakfast cereal. --Zaphod Beeblebr
Security guards are not just a deterrent, they are something that can go after a threat with the full force of the law on an active basis.
I would think that the last thing a company wants is for its rent-a-cops to go after a threat "with the full force of the law". That sounds like a huge liability issue. If the sight of a flashlight and a shout of "hey you" doesn't cause the intruder to surrender or flee, it's better to have the security guard trip the alarm, stand down, and wait for the real cops to show up.
If you are protecting something really valuable or dangerous, then yeah, maybe a more active response is merited, but for protecting a corporate campus or parking lot, a robot seems like a pretty good force multiplier, allowing a couple of humans to effectively cover more ground.
That is, I think, the entire point.
You are correct, and all the usual /. hand-wringing to poopoo something like this is for naught.
A technology like this, still in its infancy, is really just to save money by having less human guards at the same time increasing what the one guard left can see and hear, and it is recorded. I can see these types of "security guards" catching on.
We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
Do you write your own emails? If so, you're depriving someone of a job. You need to hire a secretary to take dictation from you and write your emails for you, otherwise you're contributing to the demise of society by killing jobs.
Do you cut your own grass? If so, you're depriving someone of a job as a landscaper.
Do you cook your own meals at home? If so, you're depriving someone of a job as a personal chef.
Do you make your own bed? If so, you're depriving someone of a job as a maid/housekeeper.
Do you drive yourself to work? If so, you're depriving someone of a job as a chauffeur.
Do you spend time with your kids, giving them baths (if they're young), feeding them in their high-chair (if they're really young), taking them places, or helping them with their homework? If so, you're depriving someone of a job as a nanny.
How does it feel to be a job-stealer?
But under US rules, a security guard doesn't have to cringe in a corner and hope the real police will take pity on him. They can shoot back, and so, if need be, could such a device. Mugger unions in our big cities ar already bitching about having to sign up with Uber to be customers rather than just hailing one and paying cash, which is why the medallion cabdrives are the ones you keep seeing riddled with bullets in dark alleys.
The problem is the penalty for the crime is not enough.
Not true. Severity of punishment has modest value as a deterrence. Much more important is probability of getting caught.
3 strikes and a life sentence
Several states, including California, implemented 3 strikes laws during the 1990s. In the following decades, it had no effect on crime rates compared to states that did not implement such laws.
America has the highest incarceration rate in the world, much much higher than China, Russia, Iran, etc. Our prison system is enormously expensive, and is mostly a waste of resources.
Here's an even better strategy: Go steal cars somewhere else.
Tarp has the benefit that you can cover yourself until you disable the cameras by tossing said tarp over the robot.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
I can see people just tossing a tarp over one of these robots, perhaps a tarp with a drawstring, and that is that.
... and then the nearest police patrol car is there 60 seconds later.
Pretty sure ramming it with a car would do the trick.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
I have a serious problem with those k-9 laws. Because it's a police dog you get life. Kill a civilian dog and it might not even be considered a crime beyond property damage.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
Though the purpose of this technology is to reduce workforce headcount, as humans, we can ensure a certain number of us remain employed in this space.
Every visit, bring a few lengths of old garden hose. Lay them out in the routes the robot takes. From my experience with our Roomba, I would expect this will prevent the security robot from completing its appointed rounds. A human will be dispatched to remove the garden hose from the path. That human will grumble about how someone keeps messing with the robot by leaving this gardenhose laying about, while not realizing this is a gift of charity to the human who is paid to remove the hose-- job security for the security job.
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
Rent-a-cops that work at parking lots, like in the story in question above, are absolutely not authorized to use any force of law beyond what the normal citizen has. In fact, they have less. Even if they have a CC, they cannot carry on the job and chasing a subject will almost certainly result in them being fired.
Brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.
Sssooo, it's an Aperture Science Sentry Turret, only without the red eye and projectile pellets.
[End Of Line]
Yup, cuz these companies wouldn't be doing the same damn thing if the wage was only $8/hr
When stuff gets stolen, the cops will fill out a report so you can file an insurance claim. That is _all_ they will do. If you bitch, you might get a little 'stick time' yourself.
The cops like it this way. People quickly learn how useless the cops are, they stop filing reports and the crime statistics get better.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
60 seconds. Literally laughing.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Wait till someone attaches a piece of jagged metal to the robot..
The robot will 'key' all the cars near it's patrol route.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Accountant here. No the burden rate for an hourly employee is NOT "3-4X" their take home pay. Generally speaking it is around a 50% markup of their gross (pre tax) salary. So if you pay someone $10/hour their real cost is probably $13-18 depending on the benefits offered and insurance costs.
...reminds me of those people who drive what is clearly a 5 or 6 thousand dollar value used van/truck through the front of a quikie-mart so they can steal the mini-ATM that probably only has a couple of thousand in cash (max) at any given time. Real profitable. Dumb Ass!
I have no use for one, but something about the thing makes me want to throw a conductive blanket over it to muffle its RF output, then throw the helpless thing in the back of a pickup truck and whisk it away.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
When stuff gets stolen, the cops will fill out a report so you can file an insurance claim. That is _all_ they will do. If you bitch, you might get a little 'stick time' yourself.
The cops like it this way.
What do you expect? Mobilisation of a special task force to conduct an investigation costing millions of dollars just for you?
It might sound bad, but in most cases there really is nothing practical that can be done. Most non-violent crimes are really just insurance issues, so this makes sense to me.
People quickly learn how useless the cops are, they stop filing reports and the crime statistics get better.
This doesn't follow from your first statement. People have to file reports in order to claim insurance. So the stats should accurately reflect crime for items that have insurable value.
Several states, including California, implemented 3 strikes laws during the 1990s. In the following decades, it had no effect on crime rates compared to states that did not implement such laws.
It's funny one isn't it? The natural reaction against crime is to punish or lock up the offender, especially in the US. But if you are interested in reducing crime (rather than punishing people), then rehabilitation results in much better outcomes overall
But tough-on-crime makes for better political campaigns, so we end up in the vicious cycle.
From the article As for better than a security guard, that remains to be seen. But between an overweight, mouth drooler with a can of pepper spray meandering a parking lot and a mobile recording device capable of blaring noise, flashing lights and bringing lots of unwanted attention, the latter seems better to me. Just for starters, the latter has a perfect recall of the preceding events. Good luck getting the height or sex or anything useful from the security guards story.
But if you've had any experience with existing automated security measures, you will know the biggest weakness is false positives.
Once the robot has set off 10 false alarms that night, the humans ignore it. Then someone steals a car and you miss the whole thing.
Any crook with half a brain will build this into the plan. Trigger false alarms in days leading up the the big event, so when it comes time, no-one pays attention to the real alarms.
No its not. Car alarms have been proven to be poor deterrent. Their only benefit is to make the owner FEEL safer. .
And to piss the neighbours off.
Crime is currently at historic lows in America. I bet everyone didn't know that, what with all the scaremongering. One of the big reasons why is all the criminals are locked up. The more you know!
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
That is exactly the point. I used to do part time security when I was in college. There would be 1 or may be 2 (for larger lots) guards per lot. These guys report to a patrol person, who covers many lots in the university. The lot guys cannot make any decisions, receive no training, other than how to use a walkie talkie, and basic situational awareness (so that they dont themselves killed for something stupid). Anything at all happens, they call the patrol, and patrol deals with it. They are basically meatbag cameras and image processing (and a witness if something goes wrong). I was paid $12 an hour for this, I bet my univ would be very interested in these robots for $7 an hour.
One of the big reasons why is all the criminals are locked up.
No it isn't:
1. The fall in crime started well before the prison ramp up.
2. Some states ramped up incarceration far more than others, yet had no greater decrease in crime.
3. Other countries around the world, which did not increase incarceration, also saw dramatic declines in crime.
4. In both America and in other countries, the fall in crime started about 12-15 years after they banned leaded gasoline.
one of many reviews on the subject, just a google click away
http://www.campbellcollaborati...
Review findings
The review finds that CCTV has had a modest but significant impact on crime rates. In particular, CCTV has been most effective in reducing vehicle crimes in parking lots - crime has decreased by half in car parks with CCTV surveillance. CCTV surveillance also appears to have led to greater reductions in crime rates in the United Kingdom, compared to other countries. The findings also suggest that CCTV seems to work best when combined with other interventions, such as improved street lighting.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
... which triggers the alarm. You're really stretching.
Now there is a criminal mastermind: spending days, even weeks, prepping the parking lot for his attack. Now with the guards attention turned, he strikes and steals a $70 car radio. Good job guy.
Brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.
You might work for different employers than me. I was regularly charged out at 2-3x my actual rate doing IT consulting.
The price you charge as a consultant has zero relationship the actual cost of an employee. It's not even required to be higher than the actual cost though it normally is. Price is a negotiated amount. What I said was correct. The fully burdened COST of an employee in general is roughly 1.5X their gross salary. If a firm decides to bill out their talent at a higher multiple, that is fine but it is a separate issue.
There is a big difference between IT consulting work and being a security guard, so yeah, the multiplier would be higher for skilled work.
Don't confuse price with cost. The cost of an employee has effectively zero relationship to the amount charged to customer for his/her services. Price charged is a negotiated amount. While it is typically a profitable multiple of the cost, it isn't required to be. It could be any number from 0 to infinity in principle. The actual, fully burdened cost of a typical employee is somewhere around 1.5X their gross salary in most cases. If a consultant is able to charge 3-4X the cost for their services then good for them but that's a separate consideration.
You are correct that the multiplier can be higher for skilled work though in general the costs are higher for skilled work as well for reasons that should be obvious.
People only file reports for things that are insured and worth filing a claim on (rate will go up, never file for little stuff). Depending on neighborhood that will be between 10% and 25% of thefts. Nice crime rate reduction.
I don't expect a task force, but I do expect the cops to do something about patterns of things like theft from cars etc. They don't care. I also expect them to do something with evidence like pictures of the criminals in the act. Again they don't care and can't be bothered.
If you have a picture of someone breaking into your car, don't report it. The report will be used against you if you personally find the fucker and break his legs and arms.
I know exactly where 90% of the neighborhood crime lives. The sober living house cluster about 2 miles away.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Uber, if not its drivers, are making a mint, and they can't afford human guards?
And then there's the bit about alarms if something happens: how will the cops respond, after the 12th time that week that someone hits it with a paintball gun, covering all its fancy sensors? (The 13th time, of course, they'll do it, then go in and steal cars.)
mark
You're getting way too technical. The easiest way to defeat the cameras is to cover your face up with whatever you have on hand. Or don't even bother covering it up. It's not like they're going to distribute HD pictures door to door asking if anyone's seen the guy who vandalized the parking surveillance robot (and faces aren't fingerprints, I guarantee you that in a big city there are going to be multiple people who look similar, resulting in a tenuous case for the prosecution).
If you want a personal anecdote, my friends expensive dome camera on the front of his house was stolen by a random gangster who noticed it while passing by on a skateboard (too far away to make out more than the colors of his shirt and pants on the initial pass). The guy tied his shirt around his face somewhere off-camera, then came back 2 minutes later and stole the thing. Even with HD video of the guy stealing the $2500 camera, the police dragged their feet at sending a detective over to look at it. And it's not like they could put out an APB for "~180lb Hispanic male approximately 5'10" with brown eyes and dark hair", as that would describe slightly less than half the city.
I generally agree with this statement, but will say that it isn't always the case. A few years ago I traveled to Vancouver, B.C. with a few friends. I removed by stuff from the car and put it in the hotel room; pointing out that a car with US plates was a likely target for theft. My friends did not. When we returned to the car a few hours later it had been broken into. A number of items were stolen. One of my friends was particularly upset about losing a duffel that a family member had carried into WWII. He called the police and filled out a report. A few weeks later, his duffel was mailed to him (sans the valuable bits). Someone (I believe he said an officer, but it may have been a regular citizen) spotted it in an alley by a dumpster and brought it in.
They didn't mount an investigation or anything, but reporting the item stolen was the only thing that led to successful return of the item. As such, there is more value to it than just insurance purposes.
Yup, which will make the guard cost maybe 30% more than what the guard is paid. If your security firm is spending more on a guard than the guard makes, it's either doing something highly specialized and expensive or it's highly inefficient. This doesn't mean the firm isn't billing out more than twice what the guard makes, because that's not a function of cost of the guard. It's a function of what the security firm is able to get from the client, and does have to average more than the loaded cost of the guard.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Or maybe it's a turret. I can hear it, now. "Are you still there?"
What part of "charges its battery" and "patrols" says "inanimate object"? I do wish clicking on the summary link didn't take you directly to the comments. It seems that people stopped reading even the summaries since they started doing that.
I suspect the reason that people are failing to even read the summary is that Slashdot now makes the summary links go straight to the comments. According to the summary, there are also human security personnel on the premises.
You are obviously not a shareholder in a profit-making prison corporation.
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
Now there is a criminal mastermind: spending days, even weeks, prepping the parking lot for his attack. Now with the guards attention turned, he strikes and steals a $70 car radio. Good job guy.
I take it you've had no experience in this area. Kicking the tyre each night to trigger the alarm a few days before the job was 5 minutes of effort for guaranteed return.
Also these days no-one steal car radios, you bring a flatbed truck and hoist the whole car on the back and drive off. Tens of thousands of dollars for a few minutes work, but you can pretend this doesn't exist if it makes you feel better.
People only file reports for things that are insured and worth filing a claim on
Citation? I personally lodged a claim when someone broke into my car. No insurance claim but filed a report so there was a record. I'm sure I'm not the only person who has ever done this.
Depending on neighborhood that will be between 10% and 25% of thefts. Nice crime rate reduction.
It's only a reduction if people previously were reporting it and now no longer are. You're implying no-one does this anyway so how can be reducing?
Most criminals won't think twice before blasting this thing into oblivion. Until they are given the same rights as people, these will never be as effective as there is no incentive to not take them out before or during the crime.
Couple questions.
1)How many bullets do you have? 2)Where is this thing vulnerable to them?
It's not like a person where one shot pretty much anywhere will stop them chasing you. Where are you going to shoot it and how much damage will you do? Hit the camera, it probably has a few and has everything recorded. Hit the motor it's still recording. The storage unit will probably be well protected. Can't even take it with you because it's probably loaded up with gps. Then they'll put guns on the thing and you have ED-101, good luck with that, you have five seconds to comply.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
"Yeah, the system might not be the best, but it is American, so it IS the best by default." That is how I see many people react to any discussion. They then start to defend why it is different and better and the same.
I see the same applied to e.g. speed of Internet and prices of mobile usage and methods of payment (especially tipping)
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Depending of how you look and what your gender is getting sex from a human is a LOT easier than from a bot, unless it is programmed to give it to you.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
barely human
Just like AC's.
Brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.
(rate will go up, never file for little stuff)
In the US, insurance companies can only raise your rates for things you are at fault for. They cannot raise your rates for vandalism or car theft as you didn't cause it to happen.
In a roundabout way, vandalism and car theft raise everyone's rates as they make the area more risky which raises the base rates for insurance in the area; but, you cannot personally have your rates raised for something like this, it has to happen through everyone getting higher rates.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
America has the highest incarceration rate in the world, much much higher than China, Russia, Iran, etc.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
No, that title falls to the Seychelles. Perhaps you should look at the numbers before blathering off about what the US is the worst at? At least make sure what you are saying is actually true.
I will however agree, the US incarcerates way too many, we should just institute the death penalty more often...
Joking aside, if we would legalize drug usage, it would knock out half the prison population. If people really care about incarceration rates, they should stop voting in "tough on crime" prosecutors.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
What would you call it when the hard drive crashes or the circuit bored goes up in a cloud of smoke?
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
I would call that a hardware failure. Not sure what point you believe you're making here.
A hard drive does not suffer, a circuit board is not self-aware. They have no fear of death, no comprehension of existence. No one mourns them. Nerd-rage at a hard-drive crashing is not the same as mourning.
Only I can judge you.