Slashdot Mirror
Robots Are Being Used To Shoo Away Homeless People In San Francisco (qz.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Quartz: San Francisco's Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) has been ordered by the city to stop using a robot to patrol the sidewalks outside its office, the San Francisco Business Times reported Dec. 8. The robot, produced by Silicon Valley startup Knightscope, was used to ensure that homeless people didn't set up camps outside of the nonprofit's office. It autonomously patrols a set area using a combination of Lidar and other sensors, and can alert security services of potentially criminal activity.
In a particularly dystopian move, it seems that the San Francisco SPCA adorned the robot it was renting with stickers of cute kittens and puppies, according to Business Insider, as it was used to shoo away the homeless from near its office. San Francisco recently voted to cut down on the number of robots that roam the streets of the city, which has seen an influx of small delivery robots in recent years. The city said it would issue the SPCA a fine of $1,000 per day for illegally operating on a public right-of-way if it continued to use the security robot outside its premises, the San Francisco Business Times said.
In a particularly dystopian move, it seems that the San Francisco SPCA adorned the robot it was renting with stickers of cute kittens and puppies, according to Business Insider, as it was used to shoo away the homeless from near its office. San Francisco recently voted to cut down on the number of robots that roam the streets of the city, which has seen an influx of small delivery robots in recent years. The city said it would issue the SPCA a fine of $1,000 per day for illegally operating on a public right-of-way if it continued to use the security robot outside its premises, the San Francisco Business Times said.
EXTERMINATE! EXTERMINATE!
This is probably just the beginning.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
I'm gonna flood the place with homeless robots to counter.
Table-ized A.I.
There's homeless hackers who need robot parts, too. Won't someone think of the homeless hackers?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Humans are also animals.
Mr. Robot, meet Mr. Baseball Bat!
-- You are in a maze of little, twisty passages, all different... --
I find it remarkably hypocritical that the SPCA of all organizations is chasing homeless people away from their local headquarters. Don't they realize that people are animals too, and deserving of at least the same caring and consideration that they'd give to homeless cats or dogs? Do they think that horses and cattle are deserving of their attentions but homeless humans aren't?
Good, inexpensive web hosting
Have your way with me mods, I've got karma to burn!
The homeless population in San Fran is a massive problem. I've had my car's window smashed three times over the course of four years for trivial crap i've left in my car. Seriously, they really think that my FM transmitter and 75 cents are worth something? And this is in Portrero FFS.
You consistently see these animals constantly shooting up, leaving needles everywhere, pissing in the street, and hassling you for money. They're a blight and the city's permissive attitude towards them only encourages more to show up.
It's time we stop wasting money on these animals when they OD with Naloxone. If they want to drug themselves to the point of death, let them. It's time we let Darwin do his work.
Zap them, beat them, lock them up and forcibly detox them from whatever drug they love, I don't care. It's high time vagrancy is treated the same way the homeless treat our communities, with reckless abandonment.
those 5 dollar tasers at dollar store are coming in great. Passing those out to homeless and told to short out any robot they see.
Apparently the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals doesn't think humans are animals.
... is whot bwings os tugevza tsuzay.
My dad was veteran who fought the Nazis. He lead a very successful life. Both my parents were veterans of WWII and Korea. They weren't drunks or drug addicts, and both worked hard all there life.
Today's veterans have a couple choices: 1) suck it up, and act line a man, 2) become a homeless drug addict, or 3) go on a shooting rampage, mowing down as many strangers as possible.
... seriously hilarious grey-hat hacker prank waiting to happen. I suspect bananapeels won't cut it, put I'm sure that plastic tarp, sailfishing string, graphite spray/powder, oil, spray-paint, craltops, remote controlled tilt-ramps, duct-tape, wall-to-wall carpeting tape, some other trinkets and perhaps even some more elaborate wireless/mobile connection hacking can produce balls of fun with this partolbot. Or some way to mislead it into a pit or curb with fake portable walls or something.
Don't tell me you weren't thinking about this yourselves the minute you read the story.
Bottom line:
Could some local hacker crew get to it and post an anonymous video on youtube about the results? I'd like something to laugh about.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
I'm surprised no one went all-out, dousing the thing with a gallon of gasoline and lighting a match. Burn, baby, burn!
San Francisco recently voted to cut down on the number of robots that roam the streets of the city, which has seen an influx of small delivery robots in recent years. The city said it would issue the SPCA a fine of $1,000 per day for illegally operating on a public right-of-way if it continued to use the security robot outside its premises
Maybe the city should hire the homeless people to shoo away the robots, and issue tickets.
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
I have seen this story in other venues, and am having trouble believing it's for real. The SPCA? Not a particularly wealthy organization or one that is so on the technological leading edge that they'd be using robots.
Bruce Perens.
In what way does fighting in Afghanistan give us freedom?
Initially it would have been to go after Osama Bin Laden, the guy who planned the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil.
However, when, for two days, Bush refused every single request by troops on the ground for more troops to block Bin Laden's escape from Tora Bora because troops weren't available as he was preparing to invade Iraq, that issue went by the wayside.
You're making it sound like the homeless are all veterans. Sure there are homeless veterans, but let's not try to explain homelessness as a veteran problem. The thing is, this 'veterans have trouble adjusting' schtick is a recent thing. We had millions of men in uniform for WW II and many of them saw really bad stuff. A few came back with what was termed "shell shock" (I knew 2 of them) but millions adjusted just fine. Now that PTSD is a 'thing' suddenly we have thousands and thousands of veterans thus affected. What's up with that? Is the current generation of veterans just so very sensitive that they can't hack what their grandfathers could? Do you think the horrors of war are worse now than they were then? Or are we encouraging people to self-identify as 'affected'? Seems to me calling out veterans is misguided and not the point. And I'm a veteran myself.
How about a moderation of -1 pedantic.
...are animals too! But then an awful lot of dedicated 'animal lovers' have strong misanthropic tendencies.
Debate is a form of harassment. Do not question my truth.
The vagrants in SF are like no other. They are a dangerous menace. Easily the most aggressive and violent I have seen and a physical danger to others. Only because the city coddles them to a ludicrous degree are they like this. Normal people are intruding on THEIR city.
The problem would be dramatically lessened if the city had a fucking clue about how to treat them. Being homeless is not a crime, but attacking people, stealing, shitting in the open, and vandalism are. The bums need some consequences for their behavior to nudge them down the right path--involuntary detox also.
You're thinking of WWI. When we entered WWII nearly all of Europe was still in Nazi hands, as was North Africa. And we had been supplying the allies with weapons and machinery before that. The Japanese controlled nearly all of the Pacific west of Hawaii. The U.S was in the war for part of 1941, all of 1942, 1943, 1944, and part of 1945. At the end of the war we had 16 million men in uniform. So, no, it wasn't "basically" over when we got in.
4. re-draft all economically useless veterans. throw 'em in a C-17 and just drop them on whatever the fashionable target is, en masse. blacken the sky with the screaming doomed, now that's "shock and awe".
it's been thought of.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_the_People_Fell
âoeWe werenâ(TM)t able to use the sidewalks at all when thereâ(TM)s needles and tents and bikes, so from a walking standpoint I find the robot much easier to navigate than an encampment,â Jennifer Scarlett, the S.F. SPCAâ(TM)s president, told the Business Times.
Maybe, just maybe people are being diagnosed with a mental illness when previously the prevailing attitude was 'suck it up;. Previous veterans had to get on with their lives with their own resources, plenty of WW2 veterans topped themselves. Remember back in WW1 shell shock was initially attributed to LMF (lack of moral fibre). Attitudes have changed since then.
New Zealanders are well balanced with a chip on each shoulder. One represents Australia, the other the rest of the world
It's very strange that the SPCA of all organizations is acting like that rich tech bro a few years back who published a diatribe about how the homeless people on his building's street weren't being sufficiently controlled by the city.
My idea for fixing the problem is to re-open state mental hospitals. Almost all of the homeless problem is due to mental illness and drug addiction. Where I live, there are 5 massive, closed mental hospital complexes within 50 miles that housed thousands of patients each before the deinstitutionalization wave of the 70s and 80s. Why not reopen them as voluntary treatment centers again? Instead of beating and lobotomizing patients, give them the help they need to fix whatever problem is interfering with them having a normal existence.
They'll just switch to very large bug zappers . . .
"I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
My dad was veteran who fought the Nazis.
These days that would be described as "Committing alt-left violence against some Very Fine People."
That would be funnier if the Nazis hadn't based many of their policies on the American Progressive movement. The left wing loved Hitler.
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
No; a couple means one or two. A few means three or four.
and I can't think of one!
How fortunate for them. Some people come through better than others, and some wars are worse than others.
I know a guy who got struck by lightning and suffered no ill effects. According to your reasoning, the only natural conclusion is that lightning is harmless and anyone who seems to have died from it is just malingering.
they could just install a few speakers outside and play a really annoying song over and over.
People coming home from WWII got ticket tape parades and a booming economy. In an era where a high school diploma could net you a decent job, they had advanced training on top of that. As a society, it was understood that the women pressed into the work force by necessity would be vacating those jobs en-masse as soon as the troops came home. Even manual laborers made enough for a single income to modestly support a married couple.
Does any of that ring true for Vietnam?
Gulf veterans get respect, but no booming economy, no jobs being vacated, and everyone thinks you need a degree to pump gas (I'm only slightly exaggerating on the last one).
Nah, it's about poverty. If drug addiction lead to homelessness, Robert Downy Jr. and Lindsey Lohan would have moved into cardboard boxes decades ago.
Then maybe he could have taken up the Taliban on their offer to hand over Bin Laddin if they provided some evidence that he was actually guilty of what the U.S. was accusing him of. Iraq wasn't the only bullshit war to come out of the Bush Administration.
...for illegally operating on a public right-of-way...
If it's public property, how can you be illegally on it? I know you can take over/block public sidewalks (well, unless you are homeless, then SF and other liberal cities don't give a rip), but how is a roaming robot illegally on a public sidewalk?
I'm shocked - shocked I say! - that an organization devoted to the euthanasia of homeless animals showed something less than charitable Christian kindness to homeless people.
no further comment.
You do know that using words like 'libtards' invalidates your opinion from the start, right?
Among extensive debates with a young-ish Japanese Senpai about WWII, we last concluded that even though I did not know a single person that suffers serious injury (mental and physical) that's supposed to have been ravaged by Japanese Army, sample of our experiences are inaccurate, as broken people are not likely to get married, reproduce, and generally savagely maimed victims don't survive for 4 decades for me to meet in my 1980s childhood. (He acknowledged that he himself had an uncle that was broken after returning from WII, and only faintly remembered said uncle as a NEET that was propped up by rich family, drink himself silly and do nothing but laze around in his home and lived just a little past 60 years.)
And that also sums up most people's experiences with their WWII veteran Dad and Granddad - people that's well adjusted enough to go back to live a happy/productive life or at least raise a family of course are not a fair sample to gauge PTSD. I don't know much about homeless vet situation in 1950s, but real broken ones probably landed up in a mental institution by 1950 or succumb to alchoholism and most probably die childless at their 50s/ 60s.
Talk to WWII veteran that still maintained vitality to talk about his experience at 93, Year 2017? Of course youngsters will have an impression that every single one of them WWII is tough as rock.
People who'd get an idea to adopt a child from a TV commercial shouldn't be allowed near children.
At least with pets, worst case scenario, poor animal has to suffer the fool for 12 years or so until it dies.
With a child 12 years is just the start.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
What in that article supports this batshit insane theory? If you think the mere fact that he was chosen as Person of the Year does, you should read the opening paragraphs again.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Is there a better way to promote their motto "We love animals. We hate humans."?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Cities in California give me this image of the residents having compassion for the less fortunate (and supporting higher taxes to try and execute that.) Then the residents go all NIMBY about undesirables they don't like in a public space.
A couple means two. Period.
Wait what. Non-native speaker here. Can someone who is a native speaker confirm this, or confirm that AC is full of himself?
I've always used "couple" - except when using it as a substantive - to mean "a few". As in "give me a couple minutes will ya?". Feels incredibly wrong to use it to explicitly refer to 2 instances of whatever.
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
A couple does indeed mean two - two people who are together are a couple. However, if you say "a couple of minutes" it's like "just a second" - not to be taken literally. So you're fine saying "give me a couple of minutes" and then going over.
Some Americans also say things like "a couple-few people came over", just to further muddy the waters. Welcome to English!
Because most of us don't want a world in which people with no money can not legally stand on the ground or walk down a street.
American troops are fighting against terrorists in places like Afghanistan and Iraq so we can be free.
No. They invaded Iraq under false pretexts that had fuck all to do with terrorism - unless you include "creating a fuckload more of it".
Without the sacrifices by American soldiers for our
Oil.
But..
We should be donating to help our veterans instead of the cruelty of chasing them away with robots.
I do agree with this. The soldiers don't decide policy, can't rule on the legality of a war, put their lives at risk and deserve recognition for this.
Just don't go romanticising the bullshit reasons that the politicians are putting them at risk in the first place.
On one hand, I really like that the robots are discouraging crime and discouraging tent cities. There are shelters with food services available to the homeless. It is annoying to be constantly panhandled. In my city, the panhandlers are getting pretty brazen. Some are doing it to scam people. One guy actually had clean clothes on and a pair of more expensive sneakers than I had. It was so brazen that I called attention to it. He quickly beat feet.
On the other hand, I think this is just plain ugliness and hypocrisy. It's even sick adorning the robots with cute stickers. Why not help advocate solutions to the problem instead of simply sweeping it out of sight and out of mind? Especially from an organization dedicated to helping lives ... I fear for the days when the robots will actually fight.
Today's 'veterans' (really? you're a veteran with 6 months of combat duty? Try several years) return to a very different environment than post World War II veterans.
When half your colleagues also fought in a war, there's a different level of understanding going on. When public services recognise and thank you for your contribution, it's simpler to access help. When the enemy was clearly vanquished it's easier to move on.
Where's your option 4: Get support from the people around them?
Incidentally, do you actually have any statistics on post-combat trauma and/or alcoholism for WWII versus modern combatants? Just because we didn't hear about it in the 50s doesn't mean it wasn't there.
Those were different wars and the training the soldiers received was very different. Modern soldier training involves teaching the soldier to overcome the hesitancy to kill and indoctrinating death. Once the war is over, the psychological effects come in full force.
One can mean a class of many. "One does not do this."
Couple generally means two, but not canonically.
Few means however fucking many people want it to mean. A few lads could be up to a dozen and nobody would bat an eyelid at it.
Many tends to mean more than a few.
Lots could be fewer than many or many more.
It's a flexible language and these words allow a level of imprecision that it would be wrong to try to constrain.
I don't know if it's the case in SF, but I'm pretty sure other cities make businesses responsible for keeping the sidewalk in front of their building clean and free of loiterers. So, is the ASPCA responsible for keeping homeless people from camping out in front of their building? Because there could be a whole other layer of absurdity in play here.
Many people think you're being silly.
No data required.
So the homeless problem in SF and other liberal bastions are because society is fucked up? What about the hobos and bums? Do they share any responsibility at all or is it just society that is fucked up?
I am asking because I haven't ever met a person in my life who wants more homelessness and more misery for people. I am quite certain "society" wants to resolve this.
Well, as for WW2 veterans, they had all the same problems Vietnam veterans did. They just weren't homeless because of government welfare programs. I know because I grew up in the 60s, a mere 20 years after WW2, and I often visited my friends' crazy old unemployed uncles living in subsidized housing who'd show us their war tropies -- enemy uniform caps, even samurai swords.
The worst off would have been institutionalized, but in the 60s and 70s there was an anti-psychiatry movement, centered around something called the Laing-Szaz hypothesis: "mental illness" doesn't exist; what we call mental illness is just a reaction to the irrationality of society. This united people on the left in the right behind deinstitutionalization: the left because they thought they were liberating mental patients, the right because they didn't want to pay for treatment. Moderates wanted to move the more functional of the patients out of the worst institutions to receive care in the community. That care never materialized -- not on the scale needed -- because of cost and NIMBY opposition.
The result was in the 70s a lot of people who had been institutionalized ended up on the streets, and suddenly the mentally ill became a visible problem. It wasn't until years later I understood the policies which produced this, but at the time I remember walking down the street and marveling at the number of "bums" there suddenly were.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
You're using it right (colloquially), it just gets the attention of pedants every so often. "There were a couple people on the bus" doesn't mean two making out, it just means it was a small number greater than one (since it is being used as an adjective). "I have a couple bucks on me" does not mean specifically two dollars, etc. In everyday speech it is a synonym of "few".
--Disclaimer: this is how we use it in Northeast US. While other regions might do things differently, ours has more people than theirs and is therefore more correct (tongue in cheek).
A couple means two. Period.
Wait what. Non-native speaker here. Can someone who is a native speaker confirm this, or confirm that AC is full of himself?
I've always used "couple" - except when using it as a substantive - to mean "a few". As in "give me a couple minutes will ya?". Feels incredibly wrong to use it to explicitly refer to 2 instances of whatever.
The rigorous dictionary definition of couple is "two". Used idiomatically (e.g., "I met a couple of friends for drinks" or "the package will arrive in a couple of days"), it means two or more, but not many.
Soviet combat deaths in WWII -- >8,500,000 in approx. 4 years
Remind the makers that the homeless have the power to start massive wildfires.
The residents of Southern California don't need to be reminded of that. The recent Skirball fire that swept through Bel-Air was started by a cooking fire at a homeless encampment.
Give it a laser, problem solved.
Shell Shock was just the worst of PTSD cases where you couldn't just hand wave away the symptoms. Society was different then, and a guy who couldn't hold his temper in check to avoid beating his wife and kids wasn't such a big deal. Today that kind of behavior is generally inexcusable and will result in the police getting involved. War was also very different in the first half of the 20th century than now. There were clearly delineated lines of battle with fronts. Troops would typically be rotated to the front lines for awhile then spend time in the rear were it was essentially safe. Today we are engaged in asymmetrical warfare where there is no real safe place when you are in a combat theater, you are under constant threat from ambush, IED, and mortar attacks. That situation pushes people into a constant state of very high stress for months at a time.
Our medical science has advanced incredibly which is a boon in that more soldiers can survive wounds that would historically have been mortal. The downside to those medical advances though is that just because a soldier survives, doesn't mean they aren't physically and or mentally maimed for the rest of their lives. I've also seen some reports that with the prevalence of IED attacks that more soldiers are suffering brain injuries than from previous wars where bullets, shrapnel, and disease were more the order of the day.
It isn't that article that explains how much the American left, progressives, scientists, and social workers, were a big inspiration for the worst of the Nazi's policies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I would include more, but most of the references are from authors that I am sure you would immediately reject. And I have to go do work now, so Bye.
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
I would include more, but most of the references are from authors that I am sure you would immediately reject.
Indeed, because it would take a historical revisionist to suggest that there was something particularly "leftist" about support for eugenics when it found support widely across the political spectrum.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
The worst off would have been institutionalized, but in the 60s and 70s there was an anti-psychiatry movement, centered around something called the Laing-Szaz hypothesis: "mental illness" doesn't exist; what we call mental illness is just a reaction to the irrationality of society.
People were already kicked out of mental institutions by that time. I doubt it had much effect. It has more to do with constant fighting between state and federal governments as to whose responsibility it was to pay for metal health care, and that there was a 1967 bill that said that made it harder for people to be institutionalized without their consent.
It's amazing how many people don't know history, isn't it?Thanks for pointing this out.
Please note that this article is misleading and has been updated with the following edit:
Update (Dec. 13): This post has been updated to include comments from Knightscope.
“Contrary to sensationalized reports, Knightscope was not brought in to clear the area around the SF SPCA of homeless individuals. Knightscope was deployed, however, to serve and protect the SPCA,” A spokesperson for Knightscope told Quartz. “The SCPA has the right to protect its property, employees and visitors, and Knightscope is dedicated to helping them achieve this goal. The SPCA has reported fewer car break-ins and overall improved safety and quality of the surrounding area.”
It's not a money issue, it's a safety issue. I don't frequent Tim Hortons near as much because a good portion of homeless and shit disturbers loiter there, inside and outside. Employees are regularly screamed at and intimidated. It's a fucking minimum wage job. I pity the workers. Bathroom cleaning, no fucking thanks. A lady who works her small business a few blocks from the illegal homeless camp has lost significant business and all the homes around it are scared for their kids because of violence and needles. We have been throwing tons of money at the problem. We're talking 5-6 figure per person in housing and support services per annum.
NObody expects the Veteran Inquisition!
Bin Laden took credit. Maybe not initially, because he's a coward, but he did. No, it was not likely they'd turn him over.
It says something that the city's problem is "robots crowding the streets" and not the part of homeless people crowding the streets. I don't know what that is, but it says it.
Then perhaps all those Republicans who are hellbent on outlawing abortion because it "kills a person" should enact laws
Perhaps the Democrats hellbent on enlawfulling abortion should enact laws to allow for not just robots, but robots to take the homeless people loitering and grind them into dog food. After all, it would just be a really late term abortion for a clump of cells no-one wants anymore to improve the lives of everyone around.
So I should put you down as a "Maybe" on the issue of Abortions into the 63rd Trimester?
This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
the ugliest piece of hardware I ever saw.
That's what they get for being allies of the Nazis first.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
The Chinese are already doing this?!
Mr. President, we cannot allow an inhumanity gap!
"They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
That generation had the GI bill and an economy fully intact to become the powerhouse when the rest of the world is war torn. The boomers have taken that for granted and allowed the politicians to shred the bootstraps. You bet it's way different for veterans or anyone trying to get started now. Quality four-year education is nearly unaffordable, food and health care keep spiraling, and of particular relevance to San Francisco - a bunch of ridiculously rich and out of touch landlords are allowed to drive everyone's living costs up at a ridiculous rate. But, I'm stating what's blindingly obvious all around some of us, and somehow lost on others, and that clearly has to be because of their place, age, and/or assumptions.
Which is an entirely different scenario than what we're talking about, which is people with no money leaving used needles and lounging on the sidewalk for extended periods of time, blocking others from using it.
Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
Comparing armed forces of two different nations fighting each other to some idiot punks attacking other idiot punks is kind of silly, don't you think?
Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
The person to whom I was replying was inferring that people with no money shouldn't be allowed access to public resources. That has fuck all to do with whether they abuse those resources.
Maybe you agree with them. I don't.
Someone using words you don't like doesn't make their opinion or argument incorrect.
No, you were inferring that that's what they meant - they might have been implying it, but I don't read it that way. They said why should the homeless get more say than taxpayers, not why do they get any say. Maybe the AC worded it poorly, but it seems to me like they were saying the homeless shouldn't be allowed to abuse the sidewalks and prevent taxpayers from using them, not that the homeless shouldn't be allowed to use them at all.
Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
In the U.S. Civil war; it was called "Soldier's Heart".
In World War 1; it was called "Shell Shock".
In World War 2; it was called "Battle Fatigue".
The term "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder" was first coined during the Vietnam Conflict. PTSD combines conditions with common symptomology from divergent environment stressors. Battle Fatigue, Survivor's Guilt, and reliving disasters all can show the same symptoms. PTSD isn't a "recent thing" but an evolving recognition of the fact that when you go through HELL; you can't forget it. You cope with the visit to hell. Some cope well from their time in hell. Others don't cope with hell memories too well.
Until some Dr. Feelgood markets a truly effective eye bleach and mental floss; there will be PTSD.
NRRPT/RCT
Using robots is a bit different from hiring a tough bully with a truncheon which is the classic solution to a noticeable homeless population (Great Depression). When an area has only one area where the homeless won't be harassed or molested; there gets to be a bit of a name for it. i.e. Hooverville, Hobo Jungle, Public Camp. What is the name for it in your community?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/archive/e/e0/20090312174935%21Hobo_Jungle.jpg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hooverville
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_the_United_States
NRRPT/RCT
it doesn't make it incorrect. but one can't take it serious nonetheless