That is already a problem. Departments have been caught "losing" files, reclassifying crimes to lesser categories, delaying entry of files until next fiscal year, etc., so that they don't look bad in the nationally-collected statistics. Hopefully they are more honest with the data that can only help them, and isn't being submitted to an outside group. If they are given reason to lie^w alter the presentation of the data, they will, but in this case it is something they are doing internally that could significantly benefit the department to do correctly.
Overall accidents increased in some areas, but the number of severe accidents dropped substantially. Minor accidents increased slightly, but they accounted for a larger percentage of total accidents. In many areas, that increase in minor accidents at red-light-camera intersections is expected to be temporary. In my city, for instance, by the second year minor accidents had fallen back to previous levels, but major accidents stayed down, and overall accident numbers had dropped, for camera-monitored intersections. The local media only reported on the "increases total accidents" part of the story the first year, and didn't say a thing at all after the second year, despite the traffic engineer explaining it to them clearly.
If their pattern-predicting software allows them to reduce overall crime rate, there could be more resources devoted to the unsolved crimes that did not fit the pattern as well. Are you saying they shouldn't study the statistics to direct patrols more effectively?
Maybe they'll give different weights to the different inputs, i.e. number of arrests in an area (by category of crime), number of calls/crimes that come from citizens (rather than the police being the ones to discover the crime), etc.
You are correct, though - if they are very dumb and measure criminal activity only by number of arrests in an area, (but smart enough to do the analysis), they'll eventually discover that all crime happens in proximity of police officers.
Yes, this system could be abused, if the Evil Genius is directing a significant portion of the crimes in the city. If that happens, a separate parallel program to root out criminal masterminds might be in order. Until then, I think you'll find that most crime is unconnected, and that independent criminals far outnumber loyal minions of comic-book type villains.
Some patterns are more resilient. Vandalism when schools let out. Drunk driving after last call. Petty theft towards the end of the month/pay cycle. Domestic violence around holidays. Spring Break. Summer vacation. Night time.
Locations may be more difficult to observe patterns in. From above examples: proximity to schools. Proximity to bars. Poorer neighborhoods. etc.
Often certain locations seem to attract trouble. Rowdy apartment complex/subsidized housing may be a hot spot - if there was a fight last night, there might be a bigger confrontation tonight. An extreme example might be the london riots - many people seem to have gone out to take part, because they knew a riot happened the night before.
Of course, this will never eliminate ALL crime, but recognizing patterns, both short-term (noticing 2 gangs recently both trying to assert a claim on a neighborhood, by arrests/calls to that neighborhood going up in the past week), and long term (annual cycle related to school year and holidays, construction season, etc). Knowing that one neighborhood often sees an increase in crime before another neighborhood does might even allow you to use it as an indicator of trends within the city.
This was patent #8,000,000, or the 8,000,000th numbered patent. before the 1830s, patents were issued but not given numbers. I choose to be pedantic, rather than think about the travesty that our patent law has become - I'll leave that to someone else just this once.
Diesel substitutes are actually pretty easy to make. Gasoline substitutes are much harder, to the point most of them cost more gasoline than they replace. Ethanol for fuel is a joke being played on all of us, a scam at our expense. The faster we give up on ethanol and get into bio-diesel, the better.
How about we make driving the privilege? And the more dangerous your vehicle is to others, the higher the standards for you to get a license. Rather than putting up a sign at every bridge in the state informing that "ice may form on bridge" (as Texas has done, which means drivers promptly learn to ignore the signs and are even more surprised when bridges ice over), why don't we just put that on the test to get a license in the first place?
The giant SUVs seem to actually require you to become a bad driver if you get one. Those drivers in particular should be held to higher standards, i.e. longer test to get a license, harsher penalties for bad driving behavior, more restrictions on eating/smoking/makeup/2phones-and-a-laptop while driving. Then again, it sadly too common to see people with a flat screen installed in the car who seem to believe watching porn makes them better drivers. Or something. We don't even enforce basic equipment laws in most states, leading to customized trucks with bumpers 4 feet off the ground, and headlights shining everywhere except where they should be, in every color of the rainbow.
Who said anything about having to be perfect? All my scenario requires is 1) slightly successful, in that they reproduce enough to get out into the wild and spread a little bit, and 2) and unpredicted side effect. #2 could be anything - provoking an unpredicted allergic reaction in humans, for example. It doesn't have to drown us in grey goo or actively hunt us down for parts to cause us danger. A cloud of particles (think pollen or spore cloud) that the human body isn't used to could be significant.
Usually they are at least related to other members of the back, therefore even if the non-breeders don't have offspring, they are helping ensure the survival of closely-related animals.
Slashdot Mirror
They might even go with 2^6 before going with 2^5.
48 permutations, assuming 4 known, unique digits. 36 permutations, assuming 3 digits, not knowing which is unique.
For a first offense? maybe 6 years for murder, with bad behavior. second and third offenses, simultaneous? http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/10/us-execution-texas-idUSTRE7797BM20110810 That's when they get serious.
That is already a problem. Departments have been caught "losing" files, reclassifying crimes to lesser categories, delaying entry of files until next fiscal year, etc., so that they don't look bad in the nationally-collected statistics. Hopefully they are more honest with the data that can only help them, and isn't being submitted to an outside group. If they are given reason to lie^w alter the presentation of the data, they will, but in this case it is something they are doing internally that could significantly benefit the department to do correctly.
Overall accidents increased in some areas, but the number of severe accidents dropped substantially. Minor accidents increased slightly, but they accounted for a larger percentage of total accidents. In many areas, that increase in minor accidents at red-light-camera intersections is expected to be temporary. In my city, for instance, by the second year minor accidents had fallen back to previous levels, but major accidents stayed down, and overall accident numbers had dropped, for camera-monitored intersections. The local media only reported on the "increases total accidents" part of the story the first year, and didn't say a thing at all after the second year, despite the traffic engineer explaining it to them clearly.
Actually, this is true. If a fund was the top performer last year, I can very reliably tell you how it will compare this year.
I predict tides using the moon. Crazy stuff. and those fisherman using Solunar Tables ought to be sent to re-education camps.
I believe you mean "Ocean's 10+n".
If we are going to get pedantic today, I'll play.
If their pattern-predicting software allows them to reduce overall crime rate, there could be more resources devoted to the unsolved crimes that did not fit the pattern as well. Are you saying they shouldn't study the statistics to direct patrols more effectively?
Maybe they'll give different weights to the different inputs, i.e. number of arrests in an area (by category of crime), number of calls/crimes that come from citizens (rather than the police being the ones to discover the crime), etc.
You are correct, though - if they are very dumb and measure criminal activity only by number of arrests in an area, (but smart enough to do the analysis), they'll eventually discover that all crime happens in proximity of police officers.
Yes, this system could be abused, if the Evil Genius is directing a significant portion of the crimes in the city. If that happens, a separate parallel program to root out criminal masterminds might be in order. Until then, I think you'll find that most crime is unconnected, and that independent criminals far outnumber loyal minions of comic-book type villains.
What would you guess the ratio is of Criminal Mastermind to Random Thug, in your city?
Some patterns are more resilient. Vandalism when schools let out. Drunk driving after last call. Petty theft towards the end of the month/pay cycle. Domestic violence around holidays. Spring Break. Summer vacation. Night time.
Locations may be more difficult to observe patterns in. From above examples: proximity to schools. Proximity to bars. Poorer neighborhoods. etc.
Often certain locations seem to attract trouble. Rowdy apartment complex/subsidized housing may be a hot spot - if there was a fight last night, there might be a bigger confrontation tonight. An extreme example might be the london riots - many people seem to have gone out to take part, because they knew a riot happened the night before.
Of course, this will never eliminate ALL crime, but recognizing patterns, both short-term (noticing 2 gangs recently both trying to assert a claim on a neighborhood, by arrests/calls to that neighborhood going up in the past week), and long term (annual cycle related to school year and holidays, construction season, etc). Knowing that one neighborhood often sees an increase in crime before another neighborhood does might even allow you to use it as an indicator of trends within the city.
Please define "safer." Comparing LD50 alone, for example, would put caffeine and aspirin in the "more dangerous than alcohol" category.
So now we can protest, but only through speech and not through action? Is BART a private entity, or an extension of the government?
I'm not a shark, I'm a dolphin.
This was patent #8,000,000, or the 8,000,000th numbered patent. before the 1830s, patents were issued but not given numbers. I choose to be pedantic, rather than think about the travesty that our patent law has become - I'll leave that to someone else just this once.
Diesel substitutes are actually pretty easy to make. Gasoline substitutes are much harder, to the point most of them cost more gasoline than they replace. Ethanol for fuel is a joke being played on all of us, a scam at our expense. The faster we give up on ethanol and get into bio-diesel, the better.
How about we make driving the privilege? And the more dangerous your vehicle is to others, the higher the standards for you to get a license. Rather than putting up a sign at every bridge in the state informing that "ice may form on bridge" (as Texas has done, which means drivers promptly learn to ignore the signs and are even more surprised when bridges ice over), why don't we just put that on the test to get a license in the first place?
The giant SUVs seem to actually require you to become a bad driver if you get one. Those drivers in particular should be held to higher standards, i.e. longer test to get a license, harsher penalties for bad driving behavior, more restrictions on eating/smoking/makeup/2phones-and-a-laptop while driving. Then again, it sadly too common to see people with a flat screen installed in the car who seem to believe watching porn makes them better drivers. Or something. We don't even enforce basic equipment laws in most states, leading to customized trucks with bumpers 4 feet off the ground, and headlights shining everywhere except where they should be, in every color of the rainbow.
There would certainly be less children killed in car accidents. I suspect the number of children dying in household accidents would see an increase.
Would you give up your control of the motorcycle, in exchange for everyone else doing the same?
Because their automated train system works so well?
Who said anything about having to be perfect? All my scenario requires is 1) slightly successful, in that they reproduce enough to get out into the wild and spread a little bit, and 2) and unpredicted side effect. #2 could be anything - provoking an unpredicted allergic reaction in humans, for example. It doesn't have to drown us in grey goo or actively hunt us down for parts to cause us danger. A cloud of particles (think pollen or spore cloud) that the human body isn't used to could be significant.
Usually they are at least related to other members of the back, therefore even if the non-breeders don't have offspring, they are helping ensure the survival of closely-related animals.
What percent of the earth's population would be acceptable loss, in the event of accidental unpredicted affects of technology?