Minority Report: Now with more spreadsheets and guesswork The UK government has unveiled a scheme to use AI to "help police catch criminals before they strike." arrest UK officials insist 'murder prediction tool' algorithms purely abstract READ MORE It all sounds a bit Minority Report: the Tom Cruise film set in a dystopian future in which would-be criminals are apprehended before …
This post has been deleted by its author
All the information has been available here for years:
https://www.ourwatch.org.uk/crime-prevention/preventing-crime/crime-map
And the local plods know which areas are crime hot spots.
Ordinary members of the public would report anti-social behaviour locally, if they could do so easily, without filling out a huge data-grab form or hanging on the phone for 40 minutes.
In short, just spending half that money on local policing would do more in a year than anything this Kyle bloke wants to do with his digital STASI organisation.
Imagine if the map didn't get updated for two weeks so Plod phones the IT company and it turns out an rsync job has got stuck so no new data got delivered. There was a lock preventing two attempts at the same time
The rsync job was wrapped in a timer of a few hours to enforce complete or quit.
To keep our children and future society safe, the AI will be screening all unborn children and determine whether they will become juvenile delinquents, hooligans, normal criminals or lefties. Each of these instances, where such anomalies are detected, will result in involuntary abortion. No effort shall be spared to improve the safety of our children and our society.
Could I remind people that Juvenile Delinquent is actually an oxymoron. If you are a juvenile then you have not reach a level of maturity to be considered a responsible adult while being delinquent requires you to have responsibilities you are neglecting.
This is one of those buzzword phrases invented back in the past to have a label to put on people the local do-gooders felt were not showing them the correct level of respect and obedience. People who think phrases like this are appropriate to use to label people should be banned from any position of responsibility higher than 'do you want fires with that?'
Most future juveniles do have responsibilities they will be neglecting. Juveniles are supposed to be revolting and questioning the status quo. Therefore, they must be delinquent when they are not able or allowed to revolt. They are also delinquent when they are not able or allowed to question the status quo. Therefore, future juveniles are delinquent by current and future social standards and must be dealt with before they can do any harm. These juvenile delinquent bastards need to be aborted before they can become juvenile delinquent. It is as simple as that.
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
"To keep our children and future society safe, the AI will be screening all unborn children and determine whether they will become juvenile delinquents, hooligans, normal criminals or lefties"
Unborn children? I think the hit rate would be better by screening the parents when they apply for a parenting license.
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
The UK is already close to being a police state. Once they roll this out, the transformation will be complete.
The Black Mirror episode "Nosedive" is more and more like a genuine prediction for the future.
If groups like "Neighbourhood Watch" and "Resolve" are lauding this dystopian idea, it would pay to see where they get their money from. I suspect this is a clear cut case of government funded NGOs being used to lobby the government to implement policies that the government knows it has no chance of implementing without manufacturing fake support for them.
Quote: "...strict anonymisation..."
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/sep/13/gchq-data-collection-violated-human-rights-strasbourg-court-rules
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/dec/25/british-councils-used-investigatory-powers-ripa-to-secretly-spy-on-public
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jul/23/anonymised-data-never-be-anonymous-enough-study-finds
....and lots more indications that it's just lying!!
....why am I not surprised?.........
....that the STASI is being built out (again)....but this time in Nova South, Victoria SW1E and Hubble Road Cheltenham.................
This post has been deleted by its author
I heard that said on a Jury once, Day one or two of a two-week trial.
From someone who I'd guess from prior experience (which is, apparently, now equivalent to policing) would wholeheartedly support this sort of technology being rolled out to all the bad people, but not the good ones like her.
AC because I don't want to lead to risk being dragged into appeals etc.
Demographics is easily biased and often self sustaining by prejudice. We all know this. We all know it's abused. We all know it encourages more 'data collection' and assumptions. There are frequent reports of mentally ill people being killed by the police who react acording to violent reflex fed by this. Here's a thing, supposed you get stopped by the police. If they say 'on your way' they have hardly any data. If they decide to nick you' then they get DNA as well as a hundred datapoints. Just because they nick you doesn't mean you're guilty of anything.
How often have you heard somebody in the so-called justice system say "We missed the warning signs." or "We should have reacted better to reports of..."? The Police just don't have the culture (or probably the funds==priorities) to react to in-your-face alerts. So what good will 'ChatG-PC' do. <quote>The inquest heard that Davison had first been granted a license to legally own a firearm despite being known to have a history of violence, and that further opportunities that could have prevented the shooting were missed. There were multiple failures within the firearms licensing unit and staff were not using “professional curiosity” to scrutinise applications properly, the jury found on Monday as it was confirmed the five victims were unlawfully killed.</quote>
Here's a guide for plods everywhere:
Shoplifting: Try shops
Terrorism: Try peaceful protestors
Dishonesty and fraud: Try houses of parliament
'UK Science and Technology Secretary Pete Kyle trilled: "Cutting-edge technology like AI can improve our lives in so many ways, including in keeping us safe, which is why we’re putting it to work for victims over vandals, the law-abiding majority over the lawbreakers."'
Is this yet another example of an MP, who knows next to bugger all about science, computing, AI, etc, publicly pontificating about his areas of extreme ignorance? A quick check of his background on Wikipedia confirms that it is.
Politicians, above all, should learn from the maxim that it's better to keep your mouth shut and let people think you're stupid than to open it and remove any doubt.
Apparently he has a degree in “geography, international development, and environmental studies” which sounds rather vague and widespread. Certainly no qualifications, knowledge or experience in any technology field.
But no doubt that won’t prevent him from getting a very well paid “consultant” role with one of the AI companies (after this lot are inevitably kicked out of office). Purely coincidentally, of course..
This post has been deleted by its author
My city (around 125K people including suburbs) tried it 10 or 20 years ago. Didn't need "AI", they just looked at crime statistics block by block and prioritized patrols in the places with more crime.
It was eventually abandoned. Partially because it was akin to racial profiling (they were in the poorer neighborhoods, which also have more minorities) but mostly because it was a big failure. Because at least where I live, most crime happens - or at least starts - behind closed doors. Domestic abuse cases rarely happen on public streets where cops can patrol. Even disputes that might escalate to a fistfight on the sidewalk or in the worst cases to "shots fired" don't tend to start in public.
So it turned out that unless the police just happened to be driving by while the last 0.1% of something happened that might have been brewing for weeks bit by bit in a non criminal manner the extra patrols didn't do anything. Because people in those areas aren't going to flag down the cop car going by and say "a couple of my friends are having a big argument and I know one of them carries a gun so I'm worried he might do something stupid". It did lead to 10x more police stops in those neighborhoods for minor infractions like squealing tires or having a taillight out though. i.e. run of the mill police harassment of minorities that has been going on since forever, but this was supposed to be OK because it was being driven by "statistics" rather than racism.
Now even the police are finally admitting to what some were saying all along, that having some non-uniformed early intervention personnel would be a better solution. But they say they can't hire those people until the city/county builds a fancy new combined police/sheriff/jail building that the voters have rejected twice already in the past decade. Because lack of space, or something, as if these non-police need to be located side by side with the police and couldn't communicate via email, phone, or zoom.
"Because at least where I live, most crime happens - or at least starts - behind closed doors. Domestic abuse cases rarely happen on public streets where cops can patrol. Even disputes that might escalate to a fistfight on the sidewalk or in the worst cases to "shots fired" don't tend to start in public."
One needs to consider the nature of the crimes before changing patrol patterns. You are correct that increased patrols aren't going to have a big impact on domestic disputes as many of those people will happily start or continue physical fights and threats while the police are there. Burglaries, street take-overs and other property crimes might be knocked down with more police presence. Some big cities have issues with crime in business districts that are abandoned after work hours and on holidays. Police patrols that are nicely visible can make criminals think a bit. It's also a good place for the city to rethink it's planning so there's some mixed use in those areas which would lead to more people and businesses around at all hours.
I don't seen non-uniformed staff being a good replacement for liveried police officers. They aren't taken as seriously, have limited power and the scope of what they can do might lead to them being put in harms way. It doesn't matter if somebody is having a mental crisis with a gun or knife in their hand or not subject to demons. They might be talked down by a professional, but that might only come to be successful after they've done great harm to others. Sometimes the only way to put an end to a violent outburst is a very final solution. It's not ideal, but necessary for the safety of others.
Yes for stuff like breakins or vandalism in a business district that's empty after 9pm having police driving around would likely help. But they won't just drive around. They'll stop "suspicious" vehicles, and we all know how they'll determine what qualifies as "suspicious". For areas that are "abandoned after work hours" putting up some very noticeable and obvious CCTV cameras on the streetlights might do more to deter that type of crime than having a police car rolling through every half hour - especially since people tend to get into routines and it might be possible for criminals intent on a break-in to wait until they see a cop drive by before acting.
But regardless one does not need "AI" to help decide where to have police step up patrols or locate temporary or permanent CCTV cameras. That's a simple matter of looking at where crimes are being reported.
"They'll stop "suspicious" vehicles, and we all know how they'll determine what qualifies as "suspicious". For areas that are "abandoned after work hours" putting up some very noticeable and obvious CCTV cameras on the streetlights might do more to deter that type of crime than having a police car rolling through every half hour - especially since people tend to get into routines and it might be possible for criminals intent on a break-in to wait until they see a cop drive by before acting."
With automatic number plate readers, a slow cruising patrol car can spot loads of suspicious things. If the owner has a long history of breakins, that's a big red flag and so would be plates that don't match the car, stolen plates and stolen vehicles.
I see CCTV as an adjunct tool. The international wardrobe of the criminal is the hoodie so CCTV isn't going to be able to identify the person inside the hoodie. If CCTV picks up people mumping about in a black hoodie at night and triggers police to go have a look, it's a great way to draw police away from other areas without much risk to the distractor. It's not against the law to be out on a midnight stroll. Add a dog and there's another layer of plausible deniability. In the mean time, there's something going down elsewhere. A bold distractor could play Sov Cit by not wanting to identify themselves or just hands out dodgy reasons for taking a walk in that area at that time which could trigger another officer being sent as backup, two down.
I'm not afraid of cameras and neither are many criminals. Stores such as Walmart have increasingly better and better video surveillance, yet people still shoplift from them. Not only does each store have really good tech, they are all tied together. Get trespassed at one store for shoplifting and every other store (perhaps only in one country) will recognize you as you walk in. People will give up and walk out if they spot a store security person taking an interest in them which is what will happen if they are spotted on the security system. Jewelry stores have CCTV, yet get ripped off all of the time. If the area had lots of visible police, robbers might find some place else to target.
Temporary CCTV is a chore. They need power and a way to be monitored so there can be no cost savings in a temp installation so it would only be useful if there's a tip on plans to break into a particular place and They want more angles to watch for a short time.
I just had an idea. To use my drone (I'm a licensed pilot), it needs to have a Remote ID module which is a BlueTooth transmitter that is programmed with my name, license number, etc. Anybody in the area with an app on their phone can find that info while I'm flying. If CCTV cameras had a similar low power transmitter, police could get a quick inventory of cameras in the area with contact information if the cameras are registered. That way, there isn't the delay in trying to find out who owns which. It could be in the best interest of cities to provide the hardware and have community support staff to help people and shops get them installed and registered. Far cheaper than what the city pays for their own CCTV.
"It is likely that vast amounts of sensitive personal data will be hoovered up to build these intrusive predictive policing tools. Instead of 'fixing the foundations' of policing, plans to monitor the public with Orwellian AI tools could erode our most basic rights and could lead to profound injustices."
That's fairly understated, IMHO.
And now we can more clearly see another reason for introduction of the OSA - to gather the personal data to feed into the great AI machine of state.
Insurance companies have been doing this for ages, albeit without AI.
Check quotes for car insurance between postcodes. The problem is that they only use the first part of the postcode (e.g. OL4 5) and lump it all together.
Postcodes were never meant to be used this way.
"Check quotes for car insurance between postcodes. The problem is that they only use the first part of the postcode (e.g. OL4 5) and lump it all together."
With the internet and finer detail data, they can be very specific these days. In times past, the crime reports that they would use would be based on partial post codes. My town is all one zip code and very diverse. There's some apartments I can see from my property that are rather low-rent and the police know them very well. Where I am is all middle-aged professionals and retired. It's not that much of a distance, but miles apart.
(where UK elected government spend some of their time)
And some of that time is in all those subsidised bars and restaurants. After a nice lunch and liquid refreshment, it's tough keeping awake during debates in the chamber. It's a tough job being a MP or Peer.
While Minority Report did use precogs, the use of them in Judge Dredd predated that.
I wonder if this is just a job-creation scheme where the money could be better spent—for instance, just giving people benefits to avoid poverty. It seems the rollout of this system will involve recruiting hundreds of thousands for the Precog Rehabilitation Initiative & Community Keeping Service (PRICKS), not to mention the street-level Crime Reduction Assessment Patrol (CRAP)?
If memory serves me right, the first use of peacocks was in the judge child series judge dredd and that resulted in an allout catastrophic war!
Shit like this really fucking pisses me off. The same cunt that is dealing with the online bill with no clue how tech fucking works.
This will fucking fail! And we'll all have to pay for it.
The police were totally uninterested when cunt down our road was selling stolen airpods from his house via Facebook market place "we can't prove they are stolen". Really?! He had 1 set that was an "unwanted birthday gift" that turned into.about 20 of them.
The dealers who we keep catching on our CCTV "passing" and the ones that used to hang outside the fish and chip shop with one of the delivery drivers delivering fish and chips in his expensive merc (how was that profitable unless also delivering other "goods").
They've clearly not watched the minority report.
Sadly, waste like this is giving more fuel to Reform which will be a fucking disaster if they got voted in. It would be the equivalent of the trump admin.
When going into the local CoOp (or other store of choice) is enough to get you flagged as an "about to shoplift" person of interest. After all, if they've had so many shoplifters in the past (where the police didn't even bother investigating), then it's clear that people going in there must be future shoplifters - arrest everyone entering.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
