51–60 of 256 posts
AWS has tried to position themselves as being different from the old 'dinosaurs', but the public sector market is probably ripe for them to move into. They've already made steps with GovCloud, now it's time to get specialist teams and consultant contracts going.
If Amazon didn't do it I bet Google wouldn't be far behind
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When all they probably needed was a real drug rehab program. Edit: Just saying because almost all petty thievery is committed to get goods to trade for drugs. Edit 2: Also, I'm not saying that this wasn't a good use of home surveillance, or to whatever parent's comment referred, although (s)he is probably wrong that they won't be back next week. I have acquaintances that having got hooked on meth, began stealing cars…
Let me increase your rent so we can pay for said rehab program. If you say no, then you have no right to say anything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When all they probably needed was a real drug rehab program. Edit: Just saying because almost all petty thievery is committed to get goods to trade for drugs. Edit 2: Also, I'm not saying that this wasn't a good use of home surveillance, or to whatever parent's comment referred, although (s)he is probably wrong that they won't be back next week. I have acquaintances that having got hooked on meth, began stealing cars…
Let me increase your rent so we can pay for said rehab program. If you say no, then you have no right to say anything.
1. That's a non-sequitur. Drug rehab programs that are part of prison diversion schemes are implicitly a matter of public policy. A single individual writing a single check is meaningless in that context.
2. "Saint or GTFO" is a debate tactic used by the foolish who think their opponent is a bigger fool.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let me increase your rent so we can pay for said rehab program. If you say no, then you have no right to say anything.
Two things: 1. That's a non-sequitur. Drug rehab programs that are part of prison diversion schemes are implicitly a matter of public policy. A single individual writing a single check is meaningless in that context. 2. "Saint or GTFO" is a debate tactic used by the foolish who think their opponent is a bigger fool.
As an aside, I have not heard that type of argument paraphrased this way, but it is terribly amusing.
At some point in time we Americans are going to have to come to grips with the computational abilities of the state. There are way too few safeguards in the system and the Bill of Rights does not seem to be adequate in dealing with the new reality that private companies can acquire a vast amount of information on us and thereby sell it to law enforcement. Law enforcement can use privately obtained information without…
Yes, we need some substantial acts of congress including and up to a Constitutional amendment to properly handle technology. I still shake my head that "wiretap" laws are what are being used (last I knew a few years ago) - why not have a clean law to address modern communication capabilities and proper privacy & court interests? :-/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Rekognition performed so poorly compared to our prototype (which was not state of the art or anything, just good enough for our company’s bespoke conpliance problem). It was just so bad. Overall intersection-over-union scores on our training & acceptance data was really poor, and perhaps worse, the latency of the requests to Rekognition was abysmal and completely unusable for us, especially for images that had a la…
I agree with you generally. But I differ in the sense that my default belief is that these technologies are over hyped and cannot provide the scale of performance or detail of prediction that could make them effective as oppressive surveillance tools, at least not for a long time. Mostly they are “surveillance theater” akin to useless (but costly) TSA surveillance. The way it interacts with society is by being vague…
you've never heard of the chinese police state's facial surveillance which they're using to throw countless uighurs in jail for stuff like jaywalking, i suppose?
>as a concerned citizen who sees the danger in Orwellian surveillance.
you don't see the danger because your paycheck relies on you not seeing it. the rest of us are not so willfully blind.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Rekognition performed so poorly compared to our prototype (which was not state of the art or anything, just good enough for our company’s bespoke conpliance problem). It was just so bad. Overall intersection-over-union scores on our training & acceptance data was really poor, and perhaps worse, the latency of the requests to Rekognition was abysmal and completely unusable for us, especially for images that had a la…
I agree with you generally. But I differ in the sense that my default belief is that these technologies are over hyped and cannot provide the scale of performance or detail of prediction that could make them effective as oppressive surveillance tools, at least not for a long time. Mostly they are “surveillance theater” akin to useless (but costly) TSA surveillance. The way it interacts with society is by being vague…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When all they probably needed was a real drug rehab program. Edit: Just saying because almost all petty thievery is committed to get goods to trade for drugs. Edit 2: Also, I'm not saying that this wasn't a good use of home surveillance, or to whatever parent's comment referred, although (s)he is probably wrong that they won't be back next week. I have acquaintances that having got hooked on meth, began stealing cars…
Let me increase your rent so we can pay for said rehab program. If you say no, then you have no right to say anything.
- You have direct cost of imprisonment ~$60k a year
- The costs of prosecution (no idea what this costs though)
- Once someone has been to prison they are much more likely to be involved in crime again, and become a repeat customer of the industrial prison complex
- We loose a tax payer
- The perp will have no retirement fund, thus the government is on the hook again during retirement years.
- Increased insurance costs for everyone else due to a higher crime rate
I don't have the time or resources to do an accurate cost estimation but we could do some basic napkin math. Lets say 10 years in prison during their lifetime and a loss of $15k tax per year over a 30 year period (due to time spent in prison and loss of earning potential once they're out).
(10 * $60k) + (30 * $15k) = $1,050,000 loss to the State. That's a shit load of money. Crime prevention looks a lot cheaper now doesn't it?
How long until we see tons of marketplaces to sell your home & business surveillance videos?
Maybe security companies will start offering free versions of things like Nest as long as you let them sell the video in their marketplace. It's the 21st Century way after all.
I think this is going to happen, regardless of ACLU or whether Amazon pulls the service or not. Face recognition will be refined and sold as a package. Probably every cop car will have it one day. Courts will say that when you're in public you give certain privacy rights away etc. etc. Expect cop cars next to you if you missed a court date or violated parole. The scariest part is the DNA fishing expeditions through c…
> Courts will say that when you're in public you give certain privacy rights away etc. etc. This is the law of the land right now. As to your next example, I don't see what's wrong with those, as missing a court date or violating parole is a perfectly legitimate reason for you to be arrested.