Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ShotSpotter requests to be held in contempt rather than disclose its methodology

chicagoreader.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 320 posts

Re: ShotSpotter requests to be held in contempt rather than disclose its methodology

#41

Post by HWR_14 »

thereare5lights wrote: post #22
public_defender wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are being ordered to disclose and they are refusing to do it. The article says the lawyer requested to be held in "friendly contempt." I'm pretty sure that doesn't exist. It would probably be more accurate to say that the lawyer conceded the company was in contempt (i.e. they were refusing the order to produce and maybe even conceding it was legal) and was requesting a light sanction. The strategy seems rather b…

> The article says the lawyer requested to be held in "friendly contempt." I'm pretty sure that doesn't exist. It's a thing https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.idc.law/resource/resmgr/quarterly_... > This procedure is often called “friendly contempt,” a recognition that the contemnor has not acted “with contumacious disregard for the court’s authority,” but requires a contempt finding and sanction for the purpose of obtaining…

The main reason to ask for "friendly contempt" (as per your article) is to get a contempt order in place so it can be appealed. Until then, there is no reason for an appeals court to look at the decision.

So this is the lawyer asking to appeal the original judge's order of disclosure, and this is the obscure process that makes that happen.

Re: ShotSpotter requests to be held in contempt rather than disclose its methodology

#42

Post by userbinator »

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #19
anewpersonality wrote: post #11

The US should mandate every gunshot be accompanied by a loud ultrasonic tone that can easily identify the occurrence to any recording device. The tone could eventually be modulated with the guns serial number.

Quoted post unavailable.

I read the comment you're replying to as being satire/sarcasm, given how outrageous it is.

Re: ShotSpotter requests to be held in contempt rather than disclose its methodology

#43

Post by anigbrowl »

kencausey wrote: post #31
oneoff786 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s no way they have a legitimate secret sauce though… right? This doesn’t seem like a hard problem to do. Maybe some of this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_component_analys... Plus basic triangulation logic synced across a bunch of microphones?

There is also the matter of correctly identifying gunshots.

They get lots of false positives, from band practice to backfiring vehicle engines and (of course) fireworks.

Re: ShotSpotter requests to be held in contempt rather than disclose its methodology

#44

Post by elil17 »

warkdarrior wrote: post #35
monksy wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're telling me that cities are picking minority areas to put these in just for ill intent? Also, the devices don't "enforce crimes", they only alert approximate areas where a gunshot/firework may have gone off at.

Hopefully what is being enforced is the law, not the crimes.

Sometimes police manage to enforce both…

Re: ShotSpotter requests to be held in contempt rather than disclose its methodology

#45

Post by nomilk »

> The defense also requested ShotSpotter produce any data on sensors misidentifying gunfire or the location of alerts, as well as data on gunfire ShotSpotter failed to identify.

I frequently misunderstand how features work in common applications, especially nuances of models and processes; so I can only imagine the difficulty gaining a precise understanding and context for a non technical person; e.g. a lawyer or jury.

Unrelated: as someone not from Chicago, it's surprising that a company exists solely to detect gunshots. Depressing.

Re: ShotSpotter requests to be held in contempt rather than disclose its methodology

#46

Post by rockemsockem »

nickysielicki wrote: post #33

I don’t understand the argument here. Suppose shotspotter is deeply flawed and often confuses fireworks and car backfires for gunshots, how could that have any impact on this case or the legality of it? I don’t see it as any different than if a police officer is out patrolling, hears a car backfire, and confuses it for a gunshot. If he then detains someone as a part of his investigation and discovers some other crime…

Pretty sure the scenario you described with an actual police officer does not count as probable cause either. You can't just start detaining people because you heard fireworks, even if you mistook it for a gunshot.

Re: ShotSpotter requests to be held in contempt rather than disclose its methodology

#47

Post by PuppyTailWags »

monksy wrote: post #28
solardev wrote: post #5

(Not the OP) For background, this is the company that supposedly locates gunshot sounds in cities (and sometimes battlefields) by microphone triangulation. It doesn't work all that well and is selectively deployed in minority areas and is used by police to selectively enforce crimes, sometimes also altering the evidence. Vice did a few articles on them and the company tried to sue but had it tossed out. Shady all aro…

You're telling me that cities are picking minority areas to put these in just for ill intent? Also, the devices don't "enforce crimes", they only alert approximate areas where a gunshot/firework may have gone off at.

I don't think anyone truly intends ill. However, someone who chooses a technology that doesn't have real evidence of working as well as it's advertised, and then uses applications of that technology on primarily minority populations, the result can only be concluded as illness on the people.

Re: ShotSpotter requests to be held in contempt rather than disclose its methodology

#48

Post by googlryas »

solardev wrote: post #5

(Not the OP) For background, this is the company that supposedly locates gunshot sounds in cities (and sometimes battlefields) by microphone triangulation. It doesn't work all that well and is selectively deployed in minority areas and is used by police to selectively enforce crimes, sometimes also altering the evidence. Vice did a few articles on them and the company tried to sue but had it tossed out. Shady all aro…

Jackson MS uses shot spotter and is 80% black, and no, they aren't deploying it in predominantly white "minority" neighborhoods.

Re: ShotSpotter requests to be held in contempt rather than disclose its methodology

#50

Post by elil17 »

monksy wrote: post #28
solardev wrote: post #5

(Not the OP) For background, this is the company that supposedly locates gunshot sounds in cities (and sometimes battlefields) by microphone triangulation. It doesn't work all that well and is selectively deployed in minority areas and is used by police to selectively enforce crimes, sometimes also altering the evidence. Vice did a few articles on them and the company tried to sue but had it tossed out. Shady all aro…

You're telling me that cities are picking minority areas to put these in just for ill intent? Also, the devices don't "enforce crimes", they only alert approximate areas where a gunshot/firework may have gone off at.

They didn’t comment on motives, just on reality. That is where these systems are deployed.
Post reply on HN