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

ShotSpotter: listening in on the neighborhood

computer.rip

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 443 posts

Re: ShotSpotter: listening in on the neighborhood

#221

Post by [deleted] »

Blahah wrote: post #189
thereisnospork wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>With regard to the article, why is it obvious that police are putting surveillance in areas with the highest rates of gun crime? Because there are nicer neighborhoods and less than nice neighborhoods? In so far as I can tell this is true to various degrees in every place I've ever lived or visited. Colloquially, some neighborhoods have manicured lawns, other neighborhoods have cars on blocks - it's 'obvious'[0] that…

> it's 'obvious'[0] that the latter warrants more policing. Is it? I don't see it as at all obvious. It seems utterly ridiculous to me to increase policing in sync with socioeconomic deprivation. The blindingly obvious thing is to invest in solving the problems that cause the disparity, not to criminalize people who are living in poverty.

[deleted]

Re: ShotSpotter: listening in on the neighborhood

#222

Post by WalterBright »

ryandrake wrote: post #206
jakelazaroff wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s actually incredibly un clear why houses with cars on blocks would warrant more policing than houses with manicured lawns. Why don’t you elaborate?

What seems more obvious to me is that the more surveillance you do in any area (regardless of whether the lawns are manicured), the more crime you're going to find there. If you put 5 cops patrolling the wealthiest, nicest areas of your city, and 1 cop patrolling a less wealthy less nice area, the 5 cops will find more crime than the 1 cop. Even if you don't assume crime is uniformly distributed (which it probably is…

I'm not sure there are lot of murders, carjackings, breakins, etc., in wealthier neighborhoods going undetected. Why would wealthier victims be less likely to report crime?

Re: ShotSpotter: listening in on the neighborhood

#223

Post by Jcowell »

eBombzor wrote: post #183
fennecbutt wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The cops made a big mistake but why is there some juvenile sitting in the dark, middle of the night, lighting up fireworks the moment the police start getting close. That's what I don't understand. There is some weird stuff going on in this story and the article jumping to conclusions isn't helping.

What lethal force is necessary when responding to a phenomenon that regular in mass occurs at least once a year in this country?

Lightning up fire works is something I would expect a juvenile to do.

Re: ShotSpotter: listening in on the neighborhood

#224

Post by sbierwagen »

incanus77 wrote: post #54

Timely, as a boy was shot at last week in Chicago while setting off fireworks that triggered a ShotSpotter alert: https://chicago.suntimes.com/crime/2024/02/27/chicago-police...

He was setting off fireworks on January 25? Is there a holiday on that day I'm not aware of?

Re: ShotSpotter: listening in on the neighborhood

#225

Post by WalterBright »

ryandrake wrote: post #211
jakelazaroff wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that’s the original point I made which is currently being downvoted.

I think there's a lot of quiet classism going on in this thread, and it's easier for these guys to just drive by and hit the downvote button than to actually speak their mind and tell us why they think poor people -> criminals. The causation more likely goes the other way: When an area gets the reputation of being higher crime (because of reality or because of bias from more police saturation), that area becomes chea…

In Seattle, the bank tellers are behind bulletproof glass. In the surrounding communities, there's no bulletproof glass.

I don't think it's more police presence that causes banks to install the armor. More likely it's the lack of police presence that results in armored banks.

Re: ShotSpotter: listening in on the neighborhood

#226

Post by smt88 »

User23 wrote: post #202
smt88 wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also if such devices (and law enforcement) worked well to reduce crime, the crime would move to less-surveilled areas. We don't see that happening anywhere.

I didn't realize that there's a conservation law for crime. Is this some kind of ingenious application of Noether's theorem that I haven't heard of?

If you're going to be sarcastic, you should to make a point that makes sense.

Criminals react to successful surveillance and law enforcement. It's idiotic to suggest that they wouldn't.

Re: ShotSpotter: listening in on the neighborhood

#227

Post by bilbo0s »

eBombzor wrote: post #183
fennecbutt wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The cops made a big mistake but why is there some juvenile sitting in the dark, middle of the night, lighting up fireworks the moment the police start getting close. That's what I don't understand. There is some weird stuff going on in this story and the article jumping to conclusions isn't helping.

why is there some juvenile sitting in the dark, middle of the night, lighting up fireworks

Huh?

Genuinely confused by that question? When does anyone light fireworks? I've never seen them any time but at night.

Re: ShotSpotter: listening in on the neighborhood

#228

Post by seanmcdirmid »

WalterBright wrote: post #225
ryandrake wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there's a lot of quiet classism going on in this thread, and it's easier for these guys to just drive by and hit the downvote button than to actually speak their mind and tell us why they think poor people -> criminals. The causation more likely goes the other way: When an area gets the reputation of being higher crime (because of reality or because of bias from more police saturation), that area becomes chea…

In Seattle, the bank tellers are behind bulletproof glass. In the surrounding communities, there's no bulletproof glass. I don't think it's more police presence that causes banks to install the armor. More likely it's the lack of police presence that results in armored banks.

Uhm, I’ve only seen one bank in Seattle like that (in pioneer square), maybe there are more south Seattle?

Definitely my Bank of America branch in Ballard doesn’t have bullet proof glass.

Re: ShotSpotter: listening in on the neighborhood

#229

Post by Jcowell »

lifeformed wrote: post #147
jacurtis wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes there are false positives. This is an alert system and doesn't have to be perfect. This is the difference between a sensor in a self-driving car and a sensor for something like Shotspotter. If a self-driving car sensor has a 1% fail rate, then it is useless and would cause crashes and death. It couldn't be used. But if shotspotter is 1% inaccurate, then it just sends police to a street corner where there is actua…

> The consequences are pretty low to nil. Having American cops rush to your door thinking violence is happening is not inconsequential. Just a few days ago they shot at a kid who was playing with fireworks, due to a false positive. Also, see swatting and its fatal consequences.

Exactly this. When it comes to American Police the consequences are not deterministically nil

Re: ShotSpotter: listening in on the neighborhood

#230

Post by WalterBright »

resolutebat wrote: post #205
jakelazaroff wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s actually incredibly un clear why houses with cars on blocks would warrant more policing than houses with manicured lawns. Why don’t you elaborate?

"Incredibly unclear"? Really? Not the OP, but let's spell it out: Manicuring a lawn is expensive and serves no useful purpose, so most practitioners have disposable income and/or spare time, and care about keeping up appearances. Putting a car up on blocks implies it's being used for spare parts, which is generally not something the well-off need to engage in (they buy new and use professionals for repairs as needed)…

When I was little, the family a couple doors down had cars up on blocks in front. My mom lamented that, she thought it was awful.

Enter my teen years. I had cars up on blocks in the driveway. My poor mom!

Post reply on HN