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

When an experiment with existing technology does a “good enough” job

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 95 posts

Re: When an experiment with existing technology does a “good enough” job

#71

Post by StavrosK »

js2 wrote: post #33
mintplant wrote: post #16

> Although, the solution would occasionally have issues with particular letters. A mistake like this can and has destroyed lives. http://thisiscriminal.com/episode-18-695bgk/ > Police officer John Edwards was patrolling a quiet neighborhood in Bellaire, Texas when he saw an SUV driven by two young African-American men. It was just before 2am on December 31, 2008. Edwards followed the SUV and ran the license plate num…

"Tuttle? His name's Buttle. There must be some mistake." "Mistake? Ha ha, we don't make mistakes." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OalIW1yL-k

But the bureaucrat(?) did say "Buttle".

Re: When an experiment with existing technology does a “good enough” job

#72

Post by michaelmior »

michaelmior wrote: post #41
cdfgg wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

isn't it because the officer type wrong license? i thought the scanner purpose is to minimize human error like this

An automated scanner may be more accurate, but given that it will perform far more scans, I could imagine the total never of false positives being higher.

s/never/number/

Re: When an experiment with existing technology does a “good enough” job

#73

Post by keithnz »

master_yoda_1 wrote: post #54

The author is just calling some api, I don't know how much technical knowledge people here at hacker news has, but this person is talking BS. No open source software are used here. To the author: please spend some time and try to analyze the problem first. I don't think you even get the problem right, or know what open source is. A free api IS NOT an example of OPEN SOURCE.

nope, no one on HN has any technical knowledge whatsover.... all the smart tech peeps have gone over to this thing called "myspace", you might want to give it a go :)

Re: When an experiment with existing technology does a “good enough” job

#74

Post by tweedledee »

shadowtree wrote: post #3

Any project in a heavily regulated environment is not measurable that way. The cost comes from compliance, audits, paperwork. Trials, PoCs, etc. You also need to prove security and a long term lifecycle for the solution. Those open source packages - are they being updated? Who validates patches? etc etc. Those are moats, once you're able to deliver the above, you're set for a long time. Good luck!

The government is fairly corrupt. This is a make my friend rich project. See the Myki card for another example.

Re: When an experiment with existing technology does a “good enough” job

#75

Post by [deleted] »

mintplant wrote: post #27
fao_ wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, the fault lies with the trigger-happy police, not with the software.

Of course. But it is precisely this "trigger-happy" nature which makes an introducing a system with an appreciable error rate dangerous. This at least partially ( partially ) accounts for higher costs.

[deleted]

Re: When an experiment with existing technology does a “good enough” job

#76

Post by bradfa »

The local populace has a $170 million/year problem of stolen cars. Government spends $86 million (one time cost? estimated cost over X years? it's unclear) to help solve this problem. Doesn't seem like that bad of an economic tradeoff on the face of it, really.

I can understand that the $86 million seems like a lot until you realize the kinds of capabilities that an automotive camera system like has to comply with and all of the integration needed with other software/systems/services and the fact that this cost is likely a total cost over many years as it sounds much more sensational. Just the initial report from Deloitte cost the government $115,000.

In their first trial in 2014-2015, which lasted 15 months, with only 6 cars outfitted, ended up identifying and impounding 240 stolen cars and increased revenue from additional tickets by hundreds of thousands of dollars per month. That's pretty impressive! Now they're rolling out to not just 6 cars but to 220 total, which in theory should improve policing efforts.

References: http://www.caradvice.com.au/350313/victoria-police-to-consid... http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-order/victoria-polices-...

Re: When an experiment with existing technology does a “good enough” job

#77

Post by sharemywin »

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #37
taitems wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh dear. That's so creepy someone might actually do it! I'm getting into home automation at the moment, so a use case that I think I deleted from the article was just letting you know that your mum or someone had pulled up in the driveway. License plates vs. a known list of visitors. Or as is happening here in some of our suburbs, "Alert: A group of 4 men have arrived in a stolen V8 Commodore"

> That's so creepy someone might actually do it! It's only creepy if it's done on a targeted, individual basis, which it won't be. As it is - in many countries you legally have no expectation of privacy in a public place, so I have no problem with en-masse ANPR. If the police eventually develops a very dense sensor network that can track every car's movement across every intersection then there would be too much info…

The problem are:

- who has access and are they using it for official business?

- what if it's hacked?

- who is it shared with and who do they share it with after that? private companies for analysis?

Re: When an experiment with existing technology does a “good enough” job

#78

Post by vincnetas »

camillomiller wrote: post #68
anitil wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what I get for not following the news. I also remember a case years ago on Bondi beach where a guy having a psychotic break and brandishing a knife was killed. If I remember correctly this was used a justification for introducing tasers. I should have said rarely.

A knife in the hands of a psycho is much more dangerous than you might think. If he's at close enough range a shooting reaction is correct.

You don't need to shoot to kill. You only need to disable a attacker, not kill him. "German Police shoot a knife wielding man in the leg in self defense"

https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=cfe_1440199540&comments=1

Re: When an experiment with existing technology does a “good enough” job

#79

Post by Singletoned »

Casseres wrote: post #69
bigiain wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've got a war story about a government project we did for which we invoiced in total ~$80k, which by the time it made it to the media was a "$3.5 million dollar project".

Feasibility studies, hiring experts to write reports, the salaries of everyone in the department, etc? I have no idea, but conceivably if one wanted a juicy headline, there's ways to get it.

Also lying. If there's no comeback, then there's no real downside to heavy exageration.

Re: When an experiment with existing technology does a “good enough” job

#80

Post by sharemywin »

taitems wrote: post #20

Author here, hi HN/Reddit. I had hoped I'd made it clear enough, but by no means am I recommending something I cobbled together in an hour on the couch be rolled out as a competitor to BlueNet. I mean shit, I'm web scraping their database and using compressed footage from cheap dashcams. The algorithm is also untrained. I was, on the other hand, hoping to promote healthy discussion and pose some good questions relate…

To me the problem is with out a true project plan and an extensive list of requirements it's impossible to tell anything.

Let's assume that your system is wrong 1 out 10 times or 100 times. And they're are 1 million scan a year. that's going to result in 100,000 people pulled over wrong. For a cost of let's say 860K(assume your outfitting the system, training people, data storage etc.).

Let's say your going to need 4 to 5 sigma better performance to get that. Does that mean 10x more effort? 100x more effort? Think data collection, storage, possibly state of the art algorithm...

what if the data gets hacked.

All I got out of your article is there's already no way to tell the difference in cost between an toy system and enterprise, government system.

BTW, it was still a cool toy project...

Post reply on HN