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

FTC orders 'gun detection' tech maker Evolv to stop overstating effectiveness

techdirt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 143 posts

Re: FTC orders 'gun detection' tech maker Evolv to stop overstating effectiveness

#71

Post by giantg2 »

gruez wrote: post #68
giantg2 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"That study doesn't have any mention of controls in the abstract." Yeah, it's an abstract ... the point is, there are studies you can go look up.

[flagged]

Lol I'm trying to help you help yourself. I'm not doing all the work for you. I've seen enough studies to convince me but don't have them handy. I could tell you to go read American Homicide and others to understand the historical trends. You're arguing that they aren't related. Do you have studies proving your side? Just saying they aren't related isn't actual proof. Your argument must also meet a burden of proof as absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. I've provided a study. Care to provide a counter?

Re: FTC orders 'gun detection' tech maker Evolv to stop overstating effectiveness

#72

Post by kjs3 »

unwise-exe wrote: post #36

I thought advertising and marketing materials were expected to exaggerate things to the point of blatant falsehood. Is that changing, or is this company being singled out for some reason, or are they really that much worse than everyone else?

In the US (YMMV) there's a distinction in advertising between exaggeration for effect, like "this expensive cream will make you beautiful", and straight up falsification like "we can detect all guns everywhere" when you demonstrably can't.

Re: FTC orders 'gun detection' tech maker Evolv to stop overstating effectiveness

#73

Post by recursivecaveat »

ceejayoz wrote: post #31
xrd wrote: post #26

I cannot find any summaries for the cost of these detection devices. What did this cost, anyone know?

Probably a lot. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADE_651 made tens of millions of dollars at ~$5,000/unit. > The laboratory found that the card contained only a standard radio frequency ID tag of the type used in stores to prevent shoplifting. According to the laboratory's Dr. Markus Kuhn, it was "impossible" for the card to detect anything and it had "absolutely nothing to do with the detection of TNT". The card could…

> He told The Times that ATSC had been dealing with doubters for ten years and that the device was merely being criticised because of its "primitive" appearance. He said: "We are working on a new model that has flashing lights".

Damn, why am I not a scam artist? This worked so well for so long. If he put $20 of random electronics and tiny glass tubes of chemicals in there I think he could've gotten away with it.

Re: FTC orders 'gun detection' tech maker Evolv to stop overstating effectiveness

#74

Post by gruez »

giantg2 wrote: post #71
gruez wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Lol I'm trying to help you help yourself. I'm not doing all the work for you. I've seen enough studies to convince me but don't have them handy. I could tell you to go read American Homicide and others to understand the historical trends. You're arguing that they aren't related. Do you have studies proving your side? Just saying they aren't related isn't actual proof. Your argument must also meet a burden of proof as…

[flagged]

Re: FTC orders 'gun detection' tech maker Evolv to stop overstating effectiveness

#75

Post by N2yhWNXQN3k9 »

N2yhWNXQN3k9 wrote: post #53
ceejayoz wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/12/17/mass-s... > GVA has reported 971 cases of school shootings across the United States in 2024, with many of them having no victims or injuries. The database has tracked 112 school shootings in which a victim was injured or killed. Somewhere between ~3/day and ~0.3/day, depending what you count. Close enough.

Depends how you define school shooting as well. Click around on https://www.chds.us/sssc/data-map/ . There are numerous incidents like "Teacher killed himself in classroom after school hours" "Shots fired in the evening, no one injured".

Also, if you go into that data a total of 260 Students were fatally wounded by a firearm from 1970 to 2022 during the school day.

If this is accurate, the odds of being fatally shot as a student during school hours is extremely low, about 1 in 10,000,000 over the span of this data collection. Higher odds than winning a powerball jackpot, but, in context, an extremely rare event.

It wouldn't be a stretch to hypothesize that the administrators forcing students through metal detectors, doing active shooter drills, etc, are doing more net harm than the thing that they are attempting to defend against (as a purely utilitarian calculation).

Re: FTC orders 'gun detection' tech maker Evolv to stop overstating effectiveness

#76

Post by mrandish »

gs17 wrote: post #40
ceejayoz wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably a lot. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADE_651 made tens of millions of dollars at ~$5,000/unit. > The laboratory found that the card contained only a standard radio frequency ID tag of the type used in stores to prevent shoplifting. According to the laboratory's Dr. Markus Kuhn, it was "impossible" for the card to detect anything and it had "absolutely nothing to do with the detection of TNT". The card could…

> Promotional material issued by ATSC claimed that the ADE 651 could detect such item as guns, ammunition, drugs, truffles, human bodies, contraband ivory and bank notes at distances of up to 1 kilometre (0.62 mi), underground, through walls, underwater or even from aircraft at an altitude of up to 5 kilometres (3.1 mi). Could they have at least tried to make their lies believable?

Sounds like they're basically making minimally plausible props for customers more focused on security theater performances than any actual security.

It's scummy and dumb but legally the only real problem I see is lying and collecting money under false pretenses making it fraud. Alternatively, they could have chosen to market these products confidentially as essentially security placebos. There's a market for things like fake security cameras, which arguably have some value for deterrence and reassurance. I suspect many of their current customers would probably have been just as happy buying these products knowing they didn't work.

Re: FTC orders 'gun detection' tech maker Evolv to stop overstating effectiveness

#77

Post by giantg2 »

gruez wrote: post #74
giantg2 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lol I'm trying to help you help yourself. I'm not doing all the work for you. I've seen enough studies to convince me but don't have them handy. I could tell you to go read American Homicide and others to understand the historical trends. You're arguing that they aren't related. Do you have studies proving your side? Just saying they aren't related isn't actual proof. Your argument must also meet a burden of proof as…

[flagged]

Looks like maybe the stats were added later in an edit, as I didn't see them. Comparing stats from separate countries is terrible. This has no control for any of the other possible factors associated. Those aren't studies, but just random stats. I at least offered a study. I didn't offer any "flak", but a starting point for you with a source.

Re: FTC orders 'gun detection' tech maker Evolv to stop overstating effectiveness

#78

Post by simoncion »

ceejayoz wrote: post #43
mattw2121 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

USA Today's reporting is wrong. There are not 971 cases of school shootings. There are about that many "school incidents". Some of those incidents, like the one listed below, are where police responded to a report of someone with a gun and never found the person or gun. https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/3096236 Additionally, some of the 112 that did have a victim didn't even happen on campus. See this linke…

> Additionally, some of the 112 that did have a victim didn't even happen on campus. See this linked incident. Did you look at your link? > Student shot in leg during dispute in parking lot as school was dismissing That's a school shooting. The parking lot is absolutely part of the campus.

> That's a school shooting.

Ah. I now understand why school shooting numbers that people are quoting are so very high as of late.

Shit like Columbine is a school shooting. Shit like that is a shooting that happened to happen at school. If the assailant had used a knife, would you be calling it a "school stabbing"? If you would, then I disagree with that characterization, too.

For lots of folks, the term "school shooting" is strongly associated with the notion that a massacre happened... and not at all with the notion that some folks got into a heated argument, and one of them decided to attack the other with a weapon.

Re: FTC orders 'gun detection' tech maker Evolv to stop overstating effectiveness

#79

Post by jandrese »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #46
gs17 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Promotional material issued by ATSC claimed that the ADE 651 could detect such item as guns, ammunition, drugs, truffles, human bodies, contraband ivory and bank notes at distances of up to 1 kilometre (0.62 mi), underground, through walls, underwater or even from aircraft at an altitude of up to 5 kilometres (3.1 mi). Could they have at least tried to make their lies believable?

I assume it's like Nigerian Prince emails - if they were believable, they might have appealed to buyers who would have done something like purchasing one and testing it , instead of spending millions of dollars on garbage.

This is it exactly. All of the serious people left before they finished the sales pitch. If they had sold one to someone competent that would be grounds for a lawsuit or fraud charges. They had to filter out the customer base to just two kinds of buyers:

1. The people who fail to realize that it's a big scam and will be fat dumb and happy forever.

2. The people who don't want something functional, they want a "probable cause" generator they can pull out when there isn't any evidence to go on.

Re: FTC orders 'gun detection' tech maker Evolv to stop overstating effectiveness

#80

Post by jandrese »

mrandish wrote: post #76
gs17 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Promotional material issued by ATSC claimed that the ADE 651 could detect such item as guns, ammunition, drugs, truffles, human bodies, contraband ivory and bank notes at distances of up to 1 kilometre (0.62 mi), underground, through walls, underwater or even from aircraft at an altitude of up to 5 kilometres (3.1 mi). Could they have at least tried to make their lies believable?

Sounds like they're basically making minimally plausible props for customers more focused on security theater performances than any actual security. It's scummy and dumb but legally the only real problem I see is lying and collecting money under false pretenses making it fraud. Alternatively, they could have chosen to market these products confidentially as essentially security placebos. There's a market for things l…

I don't think it's quite as innocent as security theater. I think these are more for generating probable cause when they need to shake down someone who isn't doing anything illegal.
Post reply on HN