14 Mar
2014
14 Mar
'14
4:45 p.m.
Oh boy there are a bunch of things here:
1. "Minus shotspotter, shootings will increase, guaranteed." - To call
this unfounded is being polite. There are significant sentencing
enhancements for crimes that are perpetrated with guns in the state of
California. These people are potentially facing years in prison.
Shooting a gun in these situations is an entirely irrational action.
You're perpetuating the notion that if we just make people more scared
of the police, they'll be less likely to participate in violent crime,
and it's bogus theory.
2. It's not clear to me that shotspotter was particularly good at
discerning between gun shots and other loud noises, or at least that it
was used for other purposes:
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/video/7473317-oakland-police-use-shotspott…
This is typical surveillance mission creep.
3. It might be hard for some of the folks on this list to understand,
but for communities who have been the consistent target of state and
police violence, there is a very reasonable fear of the cops. Whether or
not you think that the police are the appropriate response to a
particular given situation, by choosing to partner with the police in
any way, we are making a specific galvanizing decision. Sudoroom (and
hackers, and new residents to west oakland) will be judged by these
sorts of decisions, and in this case, I think that perception is a real
and important thing to take into consideration.
Of all of the projects that really have the possibility to make Oakland
a more peaceful city, I think it's likely that this is money and time
poorly spent.
On 03/14/2014 04:21 PM, Jake wrote:
So Gabby are you saying that a person who fires a gun
in the city has a
right to privacy that is more important than the community's right to
share that information?
also, if you object to calling the police on people who are shooting
guns in the city, do you have an alternate suggestion or are you
volunteering to do something about it yourself?
for what its worth, i am not suggesting that the data from a system we
build would be sent to only the police, but rather to everyone who wants
to know where and when shots are being fired.
-jake
On Fri, 14 Mar 2014, Gabrielle Silverman wrote:
You realize it would be extremely controversial if Sudo was involved
in building something that called the police on people,
right?
I'm just saying...
Gabby
On Mar 14, 2014 3:49 PM, "Marc Juul" <juul(a)labitat.dk> wrote:
If combined with a lightning detector and an acceleromter it
could pinpoint lightning, earthquakes and large trucks.
Also noise pollution mapping. Also add speakers and you could
use it in reverse to get steer cops around oakland like
a laggy rc car parade.
On Friday, March 14, 2014, Jake <jake(a)spaz.org> wrote:
i can't tell if you replied to the list or just privately
to me.
that sounds like it would be fun, but it would be more
worthwhile if there were a larger goal to be
accomplished, ideally with funding.
it wouldn't be trivial - what is the right way to record
timestamps onto an audio recording from a GPS?
perhaps use one of the two audio channels as a SMPTE
timing track? that's kinda ridiculous but there's
probably lots of code already written...
On Fri, 14 Mar 2014, Hol Gaskill wrote:
I'd be down to make a few time of flight receivers
with you.
on Mar 14, 2014, Jake <jake(a)spaz.org> wrote:
what do people think of the shotspotter system
installed in oakland?
it's a network of microphones on telephone
poles, each with a GPS (for
a precise clock) and a network connection.
When a gunshot-like sound is
detected, they send the sound and its precise
timing to a central server
that determines the location of the shot, and
tells the police to go
there.
some people have expressed concern that the
microphones are used to spy on
people, but it would be impossible to hear a
conversation from the top of
a telephone pole that wasnt already loud
enough to be heard inside nearby
houses (or the phone in your pocket).
apparently the city pays $264,000 per year to
keep shotspotter going. I
think sudoroom people could do it for much
less if they thought it was a
useful thing. They would be discontinuing it
to save money, or perhaps to
avoid having to send cops to do actual work
once in a while...
i mean.. sending police toward the gunfire?
sounds like a good idea...
http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Oakland-cops-aim-to-scrap-gunfire-detec…
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss