Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 19 submissions in the queue.
posted by LaminatorX on Wednesday February 26 2014, @11:00PM   Printer-friendly
from the studies-show-poverty-causes-cancer dept.

Angry Jesus writes:

"The Chicago Police Department is mis-applying epidemiological science (the study of entire populations) to target individuals in a real-life version of Minority Report. They have decided that it is a good idea to put people on a secret list based on a Big Data analysis of their social networks. But don't worry, it isn't racist or abusive because, Science!"

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Angry Jesus on Thursday February 27 2014, @12:42AM

    by Angry Jesus (182) on Thursday February 27 2014, @12:42AM (#7676)

    >On the contrary, the police DO exist solely for the 1%.

    I'm median income. My house was broken into a couple of years ago. Guess what? The cops caught the burglar and he went to jail and insurance paid for the monetary damage. Guess what happens when a 1%er's house is burglarized? Same thing.

    While I don't believe the premise that they exist solely for the %1, I think your counter-example is terrible. Who owns the insurance company? Mostly 1%'ers.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by edIII on Thursday February 27 2014, @01:17AM

    by edIII (791) on Thursday February 27 2014, @01:17AM (#7698)

    I realize that "solely" smacks of hyperbole, and perhaps, histrionics.

    However, the last few decades have shown the emergence of very troubling laws and regulations that are, in fact, solely designed to criminalize behavior for no other reason than that they impact revenue for very specific people and industries.

    That's why I say police are for the 1% now. Their actions have been directed by monied interests to the extent now that both laws & regulations and the determination if you are a criminal, rests with large monied interests.

    I don't know how else to say it. It is the 1%. It is the primary shareholders of various industries and business sectors influencing whether or not we can be picked up by the police at all.

    I know what Big Data *IS*. There is somebody directing it, and I'm willing to bet the rest of the donuts I will get in this life, that they don't have the interests of the 99% at heart. Nope. Not at all.

    --
    Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
  • (Score: 2) by mcgrew on Thursday February 27 2014, @02:42PM

    by mcgrew (701) <publish@mcgrewbooks.com> on Thursday February 27 2014, @02:42PM (#7964) Homepage Journal

    While I don't believe the premise that they exist solely for the %1, I think your counter-example is terrible. Who owns the insurance company? Mostly 1%'ers.

    Good point, here's another example. When I was a long haired college student living on campus, one night in town as I was getting into my car I was strongarmed by a dozen men, who stole the big speakers I'd built. No insurance; only liability on the car and no homeowner's in my apartment. Yet they showed me some pictures, I identified one of the robbers, all were caught and I got my speakers back.

    How did that help the 1%? Other than by getting thieves off the street, which helps us all?

    --
    mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
    • (Score: 2) by Angry Jesus on Thursday February 27 2014, @03:33PM

      by Angry Jesus (182) on Thursday February 27 2014, @03:33PM (#8003)

      How did that help the 1%? Other than by getting thieves off the street, which helps us all?

      If the police were to do an evaluation of each and every situation to decide if acting helped out anybody who wasn't rich then refused to act they would have no public support and many of the rank and file would quit. The issue edIII is talking about is policy. He's saying that policies are set so as to primarily benefit the rich, its management making these decisions not the people on the ground. Lots of cops on the beat want to do the right thing, and will do the right thing given the chance, the question is how to set up the situation such that most of the time the right thing is good for the rich.