printable version PDF version

Algorithmic 'Collateral Damage' Acceptable to Police, Agencies and Military
by lex Sunday, Jan 20 2019, 9:32pm
international / prose / post

Algorithms are simply unthinking computer programs that re-act to the results their initial searches produce, they react to themselves according to programming, a highly problematic process as algorithms REMAIN insentient, unable to THINK intuitively or ASSESS abstractly, which characteristics have earned humans dominance over other species and to a large extent their environments, whereas algorithms are purely self-re-actionary. Therefore, they are prone to fault as they are programmed by faulty human minds not able to assess future outcomes until they happen and as the faults grow (exponentially) and lead to faulty conclusions, due to self-reliance, the more inaccurate and faulty they become; they cannot say wait or slow down, I need to look/think about that result in order to avoid a larger fault as I go, they continue to MINDLESSLY react at light speed until they inevitably fail.

However, the cost of that failure today is far too large to allow mindless algorithms to determine whether or not to launch nukes or to arrest otherwise innocent persons caught in the search net, as NOTHING, no-one, not even humans are able to predict into the future accurately, yet that is precisely what is expected of mindless, insentient, algorithms today, though clearly they are UNABLE to assess cognitively, intuitively and abstractly, and as we should all be aware, cognition remains a characteristic of thinking sentient beings ONLY.

Nevertheless, police, agencies and the military have become increasingly reliant on these ‘unavoidable’ faulty deductions of which they are extremely familiar; nonetheless, algorithms perform massive tasks at lightning speed, and that is there great advantage over humans though they cannot assess their own inaccuracies, mathematics was, is and continues to be BLIND in other words.

So algorithms sort of work and in benign environments and kept manageable/simple, are of great assistance today, though of course, for instance, if an algorithmic search to determine whether a crime is about to occur and who is likely to commit it fails by incorporating innocents due to broad search criteria, then tough luck -- that is the price incompetent, digitally addicted, and now completely dependent regulatory agencies etc, are willing to pay -- notwithstanding that price is to the huge cost of innocents captured in the ongoing search matrix. And of course if agency, military or police staff are captured for a number of real faulty reasons they simply intervene, ignore or remove themselves from results but that luxury is NOT afforded to the innocent PUBLIC at large, which are more and more considered enemies of the State today.

So incompetent State regulators are always safe, though of course YOU and I are NOT, notwithstanding the groundless excuse -- ‘if you have nothing to hide or have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to FEAR or worry about’ -- BUNK, as newer more complex self-reliant algorithms are KNOWN to capture INNOCENTS, which price agencies, police and the military are willing to pay, as they have done for decades, it’s called, “collateral damage,” or ‘unavoidable’ (rubbish) or ‘acceptable’ (to whom) loss of innocent life.

For example, take remote controlled but human commanded drone attacks. A target is located among a group of innocent people yet the command to launch a missile is given knowing that many innocents would be MURDERED and that is the way the USA and its allies function TODAY. So the huge excuse, ‘... you have nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide ..’ etc, has now be PROVEN to be complete BULLSHIT! We, as innocents, have much to fear from our incompetent, digitally addicted State institutions, FACT.

The following article highlights the degree to which State institutions are consciously willing to go to make their job easier. Now consider that job for a moment. An entire US capital city (Boston) was LOCKED DOWN and para-military police were given broad unconstitutional search powers, neutralizing the rights of ALL citizens, to capture ONE (1) mortally wounded teenager suspected of a terrorist offense, which eventual capture resulted from a CITIZEN tip-off to police. A standard, traditional police approach was more than sufficient to deal with the matter, HOWEVER, our increasing INCOMPETENT, moronic, digitally addicted State apparatuses went into over-drive and over-kill and still failed to capture the suspected offender! And we are expected to trust these institutions and their faulty approaches/devices. Well, I don’t know about YOU, but I’m NOT INSANE:

“Pre-crime and Predictive Systems”. Reliance on Data-driven Surveillance and Algorithms
by True Publica staff report

Police Pre-Crime ‘Minority Report’ Systems Announced

Back in May 2017, I predicted that the police would be doing just that – predicting. I warned that Britain already has a reputation for deploying the most intrusive surveillance systems against its own people in the Western world. I warned that our civil liberties are being systematically dismantled, driven through the false narrative of security.

UK police are investing millions in a new predictive pre-crime system, the National Data Analytics System
The system will access police databases, social services, and even the NHS and schools
Every citizen would risk being monitored, judged and having our lives intruded upon by the Police
Largest British law enforcement system threatens civil liberties handing massive power to the state

I also warned that police departments around the world are partnering with private companies to use public data, personal information and algorithms to predict where illegal actions are most likely to occur and, crucially, who is most likely to commit them.

In an article I wrote warning of all these coming intrusions, there was also a review of a documentary film that focused on pre-crime technology.

“There are predictive police programs in Fresno, Philadelphia, Chicago, and in Kent and London featured in the film. Are these all pilot programs? And the chilling answer from the director of the documentary “Not any longer. Kent’s program is 4 years old.”

From Big Brother Watch comes the official news that UK police are now investing heavily in pre-crime and predictive systems.

UK police are investing millions in a new predictive system, the National Data Analytics System (NDAS), which will analyse vast quantities of data from police databases, social services, and even the NHS and schools in order to predict who is likely to commit crimes, despite serious concerns over profiling, ‘the potential reversal of the presumption of innocence’, and the impact of ‘inaccurate prediction’.

Our Director, Silkie Carlo, said:

“This would be a remarkable change in policing. Every one of us would risk being monitored, judged and having our lives intruded upon.

“Predictive policing conflicts with the presumption of innocence that our justice system is built on and invites authorities to keep tabs on innocent citizens. It’s extraordinary that police have spent millions on a Minority Report-style scheme.”

The Mail on Sunday has covered the story by saying that – “The £48 million National Analytics Solution analyses vast quantities of data from force databases, social services, the NHS and schools to calculate where officers can be most effectively deployed.

But it admits to ‘ethical challenges’ about storing and sharing huge amounts of data on individuals and warns of ‘damaging consequences’ if those risks are not tackled.

The article goes on to say that – “In an effort to address privacy concerns, those behind the trial say it will ‘not create a centralised law enforcement database’ that would allow any officer to search for information on individuals.”

The problem is that the government have already announced a new centralised biometric database and a centralised NHS database alongside other local government and government agency databases.

It was only last October that a new super-database being built for the police represented a “grave” risk to privacy, a leading human rights group said. It is called the law enforcement data service (LEDS).

Liberty claims the government is glossing over concerns that the database, the largest built for British law enforcement, threatens civil liberties. The group fears it gives massive power to the state at the expense of millions of Britons.

The Guardian reported their concerns as well.

“The Home Office has had consultation meetings with groups and experts concerned about privacy ahead of the super-database becoming operational later this year. Liberty said it has quit them in protest, damaging government hopes of neutralising civil liberties concerns.”

Liberty said in one meeting it was told the new database would include information the government and the police have no legal basis to hold but will do so anyway. The government have actually admitted it is breaking the law.

Home office documents have confirmed that the government accepts that large amounts of the data will have nothing to do with crime that will be used on the database and also confirms that other government agencies like tax inspectors, border control and even credit reference agencies will have access.

Liberty boycotted the Home Office’s meetings because it feared they were a sham and that its continued participation would allow the government to claim it is taking civil liberty concerns into account when the opposite was true.

The Guardian also quoted Hannah Couchman, of Liberty, who said:

“Having enormous amounts of our personal information held on this super-database represents a grave threat to our privacy. While the collection of a few pieces of personal data can seem innocuous, combining it with other information can create an intrusive personal profile.

“In the UK, we have a long-held principle of policing by consent. We must be able to trust the police to protect our privacy and our fundamental rights and the Home Office must take seriously the threats this super-database raises.”

A government document said:

“The volume of records involved is substantial; there are around 55.4 million driver records and 54.8 million vehicle records whilst there are approximately 10.7 million criminal records, thus non-criminal records form a substantial part of the PNC [police national computer].”

The police database also holds 12 million images.

Couchman said:

“Even more sinister is the creeping reliance on data-driven surveillance and algorithms the police use to make decisions about us – leading to conclusions which may be inaccurate or biased.”

https://truepublica.org.uk/united-kingdom/police-pre-crime-minority-report-systems-announced/