[rayiner]

I think people should consider the upsides to these technologies in addition to the privacy concerns. Faster police response could lead not just to saved lives, but also to much better suspect identification. Our current methods for identifying suspects using evidence gathered long after a shooting hall are complete trash. Of the wide array of forensic techniques used by police, only DNA is remotely reliable. If a system like this meant the difference between apprehending a fleeing suspect a couple of minutes later and picking up a random ethnic minority days later based on highly flawed identifications, this technology could have major benefits that must be weighed.

[specialist]

Potential upsides. Rarely realized.

I'd rather pay for more cops.

These technologies are just used to put more distance between the corporate profits and accountability to the communities effected.

As a history lesson, dehumanizing intelligence services, preferring satellites and wiretaps to HUMINT, has crippled our capabilities. But it did enrich defense contractors, so it's all good.

[tptacek]

This whole system deployed at scale appears to cost 0.5% of what patrol does. There's no reason cities can't do this and ramp up patrol.

[rayiner]

Paying for more cops has its own problems. In a high-cop low-crime environment, e.g. most suburbs, cops spend most of their time harassing people for minor things or figuring out ways to increase ticket revenue.