[assimpleaspossi]

You are absolutely correct but you won't get anywhere here.

I have relatives who are cops and lawyers and city councilmen. No cop is sitting in a back room somewhere tracking all the cars on every street trying to do, uh, whatever it is people here are claiming they are going to do to them.

[kannanvijayan]

An obsessive stalker police officer that's angry at their ex girlfriend moving on and finding a new partner will probably not be interested in EVERY car, just the one she drives and the one her new boyfriend drives.

I won't speculate as to what your law enforcement family members may or may not be capable of when it comes to this technology, but I will speculate on what they will likely do if they found out about an obsessive stalker police officer that's watching their ex-girlfriend and her new partner using this tech: they will likely assist in hiding it so as to ensure that the optics of the justice system are not marred.

The reason I suspect they will behave in this way is not because they're bad people - but because they're likely normal people who are subject to normal influences and incentives. There will be no personal benefit, and significant personal risk associated with whistleblowing on this hypothetical officer, and so they will find rationalizations for why they shouldn't. Why it's fine to let this "one bad apple" go for the greater good of the optics of the justice system.

So it goes.

[sublinear]

I also wonder what makes people think the cops are going to trust AI any more than anyone else. A mistake on bad information is even more dangerous for them and often makes national news.

[abalashov]

Judging by the number of news stories in which they have done just that, they will happily trust AI. A certain relatively small percentage will generate national news and that kind of blowback, but by and large, they have the guns, the SWAT teams, and the local prosecutors, and the consequences are minimal.

[sublinear]

How do you know what a "relative small percentage" is if there are alleged unreported incidents? What would even allow anything to go unreported vs just ignored (because nobody cares)? Why would having a large capability to respond with force be relevant to whether the cops are going to listen to the slop machine?

I'm trying to understand what makes you so sure of your opinion. Unless you're living in a third-world country, from the perspective of anyone who has barely even known a cop, this sounds wildly out of touch. There already is a ton scrutiny on everything they do. Picking apart the long tail of debatable outcomes you don't like is not evidence of corruption. Corruption would be no debate at all.

[deaux]

Except for of course, the more than a dozen known cases where cops have been using Flock to stalk people [0]. Realistically, it's very likely that most of these cases do not become known.

[0] https://www.404media.co/cops-keep-getting-arrested-for-using...