3 ms·

Well, based on inspection of content, maybe. But we're not talking about mere words as an expression thought. The simple fact is that within U.S. borders alone

Well, based on inspection of content, maybe. But we're not talking about mere words as an expression thought. The simple fact is that within U.S. borders alone, there are maybe 300 million animals, each weighing in at probably 150 lbs (75kg) or more. They drive cars visible from space. They flip light switches on and off wherever they go. They clock in at work. They clock out. They walk in front of cameras, and there are cameras dotting every place of business, and in homes and outdoors. They plug things in and then unplug them. They power on machinery. They use credit card terminals. They visit ATMs. They buy things in cash, with serial numbered currency, which passes through more optical scanners than you might guess. And almost everyone speaks English, exclusively. And then there are the mobile devices, the uniquely identifiable radio beacons we've, almost all of us, have volunteered to be tagged with. So, VPNs, and proxies, and TOR, as much as they do, are only going to go so far.

Retric 11y ago
Your assuming competence. The surveillance state is built by the lowest bidder and is far far less useful than generally assumed. Just look into false positives on the no fly list. Sure, it's slightly better than random chance, but odds are if you pick an name from that list they are a non threat. (It's far worse than that you can probably pick several names before finding a real issue.)
- Rylinks 11y ago
  The no-fly list can have three nines of accuracy and still have more false positives than actual hits.
  - Retric 11y ago
    Depends on how you define accuracy. Your thinking in terms of the test for the no fly list is X accurate, but that does not mean the no fly list it's self has X accuracy. List A, contains every person on the planet so it's comprehensive, but nobody would call that an accurate no fly list. List B contains one name of an terrorist who has made specific credible and recent threats, it is very accurate.
    - kbenson 11y ago
      I think what's really being alluded to is that regardless of your accuracy (unless it's 0% or 100%), your false-positives will always be subject to your inputs. Put another way, if you have no terrorists going through, then your false positive matches will always be greater than or equal to your positive matches, and in this case, equal only when they are both zero, since there would never be a real positive. In a less extreme case, such as the reality we live in, we have many millions of non-terrorists and a few terrorists, and even with three nines of accuracy, it's likely your false positive matches far outweigh your real positive matches.
volker48 11y ago
75kg is 165 lbs. 150 lbs is 68.2kg

Retric 11y ago

Your assuming competence. The surveillance state is built by the lowest bidder and is far far less useful than generally assumed. Just look into false positives on the no fly list. Sure, it's slightly better than random chance, but odds are if you pick an name from that list they are a non threat. (It's far worse than that you can probably pick several names before finding a real issue.)

Rylinks 11y ago
The no-fly list can have three nines of accuracy and still have more false positives than actual hits.
- Retric 11y ago
  Depends on how you define accuracy. Your thinking in terms of the test for the no fly list is X accurate, but that does not mean the no fly list it's self has X accuracy. List A, contains every person on the planet so it's comprehensive, but nobody would call that an accurate no fly list. List B contains one name of an terrorist who has made specific credible and recent threats, it is very accurate.
  - kbenson 11y ago
    I think what's really being alluded to is that regardless of your accuracy (unless it's 0% or 100%), your false-positives will always be subject to your inputs. Put another way, if you have no terrorists going through, then your false positive matches will always be greater than or equal to your positive matches, and in this case, equal only when they are both zero, since there would never be a real positive. In a less extreme case, such as the reality we live in, we have many millions of non-terrorists and a few terrorists, and even with three nines of accuracy, it's likely your false positive matches far outweigh your real positive matches.

volker48 11y ago

75kg is 165 lbs. 150 lbs is 68.2kg