2 ms·
> Those patterns would be easily detected in the dataset You left off the implied "unless the intent of those systems is to create the appearance of occupancy"
by Godel_unicode 10y ago
> Those patterns would be easily detected in the dataset
You left off the implied "unless the intent of those systems is to create the appearance of occupancy". You know that a pattern associated with waking up happened. You don't know if I'm home or not. Now add in the case which happens to me sometimes where my morning ritual automation kicks in because my phone is home (but I'm not).
- fixermark 10y agoIf I recall correctly, this argument has been successfully applied, from a legal standpoint, in the context of traffic from IP addresses on shared resources not mapping to individual user behavior (and, relatedly, in the context of a vehicle being photographed in violation of the law not proving that the vehicle's owner was driving the vehicle at the time the law was violated). I imagine it'd be a harder argument to make, before a jury in a criminal trial, that the dataset showed the house was occupied because the occupant had rigged beforehand an elaborate system of intentional resource wastage to fake occupancy in the way that would fuzz a police investigation, as opposed to the much simpler explanation "the suspect was home." Burden of proof might be high.