5 ms·

> Encrypted communications have enabled criminal gangs to operate and co-operate more freely than ever before, and establish global supply chains. Is this the

> Encrypted communications have enabled criminal gangs to operate and co-operate more freely than ever before, and establish global supply chains. Is this the payload message of the article? Many cars have GPS installed. Everybody has a smartphone, and even if it's offline, it's possible to see who went offline when the car was stolen. Customs offices have never ending databases of the containers that passed them. How is it impossible to track down a thief? I guess, because there's just too much data to automatically track many cases. How on Earth will banning cryptograhpy and adding more data to the sea, help track the thieves?

throwup238 1y ago
From the article: > Fourth, police forces largely remain in the dust. NaVCIS has enjoyed some success, intercepting 550 cars in the past year. But that is a small fraction of what gets through. Mr Gibson is one of three officers on the whole south coast. Britain’s police have yet to catch any high-ups in the business. European forces do not even have dedicated investigation teams. Across the rich world, police resources tend to be directed towards “higher harm” offences. There's just very few people working on it because it's not a priority.
- potato3732842 1y ago
  The state only cares about thieves insofar as the optics of their activity is bad for the state, illicit trade is lost revenue and every score criminals settle among themselves challenges the state's monopoly on violent dispute resolution, it doesn't really care about the peasants' property, it just looks like it cares a little when the interests align.
  - margalabargala 1y ago
    That's grossly untrue in democracies. The people who vote in democracies care. And therefore, the state also cares. You expect them to let pass by such a great opportunity to performatively score points with voters by being "tough on crime"?
    - bsder 1y ago
      The police can hunt down car thieves which they don't get much money from. Or police can hunt down low-level marijuana offenders which they can extract money from over and over and over. Which one do you think is going to get voted for?
      - scythe 1y ago
        I think a prototypical amoral economist would "solve" the problem by having people pay the cops some kind of percentage fee if they get their car back. Or at least I think that would work, but it bothers me.
        gruez 1y ago
        Or just change the incentive structure. Make the fines go to the general government operating fund, not directly to the police department. Assess performance based on solving the crimes you want solved, rather than pure # of offenses. It's not hard to come up with alternatives.
        mcphage 1y ago
        You’re suggesting we pay cops to steal cars and then recover them?
  - bigiain 1y ago
    > their activity is bad for the state, illicit trade is lost revenue I wonder. With a sufficiently sociopathic point of view, every high end car theft almost certainly represents a subsequent insurance claim and new car purchase. And every insurance claim results in upward pressure on insurance prices. If you just look at car theft and export through a "economic impact to the state" lens, there are without doubt a lot of industry and political people who see it as being new revenue and _good_ for the state.
    - potato3732842 1y ago
      Your logic reminds me of when we see people on HN saying that it's "good" when old cars get totaled out over petty BS or have their operating costs artificially raised by the state because they statistically get replaced with safer, cleaner cars but at the end of the day the population has to bear those costs at some point. At the end of the day people are basically forced to surplus in a particular way. Viewed through a state lens of course the state wants this invested in highly regulated, fairly complex and integrated areas of the economy. You don't even need to be a sociopath. You just need to be a single minded idiot who's rounding every hard to measure harm to zero in dishonest pursuit of your goal. You see these thought patterns and flimsy justifications on all sorts of issues once you start looking.
    - Ekaros 1y ago
      If you really think it in non-standard ways. It does contribute to GDP. New cars sold, insurance claims. And I suppose on average the criminals are more likely to spend their gains in economy in general.
      - potato3732842 1y ago
        It contributes to GDP in the same way that someone fucking a whore instead of their wife does. Yeah there's a transaction there, but should there be? And at what cost? Ditto for the divorce. This kind of stuff is textbook broken windows fallacy.
        1y ago
- rekabis 1y ago
  > There's just very few people working on it because it's not a priority. Right? The existence of organized crime is a policy choice by politicians. If they truly wanted to do something about it, the policies would change - both in terms of funding/staffing, as well as the incentivizing of officers to pursue leads.
axus 1y ago
Also in the article, they mention at the time of theft cell phones are wrapped in foil, and GPS jammers are installed on the car.
- culebron21 1y ago
  but but... wasn't the UK been stuffed with survelliance cameras?
- ahmeneeroe-v2 1y ago
  a GPS jammer should be trivially easy to track. plus that's a crime on its own so police could just investigate those without needing a stolen car to find.
Llamamoe 1y ago
> Is this the payload message of the article? This makes it sound like a hit piece to sell mass surveillance laws like ChatControl. Even if encryption was illegal and everything scanned 24/7, all it takes is speaking in code to be uncatchable. It's what criminals have done for all of history. This is just disgusting.
- gruez 1y ago
  >This makes it sound like a hit piece to sell mass surveillance laws like ChatControl Encrypted chat apps get mentioned in literally one sentence out of a ~1900 word article, and somehow that's "a hit piece to sell mass surveillance laws"? Get a grip.
  - Llamamoe 1y ago
    It's not a sentence you say by accident, nor is it a sentence that makes sense to say unless you have an agenda to push.
lawlessone 1y ago
>How is it impossible to track down a thief? It's not , but i've seen plenty of stories of people, in many countries, reporting that they know where their stolen laptop, bike etc is and the police being kinda useless.
- worthless-trash 1y ago
  Friend of a friend had almost all his gear arolen, found the theives and burned thr house down when the police couldn't get his gear back. I understand the frustration.
bsder 1y ago
> How is it impossible to track down a thief? It's not. If an expensive supercar is stolen, the police forces somehow find it really quickly. The problem is that police forces are there to protect the property of the aristocracy and oppress the plebeians. Any "protection" for the plebeians is purely incidental and accidental.
- scheme271 1y ago
  That expensive supercar is a lot more noticeable than a toyota corolla. People are also more likely to remember seeing a lime green lambo than a silver corolla.
tsukikage 1y ago
> > Encrypted communications have enabled... > Is this the payload message of the article? No, this is: > > Britain’s police solve only 5% of crimes Britain's current government is heavily pro-censorship and pro-surveillance, and encourage any and all rhetoric that might help them to this end. However, when the reality on the ground is that I can literally locate a stolen object myself and pass to the police evidence both of the object being mine and of its current location, and they simply cannot be bothered to do anything at all with that information... it is clear that the existence of encryption is not relevant to the problem. cf. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crl873p51zro https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crl873p51zro

throwup238 1y ago

From the article: > Fourth, police forces largely remain in the dust. NaVCIS has enjoyed some success, intercepting 550 cars in the past year. But that is a small fraction of what gets through. Mr Gibson is one of three officers on the whole south coast. Britain’s police have yet to catch any high-ups in the business. European forces do not even have dedicated investigation teams. Across the rich world, police resources tend to be directed towards “higher harm” offences. There's just very few people working on it because it's not a priority.

potato3732842 1y ago
The state only cares about thieves insofar as the optics of their activity is bad for the state, illicit trade is lost revenue and every score criminals settle among themselves challenges the state's monopoly on violent dispute resolution, it doesn't really care about the peasants' property, it just looks like it cares a little when the interests align.
- margalabargala 1y ago
  That's grossly untrue in democracies. The people who vote in democracies care. And therefore, the state also cares. You expect them to let pass by such a great opportunity to performatively score points with voters by being "tough on crime"?
  - bsder 1y ago
    The police can hunt down car thieves which they don't get much money from. Or police can hunt down low-level marijuana offenders which they can extract money from over and over and over. Which one do you think is going to get voted for?
    - scythe 1y ago
      I think a prototypical amoral economist would "solve" the problem by having people pay the cops some kind of percentage fee if they get their car back. Or at least I think that would work, but it bothers me.
      - gruez 1y ago
        Or just change the incentive structure. Make the fines go to the general government operating fund, not directly to the police department. Assess performance based on solving the crimes you want solved, rather than pure # of offenses. It's not hard to come up with alternatives.
      - mcphage 1y ago
        You’re suggesting we pay cops to steal cars and then recover them?
- bigiain 1y ago
  > their activity is bad for the state, illicit trade is lost revenue I wonder. With a sufficiently sociopathic point of view, every high end car theft almost certainly represents a subsequent insurance claim and new car purchase. And every insurance claim results in upward pressure on insurance prices. If you just look at car theft and export through a "economic impact to the state" lens, there are without doubt a lot of industry and political people who see it as being new revenue and _good_ for the state.
  - potato3732842 1y ago
    Your logic reminds me of when we see people on HN saying that it's "good" when old cars get totaled out over petty BS or have their operating costs artificially raised by the state because they statistically get replaced with safer, cleaner cars but at the end of the day the population has to bear those costs at some point. At the end of the day people are basically forced to surplus in a particular way. Viewed through a state lens of course the state wants this invested in highly regulated, fairly complex and integrated areas of the economy. You don't even need to be a sociopath. You just need to be a single minded idiot who's rounding every hard to measure harm to zero in dishonest pursuit of your goal. You see these thought patterns and flimsy justifications on all sorts of issues once you start looking.
  - Ekaros 1y ago
    If you really think it in non-standard ways. It does contribute to GDP. New cars sold, insurance claims. And I suppose on average the criminals are more likely to spend their gains in economy in general.
    - potato3732842 1y ago
      It contributes to GDP in the same way that someone fucking a whore instead of their wife does. Yeah there's a transaction there, but should there be? And at what cost? Ditto for the divorce. This kind of stuff is textbook broken windows fallacy.
      - 1y ago
rekabis 1y ago
> There's just very few people working on it because it's not a priority. Right? The existence of organized crime is a policy choice by politicians. If they truly wanted to do something about it, the policies would change - both in terms of funding/staffing, as well as the incentivizing of officers to pursue leads.

axus 1y ago

Also in the article, they mention at the time of theft cell phones are wrapped in foil, and GPS jammers are installed on the car.

culebron21 1y ago
but but... wasn't the UK been stuffed with survelliance cameras?
ahmeneeroe-v2 1y ago
a GPS jammer should be trivially easy to track. plus that's a crime on its own so police could just investigate those without needing a stolen car to find.

Llamamoe 1y ago

> Is this the payload message of the article? This makes it sound like a hit piece to sell mass surveillance laws like ChatControl. Even if encryption was illegal and everything scanned 24/7, all it takes is speaking in code to be uncatchable. It's what criminals have done for all of history. This is just disgusting.

gruez 1y ago
>This makes it sound like a hit piece to sell mass surveillance laws like ChatControl Encrypted chat apps get mentioned in literally one sentence out of a ~1900 word article, and somehow that's "a hit piece to sell mass surveillance laws"? Get a grip.
- Llamamoe 1y ago
  It's not a sentence you say by accident, nor is it a sentence that makes sense to say unless you have an agenda to push.

lawlessone 1y ago

>How is it impossible to track down a thief? It's not , but i've seen plenty of stories of people, in many countries, reporting that they know where their stolen laptop, bike etc is and the police being kinda useless.

worthless-trash 1y ago
Friend of a friend had almost all his gear arolen, found the theives and burned thr house down when the police couldn't get his gear back. I understand the frustration.

bsder 1y ago

> How is it impossible to track down a thief? It's not. If an expensive supercar is stolen, the police forces somehow find it really quickly. The problem is that police forces are there to protect the property of the aristocracy and oppress the plebeians. Any "protection" for the plebeians is purely incidental and accidental.

scheme271 1y ago
That expensive supercar is a lot more noticeable than a toyota corolla. People are also more likely to remember seeing a lime green lambo than a silver corolla.

tsukikage 1y ago

> > Encrypted communications have enabled... > Is this the payload message of the article? No, this is: > > Britain’s police solve only 5% of crimes Britain's current government is heavily pro-censorship and pro-surveillance, and encourage any and all rhetoric that might help them to this end. However, when the reality on the ground is that I can literally locate a stolen object myself and pass to the police evidence both of the object being mine and of its current location, and they simply cannot be bothered to do anything at all with that information... it is clear that the existence of encryption is not relevant to the problem. cf. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crl873p51zro https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crl873p51zro