This 'College Protester' Isn't Real. It's an AI-Powered Undercover Bot for Cops

From a purely law enforcement perspective this blows my mind. Rather than fighting crime, they are generating crime to them fight it. It would be like an SWE intentionally creates a bug and then fixes it in the name of "making the system bug free"

if your kpi was "bugs fixed a month" and your pay was directly set based on that...

I think it's an old joke, right? spend the morning introducing ones and then the afternoon fixing?

If you view the world in black-and-white with "Good" people and "Bad" people, then this makes it easier to ensnare the bad people and won't affect the good ones.

(Not a viewpoint I agree with)

If you imagine a scenario with a known murderer and you have two options:

* Wait until he does a murder, and then try to capture him AND prove it was him

* Seduce him into planning a murder and then arrest him before he carries it out

The second seems desirable, given the "known murderer" part. And once you've setup something to do that, it becomes very easy to feed others into it.

Whatever gets the budget increased in their view. FBI has long been a political operation too, e.g. COINTELPRO.

FBI was created when Teddy Roosevelt used the Secret Service for political reasons and got banned from using them for most stuff. He then created the FBI by moving over all the SS agents he previously had targeting political enemies. It's always been a political operation.

I'm gonna write me a new minivan this afternoon!

https://devhumor.com/media/dilbert-s-team-writes-a-minivan

> The second seems desirable, given the "known murderer" part. And once you've setup something to do that, it becomes very easy to feed others into it.

If you haven't done the first, how do you get to the conclusion they are a "known murderer"?

Like the MS employees that wrote books on proprietary APIs that are otherwise undocumented an undecipherable.

This is the Shirkey principle.

"Institutions will try to preserve the problem to which they are the solution"

Another way to interpret it is via the savior complex or self licking ice cream cone.

This is minority report bullshit.

If you have a known murderer that is free presumably he's already paid for his crimes, no? So luring him into doing it again is extremely anti-ethical to me.

There's no pre-crime... yet. This is where you get profiling and abuse of power everywhere.

IDK how we can say manipulating people into commiting crimes is a good option. That's a crime. If we're going to commit crimes in the name of "preventing crimes" then why not go and arrest/kill the suspect directly? It's simply a different crime, right? But since I have the monopoly on violence, I can do what I want and case closed.

How can this be a good option?

I'd say it's Psycho-Pass more than Minority Report. They're fishing for latent criminals.