←back to thread

235 points colinprince | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
lawlessone ◴[] No.43717502[source]
>I-powered bots across social media and the internet to talk to people they suspect are anything from violent sex criminals all the way to vaguely defined “protestors” with the hopes of generating evidence that can be used against them.

so what if the bot radicalizes them?

replies(5): >>43717582 #>>43717589 #>>43717646 #>>43717697 #>>43717868 #
sc68cal ◴[] No.43717646[source]
The FBI already grooms young men and provides fake explosives for them to do terror attacks, so they can arrest them. They start by talking to them online so all this is doing is making the process cheaper and larger scale
replies(1): >>43717853 #
_fat_santa ◴[] No.43717853[source]
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"
replies(6): >>43717914 #>>43718071 #>>43718281 #>>43718308 #>>43719248 #>>43719989 #
bombcar ◴[] No.43718281{3}[source]
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.

replies(2): >>43718858 #>>43720060 #
1. tristor ◴[] No.43718858{4}[source]
> 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"?