←back to thread

234 points paulpauper | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
deadbabe ◴[] No.44380208[source]
There are many reasons why crime is in decline, but ultimately its economic.

Crime used to pay. Your expected return on a crime was pretty good for the risk involved. Nowadays though, because of technology, risk has increased while the returns have also decreased. Barriers to entry for crimes worth committing are now way higher. Robbing a gas station decades ago could yield a nice chunk of cash that could probably pay bills for a month. But now with less people using cash and cost of living increasing, there’s no point. Most registers have pitiful amount of cash. And mugging strangers on the street is likely even worse. No one carries wads of cash anymore.

The hot industry to be in is ransomware. The sums are vast and the risk is low if you do it right. But it’s very white collar, it requires skills that your typical low level criminal won’t have.

Overall, it means there’s a lot of crimes that are done not for any financial reason, just for personal satisfaction.

replies(2): >>44380368 #>>44384710 #
permo-w ◴[] No.44380368[source]
not forgetting that CCTV is absolutely ubiquitous and high def, where previously it was reasonably rare and low quality
replies(2): >>44381036 #>>44383897 #
3eb7988a1663 ◴[] No.44383897[source]
I am doubtful widespread recordings are making much of a change. Unless you are Luigi Mangione, are police actually following video footage trying to tie up a crime? Even with a city wide alert, he almost escaped.

It has been a common refrain that someone has an AirTag or other electronic surveillance they used to identify a thief, for which the police do nothing.

replies(1): >>44385448 #
1. qingcharles ◴[] No.44385448[source]
They actually do use the footage in a lot of cases. Bigger cities often have staff dedicated to just trying to extract raw footage from Temu-quality CCTV recording devices that most places own.