Spy plane passes 15-14
- 285
Actually insane. I'm surprised there are even 5 votes for it.quincunx wrote:Spy plane passes 15-14
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
Ayes: Middlebrook, Bosley, Evans, Hubbard, Vollmer, Grass, Howard, Roddy, Davis, Collins-Muhammad, J. Boyd, Vaccaro, Reed, Oldenburg and P. Boyd.
Nays: Ingrassia, Coatar, Rice, Guenther, Martin, Murphy, Green, Todd, Spencer, Narayan, Cohn, Clark-Hubbard, Navarro, Tyus.
Nays: Ingrassia, Coatar, Rice, Guenther, Martin, Murphy, Green, Todd, Spencer, Narayan, Cohn, Clark-Hubbard, Navarro, Tyus.
You must be new here. Nothing surprises me with the BOA.brianadler6545 wrote: ↑Jan 22, 2021Actually insane. I'm surprised there are even 5 votes for it.quincunx wrote:Spy plane passes 15-14
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
- 285
Not new, but still surprised. Even for our nuts Board this is just such a weird idea.jshank83 wrote:You must be new here. Nothing surprises me with the BOA.brianadler6545 wrote: ↑Jan 22, 2021Actually insane. I'm surprised there are even 5 votes for it.quincunx wrote:Spy plane passes 15-14
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
Wow.
Wait, so as voters, can we overturn their stupid sh*t? I mean they overturn our will, ya know? At least my alder was a nay. This is just insanity. Leadership is out of ideas.
Wait, so as voters, can we overturn their stupid sh*t? I mean they overturn our will, ya know? At least my alder was a nay. This is just insanity. Leadership is out of ideas.
- 3,762
sorry but i don't get the opposition to the "spy plane" that can't resolve enough detail to be used for spying, especially if it's even partially funded by a donar. sure seems like the opposition is all very "in principle" and based on hypothetical worst-case scenarios. haven't heard a single solid refutation other than "oh, it might maybe possibly be used in this nefarious way." (i don't have a problem with them selling information to insurance companies. if you're responsible for harm then you need to be held accountable.) meanwhile, a few hundred people get murdered every year in the city and thousands shot, and that doesn't include the road carnage (hit-and-runs, destruction of property and infrastructure, etc.) bring on the surveillance until a better solution is found. and i certainly hope that nobody who advocates for red light cameras or other modes of localized surveillance is simultaneously decrying this, because that would be hypocritical. maybe the aldermen who supported it (mostly north-side) are tired of murders and destruction going unsolved in their wards.
^ I pretty much feel the same way. I totally understand the concerns that others are voicing...but how do those concerns outweigh the reality on our streets right now?
- 3,762
^ not to mention that this would be a 3-year trial, not the creation of a permanent surveillance state.
Maybe someone could explain exactly what is being proposed?
Considering the general lawlessness that's endemic to the region (and indeed, the whole damn country), I'm inclined to favor any kind of increased surveillance.
Considering the general lawlessness that's endemic to the region (and indeed, the whole damn country), I'm inclined to favor any kind of increased surveillance.
- 9,674
The way this plane was suppose to work is with concert with the cities existing ground level camera system bc the plane itself cannot tell if it’s a person or a dog or anything. It’s just a dot. But the bill was amendment to not allow the use of city camera system with the plane. So now the plane is pretty much useless.
- 3,762
^ it could still work in concert with eyewitness accounts and non-city cameras, though. pretty sure there have been implementations in other cites that didn't have access to such a network. and, for example, if you have a recent crime scene you can look back at the aerial footage to see who came and went—especially vehicles. i think it's still worth trying despite their attempt to sabotage it.
- 9,674
^ the thing is this hasn’t been done in any other city, there is an ongoing pilot in Baltimore but that’s about it.
STL amended bill also cut the pilot time from 3 years to 18 months
No city money can be spent (it costs about $5m a year). The foundation that said it was going to pay for it said now it wants the city or other sources to pony up. City is out and no other source has been found
STL amended bill also cut the pilot time from 3 years to 18 months
No city money can be spent (it costs about $5m a year). The foundation that said it was going to pay for it said now it wants the city or other sources to pony up. City is out and no other source has been found
How many detectives could be hired for $5M? How many murders might they solve?
- 3,762
no, it's been used in Dayton, OH and Juarez, Mexico as well.dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑Jan 24, 2021^ the thing is this hasn’t been done in any other city, there is an ongoing pilot in Baltimore but that’s about it.
STL amended bill also cut the pilot time from 3 years to 18 months
No city money can be spent (it costs about $5m a year). The foundation that said it was going to pay for it said now it wants the city or other sources to pony up. City is out and no other source has been found
https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/radiolab/articles/eye-sky
https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/radiolab/articles/update-eye-sky
i mean, if somebody comes and says "we're going to give you $5 million to hire detectives" then great. but that's not what happened. and even with the foundation wanting the region to chip in a couple million, i fail to see how it's not worth it to try a program that has been effective elsewhere. but, my god, better to just talk and do studies incessantly and dream up big brother doomsday scenarios than actually try something new. it's the STL way. meanwhile, giving the Blues $120 million to build luxury box seats totes passes the BOA.quincunx wrote: ↑Jan 24, 2021How many detectives could be hired for $5M? How many murders might they solve?
- 3,762
^ i don't know. here's the Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_Ventures_LLC. i'm getting an error when i try to access the .org.
here's a philanthropy news digest article. seems like they fund lots of different stuff.
https://philanthropynewsdigest.org/news/laura-and-john-arnold-foundation-to-restructure-as-llc
here's a recent STLToday article:
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/philanthropists-won-t-fund-st-louis-aerial-surveillance-unless-public-money-also-is-committed/article_15ffe170-179a-525a-afb8-6cc9850e0be4.html
here's a philanthropy news digest article. seems like they fund lots of different stuff.
https://philanthropynewsdigest.org/news/laura-and-john-arnold-foundation-to-restructure-as-llc
here's a recent STLToday article:
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/philanthropists-won-t-fund-st-louis-aerial-surveillance-unless-public-money-also-is-committed/article_15ffe170-179a-525a-afb8-6cc9850e0be4.html
The St. Louis camera proposal calls for flights to occur up to 18 hours a day, using three planes. The aircraft would use wide-angle cameras to capture images of up to 32 square miles a second.
Once the company is notified through a 911 call or a shots-fired notification, it can zoom in to the site of a reported crime, then track people or vehicles traveling from the scene to other locations.
McNutt says the cameras can only track pixels and not identify individuals and would be used in conjunction with existing street-level cameras used by city police in investigations.
.
.
.
John Arnold is a former energy hedge fund manager who retired as a billionaire in 2012 at age 38. Laura Arnold is a lawyer and former oil company executive.
The Arnolds have bankrolled causes across the political spectrum, from conservative-leaning efforts to expand school-choice programs and overhaul public pensions to liberal-oriented initiatives to tax soft drinks and carbon emissions.
In 2018, they donated to the Clean Missouri initiative approved by voters statewide that changed how state legislative district boundaries are redrawn every decade. Key parts were undone in a revised plan pushed by state Republicans that was passed in November.
- 443
Well, if the dot races down Wash Ave, across the Eads bridge and disappears somewhere in Washington Park, I think we can be sure it’s not a freaking dogdbInSouthCity wrote: ↑Jan 23, 2021The way this plane was suppose to work is with concert with the cities existing ground level camera system bc the plane itself cannot tell if it’s a person or a dog or anything. It’s just a dot. But the bill was amendment to not allow the use of city camera system with the plane. So now the plane is pretty much useless.
- 9,674
And a judge is going to look at that and say what in court?BellaVilla wrote: ↑Jan 25, 2021Well, if the dot races down Wash Ave, across the Eads bridge and disappears somewhere in Washington Park, I think we can be sure it’s not a freaking dogdbInSouthCity wrote: ↑Jan 23, 2021The way this plane was suppose to work is with concert with the cities existing ground level camera system bc the plane itself cannot tell if it’s a person or a dog or anything. It’s just a dot. But the bill was amendment to not allow the use of city camera system with the plane. So now the plane is pretty much useless.
- 3,762
^ this is all oversimplification. here's a CNN story with video showing the technology in use. i forgot that it's also been used in Compton and Philadelphia.
and there are a bunch of demonstration videos on the company's website: https://www.pss-1.com/videos
and various other press: https://www.pss-1.com/press
and there are a bunch of demonstration videos on the company's website: https://www.pss-1.com/videos
and various other press: https://www.pss-1.com/press
Whether or not it is allowed to be entered into evidence for the jury to consider.dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑Jan 25, 2021And a judge is going to look at that and say what in court?BellaVilla wrote: ↑Jan 25, 2021Well, if the dot races down Wash Ave, across the Eads bridge and disappears somewhere in Washington Park, I think we can be sure it’s not a freaking dogdbInSouthCity wrote: ↑Jan 23, 2021The way this plane was suppose to work is with concert with the cities existing ground level camera system bc the plane itself cannot tell if it’s a person or a dog or anything. It’s just a dot. But the bill was amendment to not allow the use of city camera system with the plane. So now the plane is pretty much useless.
- 1,308
Honestly don't really have a problem with this. Hell, if I had my own city I'd probably set my police department up with a fleet of airships outfitted with a bunch of sensors and cameras as well as carry and be able to deploy quick response tactical teams. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- 9,674
the example above isnt good since the plane would have to stop tracking at the City border with Illinois, same goes with the border with St.Louis Countywabash wrote: ↑Jan 25, 2021Whether or not it is allowed to be entered into evidence for the jury to consider.
Thisurban_dilettante wrote: ↑Jan 24, 2021i mean, if somebody comes and says "we're going to give you $5 million to hire detectives" then great. but that's not what happened. and even with the foundation wanting the region to chip in a couple million, i fail to see how it's not worth it to try a program that has been effective elsewhere. but, my god, better to just talk and do studies incessantly and dream up big brother doomsday scenarios than actually try something new. it's the STL way. meanwhile, giving the Blues $120 million to build luxury box seats totes passes the BOA.quincunx wrote: ↑Jan 24, 2021How many detectives could be hired for $5M? How many murders might they solve?