Homeland Security Department Testing "Pre-Crime" Detector 580
holy_calamity writes "New Scientist reports that the Department of Homeland Security recently tested something called Future Attribute Screening Technologies (FAST) — a battery of sensors that determine whether someone is a security threat from a distance. Sensors look at facial expressions, body heat and can measure pulse and breathing rate from a distance. In trials using 140 volunteers those told to act suspicious were detected with 'about 78% accuracy on mal-intent detection, and 80% on deception,' says a DHS spokesman."
Designing the ad (Score:1, Funny)
Facial experessions? (Score:4, Funny)
Minority Report (Score:2, Funny)
Government screws private sector again. (Score:5, Funny)
Why do I even bother?
Re:Additional Locations (Score:5, Funny)
That's brilliant! (Score:5, Funny)
All you need to do now is post signs reminding any potential evil-doers to "act suspicious" and the system will work perfectly.
I'm all for it! (Score:3, Funny)
If it helps nailing Tom Cruise
Re:sensors... (Score:3, Funny)
It can't be sued for being racist...
Re:Designing the ad (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Not even close (Score:4, Funny)
In other words, 22% of the time it is wrong. Saying it's right 78% of the time is pure and simple market speak.
The interesting thing about this is if people started to intrinsically act suspicious, the numbers become fudged and mostly meaningless. One way this could be accomplished is by standing around handing out complimentary eye patches, telling people it is act like a pirate day.
Re:sensors... (Score:3, Funny)
Sheesh! I've never seen a bunch of geeks so opposed to developing an immature technology before! Perhaps a toning down of the pessimism would be in order, and perhaps we may see some improvements in our understanding of human behaviour, and the programs built to understand it.
Re:sensors... (Score:1, Funny)
When shown a picture of Dick Cheney, the detector started spinning in circles, waving its cables haplessly while emitting blasts of "WARNING! WARNING! DANGER WILL ROBINSON! DANGER!!!" and reduced itself to a molten clump of plastic and fused metal.
Re:Err (Score:3, Funny)
Does this sound idiotic to anyone else?
Yes indeed it does.
Testing on my new device starts tomorrow. It has a remarkable 98% accuracy in identifying people told to dress completely in purple and sing "I Love You, You Love Me". Even at a distance. As long as the terrorists play along (and who wouldn't?) we'll win this war on terror any time soon. And even if they don't, think of all the Barney impersonators we'll get off the streets. It's an everybody-wins scenario.
Re:My first thought, too... (Score:4, Funny)
All we've got is a device which can spot normal people trying to be visibly "suspicious".
Doc Brown: Get yourself some fifties clothes.
Marty McFly: Check, Doc.
Doc Brown: Something inconspicuous!
Re:Suspcious People? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:"Told to act suspicious"? (Score:3, Funny)
Wouldn't "suspicious" also be highly subjective? Many times that's more reflective on the prejudices of the observer. So let's take a programmer who's been up all night trying to solve a problem. He's disheveled, unshaven, and probably unkempt. He's deep in thought and in his own world. He starts talking to himself about the problem. Is he suspicious?
Is he sitting on a park bench? Snot running down his nose, greasy fingers smearing shabby clothes?
Re:Suspcious People? (Score:3, Funny)
What about people wearing Baclava or some other sort of head covering?
Well let's be completely honest here, anybody wearing a delicious Greek pastry [wikipedia.org] on their head while trying to fly under the radar has already blown it in a big way.
As far as other head coverings [hatsofmeat.com] go, I still think you want to stick with the ones that aren't food-related ... you know, the idea is to blend in.
Re:sensors... (Score:5, Funny)
because they're usually bug-eyed, sweating, twitching, and frequently high
Based on that alone they would be catching a lot of nerds out on the first date too.
Re:sensors... (Score:5, Funny)
Fair warning, you should go trademark the phrase "magical terrorist detector" before I do.
Re:sensors... (Score:5, Funny)
Unfortunately, sarcastic bitching is not the solution.
No, but it does make it a little easier to handle as the problem gets worse.
Re:sensors... (Score:4, Funny)
Great. So now every time I return from a business trip to Thailand where I had relations with young men of questionable age, and I call my wife from the customs line the machine will catch my guilty face and my increased heart rate from trying to pass a lie off to her. And I'll be stuck in the airport for a good six hours under arrest.
Welp, those "Business Trips" to Thailand are over.
Re:sensors... (Score:5, Funny)
I'll give that a shot...
Re:sensors... (Score:3, Funny)
Seriously? Have you ever been to New England, or do you just read too much Steven King?
Re:As a Marine (Score:3, Funny)
Uhm, he could have been serving coffee for senior officers his entire tour of duty, what do you know...
Or does assisting "murderers" make one a murderer as well? By that definition I think all of us are murderers.
Re:Err (Score:4, Funny)
Especially since their suggestion for acting suspicious was to wear a top hat, fake moustache, and black cape.
Re:sensors... All they need now is a timeship (Score:3, Funny)
Wth kinda of teenagers STEAL a dead elk from a bunch of guys with guns no less. I mean an elk weighs what 800lbs? These are some well prepared kids if they can run off with fresh kills like that, were they waiting in the woods in camo or something?
(aside from that i totally agree)
Re:sensors... All they need now is a timeship (Score:2, Funny)
Teenaged GRIZZLY BEARS.