Hacker News Reader

Comment by m463 | Hacker News Reader

"I'm a construction worker"

More seriously, I think real criminals will just leave their phone at home.

Criminals are unlikely to be better with computers than the general population. The general population is worse than most people on this site realise: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/computer-skill-levels/

There is strong selective pressure on criminals to become good at computers though, more so than the general population.

For some perhaps, but crime is hard work and criminals are lazy almost by definition.

Depends on the type, dealing drugs is like any other sales job, except way higher risk. Distributing cocaine is as complex as any other distribution job but you're not allowed to use established transportation methods and people might shoot at you. You've got to be a real self starter and creative thinker if you want to be good at it.

Then there's the contract negotiation where nothing is legally enforceable and personnel management where your employees could become addicted to stealing from you. It sounds way harder than my job.

I submit that is it lazy, because you are taking very high risks in order to achieve extraordinary margins. It's a shortcut taken by people who don't want to put the work into a dedicated career in legal sales. Obviously there are exceptions, but the majority of people who become drug dealers are doing it for quick cash.

More often it is because the person belongs to a community that is excluded from traditional carriers.

There's a big difference between "people who commit crimes" and professional criminals. If you make your living committing crimes it pays to do it properly, but most "people who commit crimes" aren't professionals.

Yo mean like those in the sinaloa cartel who built submarines, drones and erected their own cell towers?

Are you claiming the most competent 0.1% is representative of the entire category?

I must say from my observations the past few years - they are pretty quick to share with each other and change things based on things.. eg - the proliferation of video cameras everywhere - I now see much more petty crimes being done with hoodies / hoods up, hair, ear, and face covering is a thing today that was not so much a few years ago from the surveillance photos I've been seeing.

There was a time when you could say that seniors cant use tech or smart phones.. I've seen really old people using iPads better then me recently.

Streetwise wisdom changes faster today I think than it did in the 90s.

I think the biggest story was the Aron Hernandez(?) to show them that leaving a phone behind is the way to go.. and 'the wire' exposed the groups using burners only forever ago.

So there will always be dumb criminals, it does not mean as a whole they will refuse to learn.

'criminals' have been paying for extra-private versions of phones for years ( https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2019/01/fbi-u... )

and some connected folks are even making their own phones now https://www.insider.com/pablo-escobars-brother-roberto-escob...

change is certainly faster today then I ever remember.

That's possible until somebody links surveillance cameras and phone tracking. In a world where 99% of people have a mobile phone, I would pay special attention to everybody who has left his 'comfort area' without a phone. We are heading into a future without blue-collar crimes.

>>> We are heading into a future without blue-collar crimes.

and to a future where white-collar "legal-but-not-ethical" actions will be many...

Flames apart, I don't think blue collar crime is deterred by surveillance. You can't put everybody in prison, you can't fine people who have no money, you can't punish people who have not learned social life...

You make inverted prisions, aka gated communities.

That works right up until the point someone turns off their cellphone and goes hunting.

The problem with leaving all this data around is eventually the proletariat will begin prefering to share it all with each other. When they start doing that, they will begin to co-ordinate instead of compete. For awhile the information advantage will be with people who have money, but that can change.

Then they begin realizing things like Uber is owned by the Saudi Oil Fund and all the soulless corporations are really vampires owned by foreigners who only care to garden in their backyard but sh!t in yours...

I have a very optimistic viewpoint of this discovery; right now law enforcement uses it for an information advantage, but, that won't last forever.

My argument was

>That's possible until somebody links surveillance cameras and phone tracking.

Turning off the mobile phone doesn't prevent surveillance.

In an information society, intelligence will be paid handsomely. Whoever remains in the proletariat doesn't have the brainpower to circumvent surveillance, if it is possible at all.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com