Another example: most cities have systems that can pinpoint a gunshot to a block radius anywhere in the city so that police can respond quickly.
Another example: most cities have systems that can pinpoint a gunshot to a block radius anywhere in the city so that police can respond quickly.
The expert testimony did have the engineer saying "The accuracy is invented by sales and marketing. The pinpoint is just a starting point. It's in a radius around that." Which I found amusing because it seemed obvious to me.
It did improve my ability to sell, though. These caveats are useless when you're selling. You can always explain afterwards.
Assuming, of course, that the gunshot detectors are in fact special gunshot detectors and not a giant array of normal microphones with some algorithms applied to them.
Why is your statement based at all on that assumption?
I don't see what makes surveillance drones necessarily worse than human cops flying helicopters overhead with cameras (which I know for a fact occurs in my city). What makes the "drone" part problematic?
I guess I'm unsure what about the autonomous flying is what draws people ire, rather than just overhead surveillance as a concept.
>gunshot audio to gain situational awareness, and; precise location of the gunshot to search for evidence.
https://apps.apple.com/us/app/shotspotter-respond/id10968200...
In DC, I think it's been pretty successful because lots of gunshots do not result in police calls.
https://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Oakland-cops-aim-to-scr...
Officers were able to locate and respond within a minute because of a system like this.