Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

I think if you had a list of suspects, people in the area… if they could do the thing, you’re probably onto something.


sort by: page size:

I'm no intelligence expert, but I'd be surprised if the NSA would expect something like this to find a "smoking gun" proving that person X is planning Y.

More likely you already have suspects, and your suspects have acquaintances , family etc.

You would be more interested in looking at these people, who do they network with on social media, what are they interested in? Might they be knowingly or unknowingly be providing material support?

You would probably use this information to build up a broader profile and see which avenues are worth investigation.


We can find a number suspects, and then analyze other facts about them.

Unless you've got a cold case, that seems like more potential suspects than a general person may reasonably have.

What kind of evidence would you imagine one would find, if that were happening?

I doubt that is something to be much concerned about, as I doubt there would be much use of anything that produces lists of suspects without explanation. What would one do with such a list? It would be like getting a bunch of anonymous tips all saying that a different person did the deed, without any clues to follow up on.

Getting a list of suspects is rarely a problem for law enforcement; the difficulty is in winnowing it down to the actual culprits. When a body is found, for example, family and acquaintances are all initially suspects, and experience has shown that summarily dismissing any of them, merely on intuitive grounds, will eliminate some fraction of actual culprits.

If a system did start suspecting the actual culprits with a significantly higher success rate than people achieve, there would be much reason to reverse-engineer the process in order to figure out how this was accomplished, as doing so would provide clues (and, ultimately, evidence) that otherwise could only be found by an independent process.

This assumes that due process exists, such that unsupported accusations are not taken as evidence, but if due process has been abandoned, we would have a much greater problem than that posited here.


Then I would simply employ it as a means to get the names of those who deserve further investigation. The further investigation is putting a live person on the other side and then nailing the pervs.

How would they go about figuring out who did it though? Can't really involve law enforcement in that.

If they provided specific details that would all but require identifying the suspects.

I like this method of inquiry. You would probably make a good investigator.

And on top of that, assuming you find something, how are you going to prove who did it?

They're already a suspect.

It always pays off to look for suspects close to home but I would definitely not rule out an outsider that monitors social media.

You question them, ask if they saw anything unusual, ask if they saw anybody matching a suspect's description, spot a known perp, spot somebody staking out the place hours before the crime...

I'm thinking just about detection at this point. Knowing specifically what's going on and who is doing it would be an important first step towards any subsequent policing or political action.

Finding suspects for crimes in progress.

It could also narrow down the list of suspects. From there, additional investigation can find more evidence. Having access to big data can help this.

If I was murdered and it would help the investigation, absolutely.

You make a valid point. Trying to find what they did would be valuable to find what kinds of tactics the FBI and such use.

But it might very well happen if they are already under suspicion!
next

Legal | privacy