<quote> Citizens will be on their best behavior because we are constantly recording and reporting everything that's going on," Ellison said, describing what he sees as the benefits from automated oversight from AI and automated alerts for when crime takes place. "We're going to have supervision," he continued. "Every police officer is going to be supervised at all times, and if there's a problem, AI will report the problem and report it to the appropriate person. </quote>

What is far more important to understand is to ignore all that nonsense and focus on who makes money? It will be Ellison and his buddies making tens of billions of dollars/year selling 'solutions' to local governments, all paid by your property taxes. This also enables an ecosystem of theft, where others benefit a lot more. With the nexus of Private Prisons, kids for cash judges (or judges investing in stock of prisons), DEA/police unions, DEA unions, small rural towns increasing prison population (because they get added to the total pop, and get funds allocated).

More importantly this is extremely attractive to police who can steal billions every day from civil forfeiture, they have access to anyone who makes a bank withdrawal or transacts in cash, all displayed in real time feeds, ready for grabbing!

> "Citizens will be on their best behavior because we are constantly recording and reporting everything that's going on," Ellison said, describing what he sees as the benefits from automated oversight from AI and automated alerts for when crime takes place.

Wow! It is genuinely frightening that these people should be in control of our future!

I don't think we'll ever have a zero-crime society, neither should we aim to be one. But being left to the vagaries of police (and union) politics, culture and the complications of city budgets is clearly broken.

Example: Cities are being presented a false choice between accepting deadly high speed chases vs zero criminal accountability [1], which in the world of drones seems silly [2]

I don't want the police to have unfettered access to surveil any and all citizens but putting camera access behind a court warrant issued by a civilian elected judge doesn't feel that dystopian to me.

Is that what Ellison was alluding to? I have no idea, but we are no longer in a world where we should disregard this prima facie.

[1]: https://www.ktvu.com/news/controversial-oakland-police-pursu...

[2]: https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/san-francisco-poli...

That's a pretty deceptive and ragebaity article.

If you look at the original video [1], starting at 1:09:00, he's talking specifically about police body/dashcams recording interactions with citizens during callouts and stops, not everyone all the time as that article strongly implies. The USA already decided to record what police see all the time during these events, so there's no new privacy issue posed by anything he's suggesting. The question is only how those videos are used. In particular, he points out that police are allowed to turn off bodycams for privacy reasons (e.g. bathroom breaks), which is a legitimate need but it can also be abused, and AI can fix this loophole.

In the same segment he also proposes using AI to watch CCTV at schools in real time to trigger instant response if someone pulls out a gun, and using AI to spot wildfires using drones. For some reason the media didn't condemn those ideas, just the part about supervising cop stops. How curious.

[1] https://www.oracle.com/events/financial-analyst-meeting-2024...

We keep saying people like him shouldn't be involved in certain ventures, and yet, they still are. More than ever, actually.

Do not fall into the trap of anthropomorphizing Larry Ellison.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15886728

2025 is shaping up to be When the Villains Win year.

> "Citizens will be on their best behavior because we are constantly recording and reporting everything that's going on,"

Let's be honest. He isn't wrong. I'd rather live in a society with zero crime than what we have now.