So after thinking for a while on all the problems in the world, I think not just the 1st world, but the 3rd world countries need something to stop all the rampant crime.Something similar to the Sibyl System in Psycho-Pass. It can tell who is most likely to cause a crime and send officers, S.W.A.T., or alert the government of that person. I think it would be nice to have one (except for the deciding of jobs and lethal discrimination, that should always be open to the officer on hand)

I couldn't think of a better title, but the main focus is the Sybil System

Hmmm If you think about it wouldn't officers have more trauma using a similar weapon in lethal eliminator mode seeing as it just busts the guy open like a shaken up coke bottle. But yes I feel a similar system would help without the automatic switch between modes yet at the same time I'm a bit conflicted wether I'd want it on the street or not. XD just my thoughts on the subject though :p

You do realize how impossible such a system is with our current technology?

>>4 Not impossible. Improbable. The difference is distinguished by accounting for nuance. Every government hides technology. We can already wirelessly transfer data at over 1 tera per second, but it's a government project, and is controlled by NASA as they have to transfer large amounts of data from drones to Earth. Not only that, Google owns a Quantum Computer that is basically the Sybil Systems core at the most infant of stages, but the fact is we've achieved it. It's far more possible than you seem to think, but implementing it out right wouldn't be available to any government not in a form of despotism, and those that are don't have the funding/support.

Overall, I disagree with this system, but if it happens it happens. It's a very gray topic, but I have gray morals in general. I almost wonder what my color would be.

>>5 < Ignore this sci-fi shit.

>>5 References

https://plus.google.com/+QuantumAILab/posts

http://www.komando.com/happening-now/258120/nasas-internet-connection-is-13000-times-faster-than-yours

91 gigabits per second
The space organization's shadow network can transfer 91 gigabits per second, or 91,000 megabits per second. For comparison, the average broadband connection speed in the U.S. is 6.6 megabits per second - or more than 13,000 times slower. Jun 17, 2014

I was so wrong about the one Tb per second... I'm sorry... It's more like over 10 terabytes per second. Haha

>>6 < Ignore this persons ignorance.

>>8 Do you have a degree in computer science?

>>9 I do not, good sir. Do you?

I'm not sure what action the government will take for this system. For one it can easily be outsmarted, Maskishima did it why can't anyone else, and then you have little kids who are known to be violent and dangerous at a young age. However it can save more lives than without it. It is a really grey area, but that's why it's so interesting

>>11

You can't apply the ideas of the anime to the real world though. As Midsxeph notes, not all of it is 100% possible, and some of it is down right impossible. Everything can be fooled though. I can take a lie detector test, and lie on every question. You'll never be the wiser, because learning about the test itself defeats it completely. This doesn't stop us from using them.

>>8
We who say it's nearly impossible with our current line of technology are more qualified to say it is regardless of what line of degree we have. You don't need to have a degree in something in order to know how hard that something is to do.

A Sibyl System is basically a fucking mind reading device and the best we have to technology like that is just being able to, a best, pick up brain waves and having those waves move something if I recall.

"Comfort over freedom, pave a path of leisure, have it all. Freedom over comfort, give you back so much leisure, feel small."

You are literally a dumb bitch, OP.
Sorry. But you're either someone who is really really naïve or you are a gubment agent trying to shill this kind of shit.

Ok, going to make this quick, as Mr. Buzzkillington has things to do.

1. You do actually need to have expertise in an area to determine how hard it is to do something. A liberal arts major is not entitled to give an opinion on the difficulty of creating a website or crafting a deep sea submersible. I want that to be made clear before anything else.

2. 91 MegaBits Per Second is BS on the data throughput scale. Think of this. If 100,000,000 of 300,000,000 people use the internet with an average of 6.6 MegaBits Per Second, you get 6.6 GigaBits of Data Usage per second.

3. Reading someone's emotional state at present is possible. We give off heat signatures, body language queues, exude pheromones, have electromagnetic bio-signatures associated with impulses. What you can't do is read the future state. They could make a table that checks similar cases previously investigated and determine a likelihood that you would commit a crime. It would be flawed because a thought or stray idea and execution don't necessarily correlate. So yeah, it would be problematic at best. Rule by computer is not technologically impossible, its socially impossible. Most human being will not submit to rule by machines. Not because the machines are inherently dangerous, but because they would prefer a human being to communicate with when they have concerns. Talk to anyone who has sat through an hour of IVR and see what they ask for.

>>15
Let me make it even more clear to YOU. You are under the misconception that the concept of what is hard is only able to be understood so long as you have training on it.

You don't need to be an expert to know how impossible something is, and trying to say otherwise is moronic. Even a child is able, and has the right, to state that our current line of tech makes it "hard" and near impossible to do anything the OP is listing.

It would even be 50 years at the least before we even get something close enough to the point that someone even considers making such a system, not counting the hundreds of years after.

>>17

No, its childish to think you have the ability to gauge difficulty in something you don't understand in any way, shape, or form. With no reference, technology looks like magic to people who have no understanding of it.

>>7 Sorry to say, the D-Wave Two is not a functioning quantum computer. Google themselves have already pointed out there's not even a way to know whether or not we have one, and tests have even shown that it's as fast as an average PC at this point. In short, Google does not have a quantum computer that can actually compute at quantum speeds right now.

As for this rampant crime, maybe we could try solving the problem instead of treating the symptoms. We already know what 'breeds' crime, and it's not randomness, but living conditions, mental illness, etc. This is a temporary fix at best and it's pretty bad in my opinion. The idea, even if perfectly implemented, is still bad compared to other things we could do.

>>17 Come on, you do have to have background to know if something's hard. I would think it's pretty hard to create a website, but that's because I only know HTML and CSS. I have no program to design it for me, it would take me weeks while it would take a professional hours with templates and other tools. Or, on the opposite side with art. I would think it's pretty easy to make certain paintings, but in reality it would take weeks to get the level of detail I can't see with my inexperience. I'm going to have to agree with >>19.

London has a about 5.9 million cameras that's enough to begin the system of this but the problem is we don't have a profile of everyone but then again we don't need a profile we just need to be able to track people if all of these cameras were set up with a tracking software and facial recognition and combine that with all the cellular data we use and social media profiles we have with what were doing then we already have the ability to do this today

I believe the question isn't really when it will happen, can it happen, or will it happen. The question is so we want it to happen. That's why I brought up a controversial question like this. If it is treated in a way that allows the people to do what they want (not having their jobs chosen for them) and not force the lethal implications of weapons such as the dominators then it could work, *depending on how many people want it to*.

Thinking out of the box aside.
I think it is possible, but not like the Sibyl System. Nowadays, we have a technology that reads people mental state such as happiness, edginess, and discomfortness. Even before that we have a technique to detect lies (not working on all people, but mostly do).

We can implant certain chip inside our body to detect mental state. But this is controversial because planting something on human bodies will erase the humanity. Planting the chip will make us the slave of the system, and I think it works the same with the Sibyls's surveilance camera.

Even though technology will advance to make it possible, what we can do is to be a better person and educate our next generation to be a better person too (sounds abstract, but this is I think the most acceptable way). All government must work together to improve the system such as education system, welfare system and law system.

I think having a dominator in my web shooter is not that bad.
I gotta ask Mr. Stark

Psycho pass was a great series but in regards to the Sybil system it had a lot of holes:

1) it only ever addressed violent crime as crime; everyone with a high crime coefficient turned out to be violent. However, not all crimes are violent. Someone intend or theft need not be violent, nor someone who wants to do some sort of financial crime or indeed someone who wants to go drink driving. All are crimes yet none would trigger the system as shown.

Where does that leave us in reality? It raises the point that there's no universal indicator of intent to commit something wrong. Just like how IQ tests are an incorrect assumption into who is smart or not, a single number cannot represent a meaningful representation of someone's intent.

2) it raises the prospect of judgement before the crime. Ethically and morally there are significant issues with bringing 'justice' down on an individual where they haven't yet done anything. More than that, it leads to a very slippery slope down which anything could then be punished before it occurs; crimes, civil offences or even things which are just simply socially frowned upon.

This is actually a system I was hoping to work on in college, however the system I'm thinking of aligns more with Person of Interest's Machine system. The system would sort through everyone's information (internet, cell phone, camera recordings, etc....) and determine whether or not they are about to be involved in a violent crime. Whether or not they are the victim or perpetrator is something an investigator would have to determine. Something like that would be not as intrusive as a psychopass implant, ad theoretially just as effective.

I seriously can't believe how unintelligent you people are...
Yeah.. lets accuse everyone of a crime before anything happens. That'll lead to totally positive resolutions.
I dont even need to watch that anime to know it probably doesnt end very happy.
You realize this is a ripped off concept, right?

>>27 And just so you know, you're about 20 years behind the times. The system you speak of already exists. Its called the NSA.

>>28 Psychopass, 1984, plato's republic...yeah, everything's a rip off, but that's not a legitimate argument right here on this topic.

Your first point however, yeah, that's valid.

>>1 Have you watched minority report? Its much the same idea~~!
I think we shouldn't rely on things like sibyl... It would be much more effective (and less freedom taking) to change mentalities to not commit crime. Although, second option is almost impossible in the near future.

>>31 The problem is, once you start getting into the realm of changing mentalities not to commit a crime, where does that end? Who decides what is criminal and what is not? How can we be sure that we're not crossing the very VERY fine line between "we're making a better society" into "we're creating a totalitarian society where all who disagree must have their views changed to match ours"?

>>32 Exactly. It's impossible and the world is doomed to live between order and chaos xD

Big data based crime prediction softwares are already in use in the US and in development in several countries like France (The French one has a 5-7% margin of error.)

However, instead of pointing a suspect, they just indicate when and where a crime is likely to happen. That allows policemen to adapt their patrols.

Furthermore, they can't bring information on scarce events such as manslaughters.

Eng source: http://gizmodo.com/5850302/cops-using-crime-prediction-software-to-stop-crimes-before-they-happen

Fr source, more comprehensive and recent: http://www.20minutes.fr/societe/1612375-20150521-viols-agressions-cambriolages-nouvel-algorithme-gendarmes-predire-crime

"Minority Report" entails the big problem with this better than I can entail. Book > Movie
But the idea of this also stems to things told about like "1984".

>>35 Please give your arguments instead of just quoting stuff.

>>36 You're an idiot. He didn't quote anything. He put a movie name in quotes. Please read before making pointless accusations.