×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Fighting Street Gangs With Military Counter-Insurgency Software

Soulskill posted about 9 months ago | from the one-of-the-tracking-hydra's-new-heads dept.

Crime 171

An anonymous reader writes "After every major war, technology developed for a conflict gets applied to civilian life. The BBC recently reported that Army researchers have adapted advanced social network analysis software used for counter-insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan to help law enforcement analyze the behavior of street gangs. With the growing problem of gang violence in major U.S. cities, this may provide a fresh perspective. 'Orca can figure out the likely affiliations of individuals who will not admit to being members of any specific gang, as well as the sub-structure of gangs – the gang ecosystem – and the identities of those who tend to dictate the behaviour of others. ... Having some knowledge of the links and affiliations between different gangs can highlight dangers that call for more focused policing. If a gang perpetrates some violent action on a rival gang, police will often monitor the rival gang more closely because of the likelihood of retaliation. But gangs know this, and so the rivals might instead ask an allied gang to carry out a reprisal. Understanding such alliances helps the police stay a step ahead.' The question is: will it work?"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

171 comments

it could be stopped (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44232353)

when gang members are identified, eliminate them. Simple and fully effective. let their worthless parents cry about how they were turning their life around blah blah blah.

Re:it could be stopped (4, Insightful)

sabri (584428) | about 9 months ago | (#44232497)

when gang members are identified, eliminate them. Simple and fully effective. let their worthless parents cry about how they were turning their life around blah blah blah.

I don't think you fully understand the problems of gangs. In some neighborhoods, young kids almost have to join a gang in order not to become a victim. It is a matter of becoming a predator vs prey, and those youngsters don't always have the world view that adults have to distinguish right from wrong in that situation, and the potential impact on their future.

Equally effective and simple would be to isolate these folks by taking them out of that situation. Move them to some flyover state in the middle of nowhere, where they can be drilled in a youth detention center. Not as a punishment, but as a form of education.

While it would be unfair towards the parents who were unable to raise their kids, I'm sure they would prefer to have the state take care of them, rather than execute them. Not to mention the cost of the death penalty, or difficulties in proving gang affiliation.

Re:it could be stopped (-1, Troll)

rubycodez (864176) | about 9 months ago | (#44232635)

gangsers really are terrorists, much as the government abuses the word. executing gangbanger dirtbags can be done with minimal cost, a round of .22 LR can be had for less than 3 cents in bulk, and a single judge with volunteer jury can sentence thousands of the scum in an efficiently run court.

Unfair to parents? spawning criminal scum and letting them run wild is not parenting..

Re:it could be stopped (2)

hedwards (940851) | about 9 months ago | (#44232697)

We have a system of laws to ensure that the right people are convicted, and we don't execute people for petty shit. Seems to me that you're precisely the type of person that ought to be subjected to that sort of "justice." If you want that sort of thing, there's plenty of hell holes that execute people for petty shit, do us all a favor and find one of them.

Ultimately, we have a constitution that applies to everybody, one of the biggest mistakes we've made as a country was watering it down so cowards like you could sleep well at night.

Re:it could be stopped (0)

rubycodez (864176) | about 9 months ago | (#44232769)

what are you calling "petty shit"? murder, rape, maiming, molestation, kidnapping, extortion are not "petty shit". that's what we have going on in the big city where I live. I'm not talking of kids with spray paint cans here....I'm talking of organized crime, terrorism, murder and mayhem.

The "system of laws" you speak of is not being applied.

Re:it could be stopped (1)

hedwards (940851) | about 9 months ago | (#44233681)

And apart from murder and kidnapping, none of that is capital anyways. However, the sort of extrajudicial tack is very much a death penalty offense.

The reason why your neighborhood is like that is because the residents of the neighborhood condone it. They might not openly do so, but hell, just look at what happened to Compton when the neighborhood stopped providing a safe environment for that sort of thing to breed. They didn't need to resort to the sort of extrajudicial killings that you're advocating for.

Re:it could be stopped (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44233271)

I was talking to a friend who lives in an area known for its gangs (while the gangs in my small city lay low for the most part). It really is a different world, I couldn't relate to the types of problems he and his kids face on a daily basis. Guns, knives, threats of violence.. I don't know how people live in such an environment. Why not move? Educate me.

Re:it could be stopped (3, Interesting)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about 9 months ago | (#44234185)

when gang members are identified, eliminate them. Simple and fully effective. let their worthless parents cry about how they were turning their life around blah blah blah.

I don't think you fully understand the problems of gangs. In some neighborhoods, young kids almost have to join a gang in order not to become a victim. It is a matter of becoming a predator vs prey, and those youngsters don't always have the world view that adults have to distinguish right from wrong in that situation, and the potential impact on their future. Equally effective and simple would be to isolate these folks by taking them out of that situation. Move them to some flyover state in the middle of nowhere, where they can be drilled in a youth detention center. Not as a punishment, but as a form of education. While it would be unfair towards the parents who were unable to raise their kids, I'm sure they would prefer to have the state take care of them, rather than execute them. Not to mention the cost of the death penalty, or difficulties in proving gang affiliation.

WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK ARE YOU THINKING?!

You mother fucking McCarthyist. Gods damn. Do I have to spell this shit out for you?!

Are you now, or have you ever been affiliated with a gang?

Son of a fucking bitch. You dumb fools are advocating a secret police style intelligence network be used to arrest anyone for being an ASSOCIATE of someone that NO ONE ADMITS TO KNOWING. That's EVEN FUCKING WORSE. You trust the fucking police?! SERIOUSLY? Those same corrupt assholes who I have on video towing my car while not improperly parked, fucking up, dropping it on its side, totaling it then lying in court saying it was side swiped when they got there, and the judge disallowing the surveillance video? The same governments that goes after whistle blowers with the full force of their armed forces, even destroying relations with other countries for ONE MAN.

YOU FOOLS are ACTUALLY saying that we should let these power hungry elitist mother fuckers create a HUGE internment camp?!?!

Proof once again, that low UIDs don't mean shit. Hurry up and die, you're SERIOUSLY hindering the herd!

Re:it could be stopped (2)

anagama (611277) | about 9 months ago | (#44234465)

Add to that that the whole problem with gangs will be never ending so long as there is this prohibition on some drugs. Take out the profit and most gangs would dissipate. Worked for Portugal.

http://vimeo.com/32110912 [vimeo.com]

Legalization eliminates the need to go full on KGB, Stasi, Pol Pot, or what have you, and besides, bringing in military solutions will not solve anything. It will just exacerbate the arms race and make the violence worse. Plus, every encroachment on civil liberties we're experiencing, has its roots in the drug war. Prohibition is destroying America.

Re:it could be stopped (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44234429)

You want to stop street gangs all you have to do is ship the niggers back to Africa.

Pigeonholing people? (3, Informative)

Camael (1048726) | about 9 months ago | (#44234205)

when gang members are identified, eliminate them

But what if the identification was wrong?

Just look at how the profiling is done. From TFA:-

One of the features of Orca is an algorithm – a set of rules – that assigns each member of the network a probability of belonging to a particular gang. If an individual admits to this, the assignment can be awarded 100% probability. But if he will not, then any known associations he has with other individuals can be used to calculate a probable “degree of membership”.

We have no idea what rules are applied, or the weight given to them. The could take into consideration, for example, factors like skin color, race, language spoken, location of birth, marital status, family pedigree etc. I'm certain that the police are already taking some of these factors into consideration in deciding who to pay special attention to. The difference is that this technology is impersonal and can be misused to provide a veneer of legitimacy to otherwise abusive acts , e.g. "I'm shaking him down because the program says he is a gang member".

My point is that people who are born into a gang dominated environment already are severely disadvantaged, and it sits ill that someone who may be innocent may be subjected to undeserved police action/scrutiny simply because he is marked as a criminal by some program.

Re:Pigeonholing people? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44234391)

when gang members are identified, eliminate them

But what if the identification was wrong?

You cannot make an omelette without cracking some eggs. This technology has succesfully been (beta) tested in Afghanistan and Pakistan. After it analyzes the life-style patterns of potential terrorists, the most likely candidates are selected for targeted strikes.

Re:it could be stopped (2)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 9 months ago | (#44234221)

A gang is nothing less than a microcosm of your average sovereign state. The sole difference amongst them all is the scale.

Or we could just... (5, Insightful)

rsilvergun (571051) | about 9 months ago | (#44232373)

give them jobs, families and a hope for the future instead of absolute poverty and a 'nothing to lose' life style. But turning military tactics against a sizable portion of our populace works too I guess.

Re:Or we could just... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44232451)

It's a multifaceted problem. Yes: poor economy makes gang membership a viable (more so alluring) fiscal prospect. One established, however, they have a self-perpetuating nature that also tends to create a negative feedback into the local economy. Good police enforcement is necessary, but without addressing the underlying poor economy, new ones will just continue to form.

Re:Or we could just... (-1, Troll)

Nutria (679911) | about 9 months ago | (#44232531)

give them jobs

Give them???? How many trillions of dollars have been transfered from the workers to the non-workers, and how effective has it actually been?

Besides, why work mowing grass and digging ditches (what else are they qualified for, given their piss poor grades in their piss poor schools) when (a) that's "Mexican work", and (b) you can make more by selling drugs and living off the dole?

Re:Or we could just... (4, Insightful)

divisionbyzero (300681) | about 9 months ago | (#44232639)

give them jobs

Give them???? How many trillions of dollars have been transfered from the workers to the non-workers, and how effective has it actually been?

Besides, why work mowing grass and digging ditches (what else are they qualified for, given their piss poor grades in their piss poor schools) when (a) that's "Mexican work", and (b) you can make more by selling drugs and living off the dole?

Well, I'm glad we got the two most worn-out stereotypes out of the way so quickly. Now maybe we can have a useful conversation. How about legalizing or decriminalizing those things sold on a black market removing the financial incentives? How about early intervention through more funding for pre-schools in urban areas to provide the structure the kids' parents cannot? Or about a million other things that would be more effective than "hand-outs" or "policing the lazy".

Re:Or we could just... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44232723)

How about just letting those bitches starve if they don't want to work? I'm all for that.

Re:Or we could just... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44233253)

because that is what you are trying to do but instead that just pisses them off and gets to commit crimes to stay alive.

Re:Or we could just... (1)

Nutria (679911) | about 9 months ago | (#44232987)

Well, I'm glad we got the two most worn-out stereotypes out of the way so quickly.

So you don't think that there's a noticeable minority of blacks who think it's degrading to do manual labor for whitey, and who spend half their time pulling up their pants and all their time listening to music from earbuds.

How about legalizing or decriminalizing those things sold on a black market removing the financial incentives?

Agree.

How about early intervention through more funding for pre-schools in urban areas to provide the structure the kids' parents cannot?

How early do you intervene?

For how many hours per day?

If we keep on extending before-care and after-care and to younger and younger children, at what point do the people paying for all this say, "To hell with this, just take the children away from these incompetents?" But then, where do you put them?

Where will you get the people to take care of all these children? Toddlers and infants need a high adult-child ratio.

Or about a million other things that would be more effective than "hand-outs"

Carnac the Magnificent says... Poverty Rights activists will file suit before the President/Governor/etc finished putting his pen down.

Re:Or we could just... (1)

Pseudonym Authority (1591027) | about 9 months ago | (#44233605)

How about legalizing or decriminalizing those things sold on a black market removing the financial incentives?

Stuff like meth, heroin, difficult-to-trace guns, stolen property, murder-for-hire services? The average street level thugs works longer hours for effectively less than minimum wage anyway, so it's not as if they are going to become perfectly rational citizens when the easy money is cut off.

How about early intervention through more funding for pre-schools in urban areas to provide the structure the kids' parents cannot?

No matter how much you `early-intervention' a student, seeing their neighbors killed in a drive-by or stabbed by a junkie over a pair of shoes is going to fuck them up and cause them to despair and lead them to seek revenge (usually by joining a gang).

Yes, those might be good ideas, but the gangsters have got to fucking go before anything like that can even begin to work. A police force not consisting of bullies, morons, or cowards too scared to get out of their fucking car would go a long way too. How to attack this problem? I do not know. But it doesn't appear that softer methods are working very much. How many more generations can we afford to let be eaten alive before we can bring out the big guns?

Re:Or we could just... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44233869)

Honestly, have you ever considered that a sizable portion of the people you're speaking about may be the way they are because of internal, and not external factors? While acknowledging that there is no real way to discern just how much of the problem is cultural / environmental and how much is genetic predisposition, I believe that for a significant group of these people, changes / "corrections" in external factors would play little if no factor in their thought processes and behavior.

Re:Or we could just... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44234433)

Honestly, have you ever considered that a sizable portion of the people you're speaking about may be the way they are because of internal, and not external factors? While acknowledging that there is no real way to discern just how much of the problem is cultural / environmental and how much is genetic predisposition, I believe that for a significant group of these people, changes / "corrections" in external factors would play little if no factor in their thought processes and behavior.

Translation: I believe niggers are genetically defect and beyond any hope.

Very effective (5, Insightful)

rsilvergun (571051) | about 9 months ago | (#44232727)

I know you're trolling, but hey, the nonsense you spew is in the backs of people's minds for real. It's a 'Narrative'. A falsehood told to workers to make us fight amongst ourselves while the 1% laugh all the way to the bank with our time and money.

Start by googling the phrase 'working poor'. Then try to get on food stamps if you earn any amount over the poverty line. If you're single, try to get free health care. Won't happen.

And the meat packing plants are happy to hire you. Oh wait, you're a citizen? You can sue us if our dull knifes cause you to lose a finger? You want a steady food supply and health care for your kids? $4/hr isn't enough? 60 hours a week is a bit much? You want overtime? Sorry, you're just not what we're looking for.

Re:Very effective (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44232797)

Or you can just live off of welfare and fuck the white man's wife while the white man is out making money to support your deadbeat ass.

Re:Very effective (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44233645)

What, did your Klan meeting get out early? Go back to your trailer park, you racist asshole.

Re:Or we could just... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44232805)

First off, selling drugs is not that lucrative, and "living" is not guaranteed. If it were a legal job, it would be the most hazardous by far for comparatively meager pay.

Secondly, "mow my lawn or do drugs" is a fitting attitude for an upper-middle-class asshat , and it's exactly the kind of environment that is conducive to a young man joining a gang. There's nothing degrading in doing gardening work and it could be a good job. However due to oversupply of poor unskilled workers ("Mexicans") you can't actually have a decent quality life from low skill physical labor. You can't have a decent house and you can't pay for your children's education. Some will bite the bullet and accept their fate, some will rebel and make you bite it. 1% nature, 99% nurture.

Re:Or we could just... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44233151)

Trillions of dollars? Unless you are talking about the Iraq-Afghan wars (aka military welfare) then you are right otherwise you are peddling the same old right-wing fantasies.

You really think you are the only person who works and wants to work? Go actually talk and get to know some of these people you pass judgment on from your recliner.

Re:Or we could just... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44234279)

Not many trillions of dollars, in fact, I'd wager that it's less than 1% of the military budget. Education is pretty cheap compared to the way we fund warfare.

Re:Or we could just... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44232585)

I don't know if that would bring all of them over not to mention that we're raising a large generation that has little to offer outside of physical labor. Not only don't we need that, many of them aren't up to the challenge anyway.
 
Ghetto rats and trailer trash should just be gassed. It's the only way to be sure.

Re:Or we could just... (3, Insightful)

rubycodez (864176) | about 9 months ago | (#44232679)

bullshit. people who are self-motivated work hard and get those things. Plenty of illiterate minorities have come to this country and made good lives for themselves starting with NOTHING but with hard work, yet we're to feel sorry for life long lazy welfare recipients who spawn more criminals on our dime and who whine "the man is keeping me down?" They have no one to blame but the one in the bathroom mirror

Re:Or we could just... (4, Insightful)

rsilvergun (571051) | about 9 months ago | (#44232779)

And plenty have died horrible deaths in thresher machines. A few outliers doesn't make the average. Most of them live life slaves with no hope for advancement. We remember the ones that made it big, we occasionally read about the ones who were cut to pieces, but we ignore the everyday misery the bulk live in.

Christ, just look up on google what working in a meat packing plant is like. Or look up that article that says a 'temp' agency is America's second largest employer (Walmart's first). You can fall back on your nonsensical capitalism all you want. Reality doesn't work that way. That's just not what happens in the real world. The real world is a horrible place where everything is stacked against all but a lucky few, who use their privileges to the detriment of the rest of us.

Re:Or we could just... (2)

rubycodez (864176) | about 9 months ago | (#44232855)

outliers??!! fact as example, asian people who immigrate to the USA make more than the median income; they work hard and value education. there are LOTS of them.

Nothing nonsensical about working for a living, that is reality. Nothing nonsensical for paying for things, that's the reality in socialist and communist and capitalist countries alike.

Since my relatives are in agriculture (and some raise hogs), I'll have you know I've been in slaughter and meat packing plants and still love bacon and sausage. The average pay is $24K a year for meat packer and goes to $31K. what's your point?

Re:Or we could just... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44232989)

Free clue: There are gangs and other types of lowlifes of every extraction, in every society that has ever existed on Earth.

Supposedly "positive" stereotypes about certain racial/ethnic groups are still ignorant and harmful.

Re:Or we could just... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44233113)

Since when is lazy a racial or ethnic group?

Re:Or we could just... (5, Insightful)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | about 9 months ago | (#44233945)

Lazy is not just one racial or ethnic group, it's every racial or ethnic group: the lazy rich whites steal money from the lazy black and Native American poor, while the lazy Chinese steal inventions and secrets and destroy the environment, and the lazy Indians and Hispanics steal jobs instead of fixing their own countries, and the lazy Africans accept aid instead of doing the same. "Lazy" is the ultimate, omni-purpose slur; it even transcends boundaries of race and nationality: lazy men expect the world on a platter from lazy women who can't compete on their own merits; lazy youngsters can't land the jobs that the lazy boomers who selfishly destroyed the economy demand they get; lazy atheists, Christians, and Muslims parrot rhetoric they don't really understand while making broad moral declarations they don't really adhere to.

So, y'know. Take your pick.

Re:Or we could just... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44234175)

Yeah, the Asian example is pretty funny. Prior to World War 2 'Asians' were looked down on in the West as the lowest form of humanity, now they're held up as paragons of all the industrious virtues on Slashdot. I put 'Asians' in inverted commas because to me the whole idea is a Western construct. Uzbeks, Indians, Indonesians and Chinese don't have much more in common than any other randomly selected groups of peoples it seems to me.

typical smokescreen (2)

rubycodez (864176) | about 9 months ago | (#44233493)

I quoted a completely true fact as example, could have used other groups but only wished to point out that not being lazy has lasting benefits. but this bothers you and you spout off with "positive stereotypes are harmful"........no, a generally true (in the statistical sense) statement is not a stereotype, it is useful information about reality and might be instructional on how to live life.

you then make irrelevant statement about gangs and lowlifes being of every extraction. the point is that some subcultures have an abundance of them, much more than average percent of them in population. we have subcultures that value laziness, sponging off others, having no regard for fellow man or property, and that in fact commit crimes mostly against others in the same subculture.

Re:Or we could just... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44233659)

Lots of asian gangs in California, especially in the Bay Area.

Re:Or we could just... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44233909)

Lots of asian gangs in California, especially in the Bay Area.

Yep, and lots of asian kids in several of our local high schools, working their asses off and blowing the curves and class rankings for everyone else (this is not a bad thing; it is a fact here in Houston, however.) For some reason, this is the only group identifiable by race for which this may be said, however.

Re:Or we could just... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44233809)

It's a little more complicated than just one or the other. It's hard not to notice that a kid in the third grade growing up in an area where the richest person he's ever seen is a drug dealer and the gangs start recruiting by the time you're ten probably isn't going to make it without some kind of intervention. Yes, that should be the parents job, but if they were going to step it up we wouldn't even be talking.

On the other hand, there aren't meaningful exceptions to the rule of character, which is why the typical lottery winner usually manages to piss away an entire fortune within just a few years and so many people who try to make it on fame are complete cock-ups.

Personally I see no problem with labeling the gangs as terrorists, on the condition that individuals get a fair trial and we make sure that there are resources available for anyone who got trapped in the life and wants to get out before they do anything unforgivable.

Re:Or we could just... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44232909)

give them jobs, families and a hope for the future instead of absolute poverty and a 'nothing to lose' life style. But turning military tactics against a sizable portion of our populace works too I guess.

Or we could just... force the educational system.to quit sponsoring gang sports. Abolish it and societies would change for the better over night.

Re:Or we could just... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44233141)

That is the long term solution that will actually change things. The band-aid solution is this.

Re:Or we could just... (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about 9 months ago | (#44233727)

give them jobs, families and a hope for the future instead of absolute poverty and a 'nothing to lose' life style.

Wow, how exactly do you do this? It's an example of something easy to say, but hard if not impossible to implement.

There might be a way to give them a job, and motivate them to actually take it, but how are you going to give them a family? Re-animation of dead parents? Or were you thinking of something like foster parents? Because we've tried that, and it doesn't solve the problem.

I know this one! (3, Insightful)

Okian Warrior (537106) | about 9 months ago | (#44234249)

give them jobs, families and a hope for the future instead of absolute poverty and a 'nothing to lose' life style.

Wow, how exactly do you do this? It's an example of something easy to say, but hard if not impossible to implement.

Ooh... ooh... I know this one! Teacher, pick me!!!

Start by increasing business opportunities in this country. Businesses start from innovation on infrastructure, so start by improving these.

A national internet and phone service that's fast and cheap. This is trivial to accomplish, just fix the maximum price that the telcos/providers can charge for usage and mandate that there can be no other restrictions. If you choose the price right, the telcos would make the same amount of money under the new rule... but now to make more profit they have to compete for coverage and price. (No early termination fees, no access fees, no roaming charges, choose provider at the time of phone call.)

National health care. Healthy people are happier and less likely to revolt, are less likely to turn to crime, are less likely to be bankrupt from health care bills. This is easy to implement - just copy one of the existing better systems, such as Canada or UK.

Repeal drug laws, get rid of the DEA, put 1/10 the money into education and treatment. (Education and treatment are more effective anyway.) Reduce our prison population by pardoning and/or paroling all non-violent drug offenders. Retroactively downgrade their offense to non-felony, so that they can get jobs. Do this in a graduated way, so as not to raise unemployment.

Revamp patent and copyright law so that creators can profit from and protect their works by starting businesses.

Free schooling through advanced degree for citizens (like Finland). An educated population is more likely to be innovative and take advantage of opportunities. Get rid of H1B visas altogether.

Revamp the tax code so that all businesses pay the same proportional tax with no exceptions. When big corps such as GE pay no taxes it's harder for people to start new businesses. Remove the personal income tax altogether and get revenue from businesses and economic growth (by printing more money, to keep inflation down). Keep inflation a close to zero as possible, so that people can save for big purchases instead of going into debt.

I could go on, but you get the picture. Government has to stop coddling special interests and start benefiting the general population, or else deal with an angry, armed revolt.

Re:Or we could just... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44233819)

give them jobs, families and a hope for the future instead of absolute poverty and a 'nothing to lose' life style. But turning military tactics against a sizable portion of our populace works too I guess.

Military tactics will work against inner city gangs just as well as they worked in Iraq and Afghanistan. If at first you don't succeed, try, try again, and all that happy rot. One word for all the inner city collateral: "Incoming!"

Better question (5, Insightful)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 9 months ago | (#44232375)

The question is: will it work?

First; No. Technology doesn't fix social problems, it changes them. Take away guns and people use knives. Take away knives and they use big rocks. And so on. It's the same with any technology, for any social behavior. You can't fix relationships with technology, and fundamentally, all social problems can be expressed in relational pairings.

That said, the better question is -- are we willing to allow the government to change its relationship with us, the citizens, and if so, what will be the new boundaries for such a change? There must be things that are in and out of bounds -- and there needs to be more discussion than is happening now. Otherwise, we're going to wakeup one day and find that we're all wearing the Emperor's clothes, not just with the government, but with each other as well!

Re:Better question (1)

sabri (584428) | about 9 months ago | (#44232615)

Technology doesn't fix social problems, it changes them. Take away guns and people use knives. Take away knives and they use big rocks. And so on. It's the same with any technology, for any social behavior. You can't fix relationships with technology, and fundamentally, all social problems can be expressed in relational pairings.

That said, the better question is -- are we willing to allow the government to change its relationship with us, the citizens, and if so, what will be the new boundaries for such a change? There must be things that are in and out of bounds -- and there needs to be more discussion than is happening now. Otherwise, we're going to wakeup one day and find that we're all wearing the Emperor's clothes, not just with the government, but with each other as well!

Mod parent up!

Re:Better question (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44233199)

True but it is hard to kill someone in a drive-by with a knife. This would at least calm things down enough for a real fix to have a chance of being put in place.

Re:Better question (2)

jma05 (897351) | about 9 months ago | (#44234377)

No. Technology does fix social problems. But it also creates new problems. It does not simply change or amplify existing problems. The new social problems that emerge are *fundamentally different* than old problems. Industrialization did solve old problems (Eg: low economic power of women) and the problems it created were of a new kind (Eg: uprooting of cultural communities).

> Take away guns and people use knives.

I am aware of all the US gun vendor propaganda. None of the recent single-person perpetrated mass murders (Colorado, Arizona, Newtown) could have happened with knives. I am in India. We have a lot more people and have a lot more undiagnosed mental illness around (if that is what you mean by underlying social problem). No ones goes to a shrink here, even though we are in a greater social turmoil, with all the change around us. People are still less educated and the police are ineffective. Yet, we don't deal with people going postal, because guns are hard to get and you don't get far with knives (also harder to make rap videos and movies romanticizing untrained people who can solve problems with knives). The two knife attackers in China caused limited harm compared any massacre in US. Yes, people do throw rocks when rioting. But that is a much different problem. We have economically impotent and disaffected young men too, but the window of opportunities within which they may express themselves through violence is much more limited.

If US was a gun free zone, it would not have had much problem with urban gangs. It might have other problems, but not urban gangs. Historically, knife wielding gangs (as brigands) could only operate with force in the wild, not in urban environments. Let's move away from this topic that attracts emotions.

Currently, the relationship between the government and its citizens in indeed changing. And it is entirely due to technology changes. Digital snooping is suddenly cheap. Big data is suddenly cheap. Technology does not overlay social problems. Social problems (or benefits) are a direct consequence of technology. For instance, the only reason US jobs are being exported is because of the emergence of cheap travel & shipping and the Internet (shipping of information products), not because of selfish business men. Colonial era only happened because of the emergence of better shipping technology.

Just like organisms are a mere manifestation of DNA, social problems are often (although not always) mere expressions of technology application.

A military solution? (3, Insightful)

Pollux (102520) | about 9 months ago | (#44232397)

Just one more piece of evidence showing how our government is at war with its citizens.

Re:A military solution? (1)

Nutria (679911) | about 9 months ago | (#44232567)

Reread the summary and pay attention this time.

Re:A military solution? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44233343)

I think you should re-read the summary again and again until you understand the following

Orca can figure out the likely affiliations of individuals who will not admit to being members of any specific gang,

So, random Joe Blue, not affiliated with anything but just living in some shitty area. So the great software "links him" to some gangs in the area. And since it is software, it must be correct. Do not pass go, do not collect $200.

Continuation of the "War on ...." mantra. How is that working out for other social issues?

Re:A military solution? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44233235)

This country has gone completely crazy. We are creating a nightmare of human suffering unlike the world has every seen.

This country require less:
Police
Guns
Surveillance - obviously
Prisons
Policy and Security agencies
Judges, prosecutors, and courts
Prisons
Unnecessary and stupid Laws - which seems to serve no other purpose than to harm people, families, and communities.

This country requires no:
Drones
Domestic spying
Military weapons pointed at Americans

Re:A military solution? (1)

gestalt_n_pepper (991155) | about 9 months ago | (#44233679)

But these particular citizens are essentially domestic terrorists whose targets are other citizens, not buildings. Strikes me as an appropriate use of the technology.

Just round up all the blacks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44232431)

Problem solved

soulskill stop posting this propaganda garbage (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44232441)

holy fuck, this kind of "story" is such an insult to my intelligence, i dont know where to begin.

Re:soulskill stop posting this propaganda garbage (0)

Anachragnome (1008495) | about 9 months ago | (#44232637)

"soulskill stop posting this propaganda garbage"

If they do stop, we won't know who they are. Instead of being indignant, be observant.

Thought gang violence in the U.S. was going down. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44232447)

Just saying.

It may seem to work. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44232473)

We all know just what a swimmingly swell job Afghanistan and Iraq turned out to be. In fact, the "Arabian spring" and general instability is a result of the warring that's been going on over a decade now. And it shows no signs of cooling down.

I for me think this analysis software idea is nice as another spendy chunk of fancy tech, that does about the same as all the other fancy chunks of tech: Disappointingly little.

Because, you know, the best-funded military in the world plus umpteen developed-world allies have been at it for how many years exactly now? and still a bunch of basic cheap rifle-waving robe-wearing medieval-minded sand dwellers are keeping them beholden to the situation they themselves created. Until they're buggering off, and then the sand dwellers will saunter in and take over at leisure. Stocking up on burkas is the safe bet here.

In that sense deploying Army software against domestic city ghettos is yet another attempt to solve a people problem with technology. Which does not work. Which never works. But surely, it got deployed in two deserts, hey, it will work even better in an urban setting, right?

It sounds like they're trying to go to war to their own citizens this time. Instead of, you know, going in and fixing the social fabric in the only fashion that works: Brass-backed grassroots fashion. But that would look like actually having to work at it, and with far less fancy, spendy tech-y toys to play with.

So playing with toys it is. How predictable--this is what Americans do. It may seem to work, but ultimately, it cannot. And so it will not. But it sure will look nice on a few someones their resume.

Numbers (1)

krayl (209847) | about 9 months ago | (#44232507)

Didn't they already do this on Numbers a few years ago?

Re:Numbers (1)

citizenr (871508) | about 9 months ago | (#44233465)

Yes, Numb3rs 10 years ago.
I loved that show, so much math and Machine Learning. I learned a lot of stuff just because I saw it first in some episode and later hit the library to get more info.

one small problem (5, Informative)

jfruh (300774) | about 9 months ago | (#44232573)

With the growing problem of gang violence in major U.S. cities...

This is a friendly reminder that violent crime in the U.S. has dropped every year for the past ten years [psmag.com], and in fact we're at the end of a fairly sustained 20-year drop in crime.

Re:one small problem (1)

b5bartender (2175066) | about 9 months ago | (#44232605)

Shhh, it's harder to pass gun control laws if people know violent crime is actually on the decline!

Re:one small problem (1)

hedwards (940851) | about 9 months ago | (#44232737)

Not really, it's easier to pass those sorts of laws when most people don't feel the need to carry firearms around.

The general arguments made in favor of people having ready access to firearms tend to be hunting and personal protection. If it's just down to hunting, then it's questionable how long the 2nd amendment is going to last, as hunting isn't nearly the emotional issue that self defense is.

Re:one small problem (3, Informative)

cold fjord (826450) | about 9 months ago | (#44233503)

The second amendment isn't ultimately about hunting. It is about the final defense of the American people against tyranny, whether from home or abroad.

Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive. --- Noah Webster [wikiquote.org]

The Swiss have that figured out as well.

In World War II, the Swiss had defenses no other country had. Let's begin with the rifle in every home combined with the Alpine terrain. When the German Kaiser asked in 1912 what the quarter of a million Swiss militiamen would do if invaded by a half million German soldiers, a Swiss replied: shoot twice and go home. Switzerland also had a decentralized, direct democracy which could not be surrendered to a foreign enemy by a political elite. Some governments surrendered to Hitler without resistance based on the decision of a king or dictator; this was institutionally impossible in Switzerland. If an ordinary Swiss citizen was told that the Federal President--a relatively powerless official--had surrendered the country, the citizen might not even know the president's name, and would have held any "surrender" order in contempt. -- Dr. Stephen P. Halbrook [davekopel.com]

Re:one small problem (3, Informative)

hedwards (940851) | about 9 months ago | (#44233691)

The 2nd amendment is because we didn't have a standing military at the time, nor did most parts of the US have any law enforcement of note. Having those firearms at that time served a legitimate need.

Nice to see that you're pretty much completely ignorant of the reasons behind the 2nd amendment.

Re:one small problem (4, Informative)

cold fjord (826450) | about 9 months ago | (#44234059)

The 2nd amendment is because we didn't have a standing military at the time,

That is false two respect. First, the US Army as a force in being predates the Constitution, which is where the 2nd Amendment is found.

The U.S. Army as a permanent institution began on 3 June 1784, when the Confederation Congress approved a resolution to establish a regiment of 700 officers and men. Intended as a force to assert federal authority in the Ohio River Valley, the regiment deployed at a string of posts along the Ohio where it functioned as a frontier constabulary during the last years of the Articles of Confederation era.

Congress adopted this tiny force after the reorganization of the government under the Constitution in 1789. Responding to the outbreak of Indian war in the Old Northwest—and especially to St. Clair's defeat in 1791, the worst setback at Indian hands in the army's history—the government expanded the military establishment to over 5,000 in 1792. Organized as the “American Legion” and commanded by Maj. Gen. Anthony Wayne, the army defeated the northwestern tribes at Fallen Timbers in 1794. During the same year, in response to European threats, the government launched a program of seacoast fortifications and added a corps of artillerists and engineers to build and man them. -- more [answers.com]

Second, the 2nd Amendment rights were not intended to be time limited.

II. A Permanent Right [ucla.edu]

Some people suggest the justification clause provides a built-in expiration date for the right. So long as a well-regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state (or so long as the right to keep and bear arms contributes to a well-regulated militia, or so long as the militia is in fact well-regulated), the argument goes, the people have a right to keep and bear arms; but once the circumstances change and the necessity disappears, so does the right. 12

This reading seems at odds with the text: The Amendment doesn't say "so long as a militia is necessary"; it says "being necessary." Such a locution usually means the speaker is giving a justification for his command, not limiting its duration. 13 If anything, it might require the courts to operate on the assumption that a well-regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state, since that's what the justification clause asserts. 14

--------

Having those firearms at that time served a legitimate need.

They still do. Besides, whether you recognize it or not, if you are an American man you have almost certainly been a part of the militia.

Sec. 311. Militia: composition and classes [house.gov]

-STATUTE-
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are -
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

--------

Nice to see that you're pretty much completely ignorant of the reasons behind the 2nd amendment.

If I have more to learn I don't think you have anything to teach. What you "know" about the matter seems to be wrong.

Re:one small problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44234109)

The 2nd amendment is because we didn't have a standing military at the time, nor did most parts of the US have any law enforcement of note. Having those firearms at that time served a legitimate need.

Nice to see that you're pretty much completely ignorant of the reasons behind the 2nd amendment.

Actually, there are a -lot- of reasons that have been stated / opined as having been behind the 2nd amendment by scholars that seem to have put a bit more effort into their thoughts than you have:

The bottom line is that there exist a multitude of opinions, from scholars that actually back what they say up with decent arguments (you didn't quite make it into that group this time, hedwards), and cold fjord's post falls right into the middle of the range. I would say that making a single-line blanket statement of opinion as fact, then telling cold fjord that -he- is ignorant is laughable.

BTW- cold ford, I'm moderating tonight so posting as AC, but I -did- read your prior posts, and I guess you're not a shill. :-)

Re:one small problem (1)

cold fjord (826450) | about 9 months ago | (#44234351)

That is very gracious of you. Thank you. I hope you have a pleasant evening, and a great week. Cheers!

Re:one small problem (1)

kualla (2872067) | about 9 months ago | (#44232759)

Gangs.... I think the 99% are classified as a gang any time they organize to protest.

Re:one small problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44233117)

At least 62 people were shot including a 5 year old and a 7 year old over the long Fourth of July weekend here in Chicago. 12 of those people were killed. This was almost entirely gangbangers. Maybe violent crime is dropping in the United States but it is still way too high and affecting way too many kids. That being said, I don't think this software will help much. The cops already know who are responsible. The problem is that they are able to insulate themselves from the actual murder, letting some teenager take the blame. That kid will come out of jail in a few years and be a higher ranking gang member and the cycle will repeat.

Re:one small problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44233641)

Y'all need to arm and train the regular, law-abiding citizens. The gang bangers would find themselves outnumbered and outgunned a thousand to one.

The concealed carry bill that the Illinois legislature passed is a good start. Lean on the governor to sign it.

Re:one small problem (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about 9 months ago | (#44233745)

With the growing problem of gang violence in major U.S. cities..... violent crime in the U.S. has dropped every year for the past ten years

Do you understand that both of these can be true? And that gang violence can be a serious and growing problem, even though violent crime overall has dropped? Perhaps using "military counter-insurgency software" is not the right answer, but gangs are a serious, growing problem, and ignoring them isn't going to solve the problem.

Re:one small problem (1)

Flere Imsaho (786612) | about 9 months ago | (#44234417)

Yeah, but is that the wide view? I.E. overall violence has dropped, but gang members specifically are still just as, or more, violent?

Seems familiar? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44232577)

This is what the NSA is doing to all of us.

"Will it work?" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44232579)

Did this system eliminate the presence of terrorists? If not, then perhaps we should be spending more time and energy on solving the problems rather than the symptoms.

More like. . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44232719)

. . .using the fear of street gangs to rake in military-grade toys and funds.

Re:More like. . . (1)

pillageplunder (183475) | about 9 months ago | (#44232829)

not...somuch. The Marines in particular, and others (Army comes to mind) recently have used various games and other "Newsworthy" events as stealth recruiting. Makes a lot of sense, especially given how much access the feds have already taken for granted in us...the civilians, they already have. Look beyond the knee-jerk reactions.

"Will it work? In a word...Yes" (1)

pillageplunder (183475) | about 9 months ago | (#44232745)

The US military will provide a baseline. Successful "affiliations" (Read: Gangs) Will adapt and overcome. Anywhere from 1 to several to many will develop a "base instinct" and a portion of those will wind up serving our country, in one of the several branches, whether or not they are colored as "Military" because its the Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, or other Nun-such.

This isn't stating that the Military and the supporting organizations are "good" or "Bad", it's recognizing that this is a viable recruiting method, and it will have results that are looked upon as positive. Folks with talent get recruited.

If you are going to be successful for the long-term, you look for talent, and adapt that talent any way you can. Ironic isn't it, that Google walks away from one thing. http://mashable.com/2013/06/20/google-stopped-asking-brainteasers/ [mashable.com]
Makes you wonder what they moved on to?

WHAT? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44234079)

I have no idea what the hell you just said. Please restate your argument in English with proper grammar and spelling.

All this banging on about gangs and jails.. (3, Insightful)

benjfowler (239527) | about 9 months ago | (#44233115)

I have to wonder why people are so anti-government, that they live with the idea that while they themselves make a net contribution to society, there are plenty of people who simply lack the ability to manage their own chaotic lives and make everyone else's lives hell.

The libertarian conceit of the middle class, is that everyone else is just as clever, motivated, drug-free and mentally healthy as them, and that the useless are somehow "morally inferior" to their betters. Worse, this conceit goes as far as blaming the useless amongst us, saying they deserve to be dead or rot in jail.

One day, we'll have something between jails (for rehabilitation of criminals) and open society, where people who are too stupid and useless to manage their own chaotic lives can live reasonably well under a highly controlled environment where they can be made to do something useful with their lives and have structure imposed upon them until they can prove that they can properly exercise the rights and responsibilites of citizenship. This may include being compelled to train and work (for pay), and also involve drug rehab, and losing their automatic right to have children.

The "trash" (as people who say) who spawn kids who join gangs belong in sheltered facilities, not on the street.

Re:All this banging on about gangs and jails.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44234151)

I wish I could upvote you more than once.

Next step (1)

manu0601 (2221348) | about 9 months ago | (#44233197)

Next step is to send them drones, first for surveillance, then with weapons. Once accepted, target other groups.

Ironic, because this arose from police tactics (4, Interesting)

HighOrbit (631451) | about 9 months ago | (#44233203)

One of the lessons learned by the military in Iraq was that investigation and interrogation sometimes trumps raw muscle. So the intelligence teams started studying police procedures and thinking like police investigators to establish who was linked to who (in Iraq its usually cousins/tribesmen or people from the same village). They also studied how the French conducted the Battle of Algiers (which the French won despite losing the overall war in Algeria). The French had discovered that figuring out who specifically was running an operation and kicking down his one door was far more effective than randomly kicking down 100 doors . So the French started extensively interrogating (unfortunately with torture) prisoners to figure out who were members of different cells. The French started keeping books of rap-sheets, family trees, organization charts, and mug shots of all suspected insurgents in the city. Once they had a good grasp on a cell's organization, then they merely had to pick them up. The US military learned some of these lessons. For example, if they found finger prints on IED fragments, and the prints matched a guy from the town of Ramadi, then the first place to look for him would be the local house of his cousin who was also originally from Ramadi.

Re:Ironic, because this arose from police tactics (2)

AHuxley (892839) | about 9 months ago | (#44233523)

The international press and French press seemed to know what was been done with post ww2 French torture.
Like the Germans in ww2 they had a good file system and small numbers of experts per region.
The French used torture as it was what had worked for the Germans in occupied Europe - it bought the French political system time to 'think'.
Night raids and black sites work short term but the number of pick ups that become life changing start to add up.
The http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Battle_of_Algiers [wikipedia.org] movie and the Pentagon screening was interesting too.

Re:Ironic, because this arose from police tactics (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44234237)

This is just furhter proof that defeating terrorism is a policing operation, not a military one. If you aren't interviewing every suspect and finding out what makes him tick (which you can do without torturing him) you have no chance.

There was a great BBC doco many years ago interviewing a retired police officer who had defeated an insurgency in pre-WW2 India. He interviewed all the suspects and came to the conclusion that they were the cream of the local society; the best, the brightest, the most motivated. He also worked out that the terrorist organisation, like all human organisattions, had factions. Some factions were more radical that others. This was his way in, and he was eventually able to infiltrate the organisation, commence negotiations with the less radical elements ("Of course, you always say you will never negotiate with terrorists, and in the end you always do.") and marginalise and neutralise the small radical group.

Adapt or in jail (1)

AHuxley (892839) | about 9 months ago | (#44233263)

Social network analysis software used for counter-insurgencies sounds like something from Vietnam 2.0 thinking.
We now really understand the physical and financial drug trail into our country and have the faces for all middle and high ranking professional networks.
Release the vans for massive dawn raids.
As the above is been planned, funded, rolled out every corrupt cop, fed, lawyer, journalist and judge is going to be setting up urgent meetings.
Ideas about voice prints, facial recognition, internet hacking, banking, aircraft been tracked, total ongoing surveillance teams are not new.
Once sub sections of criminal network are taken down the internal questions start.
Was it the bank, the phone, a new deal, a new face, an old face, a map from a new gunshot detection systems induced a clean outside task force?
If digital networks become useless, all meetings are face to face, if the face is new and the slag/recommendation out by weeks or months questions are asked.
The UK tried the GCHQ via court friendly new departments to offer world wide tracking, quality decryption and other innovative services well outside spy cases.
Corrupt cops and corrupt press quickly understood the changes and efforts by the clandestine services would have been exposed or become near useless.
Cross examination in open court gets interesting when the 'expert' has no past or academic standing yet the court seems to 'just' trust them as no other expert would be.
The other option is to close the court but that gets every corrupt cop, fed, lawyer, journalist running to every journalist who ever wrote about 'freedoms' with the story of the decade in near print ready draft form.
The UK used a gigantic grid of blockhouses in the Boer War ~1901 and camps to 'win'.
An old method but to run that on your domestic population is rather final. Your police have to be run as undercover agents or in SWAT convoys.
If advancement is only by number of raids, arrests and frisks the only win is for the people selling the tracking software.

Huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44234103)

What the hell are you trying to say? This is like the third rant in this thread that has been just so ranty and unorganized that I can't tell what you are trying to claim. Please rewrite this in English with proper grammar and spelling and then we'll talk.

It's easy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44233525)

In any given situation, identify the niggers and spics. Then eliminate them. By the way, props to Zimmerman. He did his part in keeping America beautiful. Trayvon go bye-bye.

Gang members ARE domestic terrorists... (2, Interesting)

gestalt_n_pepper (991155) | about 9 months ago | (#44233699)

whose targets are citizens rather than government personnel or buildings. Frankly, this is one case where I'd say the use of this technology is appropriate and overdue.

Re:Gang members ARE domestic terrorists... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44234267)

There is a word for people who commit crime because they are after money - common criminals.

Caption: deterred

A better solution already exists (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44234439)

If a gang perpetrates some violent action on a rival gang, police will often monitor the rival gang more closely because of the likelihood of retaliation. But gangs know this, and so the rivals might instead ask an allied gang to carry out a reprisal.

The better solution is, of course, to close monitor everyone, including the rival gang, their allied gangs, unrelated gangs, their mothers, sisters, friends, neighbors, anyone they meet, or call or didn't call, etc. If you monitor everybody, you won't miss a thing.

After all, wholesale monitoring it has already been implemented and running, why not use the data collected, right? RIGHT??

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...