"Person of Interest" (CBS TV Show) = Plausible Surveillance or Hollywood Hype?

[IdaBriggs]

http://www.cbs.com/shows/person_of_interest/

PERSON OF INTEREST stars Jim Caviezel, Emmy Award winner Michael Emerson and Academy Award nominee Taraji P. Henson in a crime thriller about a presumed dead former-CIA agent, Reese, who teams up with a mysterious billionaire, Finch, to prevent violent crimes by using their own brand of vigilante justice. Reese's special training in covert operations appeals to Finch, a software genius who invented a program that uses pattern recognition to identify people about to be involved in violent crimes. Using state-of-the-art surveillance technology, the two work outside of the law, using Reese's adept skills and Finch's unlimited wealth to unravel the mystery of the "person of interest" and stop the crime before it happens. Reese's actions draw the attention of the NYPD, including homicide detective Carter, and Fusco, a cop whom Reese uses to his advantage. With infinite crimes to investigate, Reese and Finch find that the right person, with the right information, at the right time, can change everything.

Yes, yes, it is a television show designed to be entertaining, but did you ever notice the automatic assumption of "state of the art surveillance technology" which makes "the Machine" an actual character in the show?

Things hooked together (on the show):

-- Traffic cameras w/audio
-- Corporate surveillance cameras
-- Cell phone cloning
-- Email
-- Telephone Calls
(and probably more, as the plot requires)

4 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Time expired
	100% Completely plausible; probably currently being used in some fashion.
	3 (75%)
	75% Completely plausible but definitely not being used - too expensive!
	0 (0%)
	50% Parts are *MAYBE* possible, but only used every now and then.
	0 (0%)
	25% Probably being invented somewhere, but not used in everyday life.
	0 (0%)
	0% Beam me up, Scotty! This technology is more science fiction than actual fact.
	1 (25%)
	Other: Please explain.
	0 (0%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[HiPointDem]

1. plausible. there was a brief flurry about some program that did this, but i've forgotten its

name.

posts about it got smacked down at du, but i'd bet it actually exists.

[ananda]

2. I have a hard time answering polls like this.

That's because POI is a tv show, a fiction.

Yes, in this real world, widespread surveillance and cameras and
all that is a true conundrum. There is the feeling that we need
all this for security and protection; but there is also the problem
of the police state and what it does to people and groups perceived
as enemies to the state, particularly when that state is corporate
controlled and getting more and more fascist.

[IdaBriggs]

7. I think this is one of the jobs our "fiction" explores.

What are the "rules" for the technology we create? What is acceptable behavior? How do we trade off in the real world?

Isaac Assimov created the "3 Rules for Robots" while robots were being invented; surveillance and communication need to be explored, too.

[onehandle]

3. Possible, but the infrastructure and manpower to do this is way too expensive on that scale.

Someday?

Only if we survive.

[IdaBriggs]

5. The "manpower" is actually controlled by an AI in the show.

Brings the cost of analysis down...

[Fuddnik]

4. It's a good show for sure.

[IdaBriggs]

6. We enjoy it.

The "high tech" is just an accepted fact in the show; the plot always revolves around the human stuff required to solve the puzzle.

I've gotten to the point where I don't even blink when they "clone" a cell phone - I mean, doesn't law enforcement do that all the time?

That was when I realized how much I accept as "plausible" - and what I would assume law enforcement would use it for.

Then add in "Continuum" and the different things tech makes possible there ---

Makes you go "hmmm...."

[Bradical79]

8. Plausible up to a point

A good chunk of this stuff could be linked together (and probably has somewhat) but we don't have the type of AI controller that's used in the show for that level of effectiveness.

[RC]

9. They are working on it. Oh yes they are.

The Secret War

INFILTRATION. SABOTAGE. MAYHEM. FOR YEARS, FOUR-STAR GENERAL KEITH ALEXANDER HAS BEEN BUILDING A SECRET ARMY CAPABLE OF LAUNCHING DEVASTATING CYBERATTACKS. NOW IT’S READY TO UNLEASH HELL.

Inside Fort Meade, Maryland, a top-secret city bustles. Tens of thousands of people move through more than 50 buildings—the city has its own post office, fire department, and police force. But as if designed by Kafka, it sits among a forest of trees, surrounded by electrified fences and heavily armed guards, protected by antitank barriers, monitored by sensitive motion detectors, and watched by rotating cameras. To block any telltale electromagnetic signals from escaping, the inner walls of the buildings are wrapped in protective copper shielding and the one-way windows are embedded with a fine copper mesh.

>SNIP<

Alexander runs the nation’s cyberwar efforts, an empire he has built over the past eight years by insisting that the US’s inherent vulnerability to digital attacks requires him to amass more and more authority over the data zipping around the globe. In his telling, the threat is so mind-bogglingly huge that the nation has little option but to eventually put the entire civilian Internet under his protection, requiring tweets and emails to pass through his filters, and putting the kill switch under the government’s forefinger. “What we see is an increasing level of activity on the networks,” he said at a recent security conference in Canada. “I am concerned that this is going to break a threshold where the private sector can no longer handle it and the government is going to have to step in.”

In its tightly controlled public relations, the NSA has focused attention on the threat of cyberattack against the US—the vulnerability of critical infrastructure like power plants and water systems, the susceptibility of the military’s command and control structure, the dependence of the economy on the Internet’s smooth functioning. Defense against these threats was the paramount mission trumpeted by NSA brass at congressional hearings and hashed over at security conferences.

But there is a flip side to this equation that is rarely mentioned: The military has for years been developing offensive capabilities, giving it the power not just to defend the US but to assail its foes. Using so-called cyber-kinetic attacks, Alexander and his forces now have the capability to physically destroy an adversary’s equipment and infrastructure, and potentially even to kill. Alexander—who declined to be interviewed for this article—has concluded that such cyberweapons are as crucial to 21st-century warfare as nuclear arms were in the 20th.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/?p=58188

The pathalogicial paranoia of our country is unparalleled in the history of the world. We give our technology to other countries, so that later we can turn them into the "Enemy" we, in our psychos, need to function. We topple governments for short term gains, then later when they fail to do our bidding for whatever reason, we go to war with them. Blaming THEM for for the results of OUR actions, as the excuse for military action. Talk about your Sting Operations. We do it on a world scale. How long till the rest of the world gets tired of our meddling and pushes back?

Would it not make more sense to not be making enemies of the rest of the world in the first place? Trust has to be earned. Once gone, is very hard to regain. Where is the trust the rest of the world once had in us, US, The United States of America? For who do we trust? Like the pathologically paranoid, we trust no one, not even those we need to help us in our delusions.

[Dawson Leery]

10. Seeing that Caviezel is a right wing religous kook,

he will fit in perfectly with this show.

[RC]

12. And Obama has continued most of bu$h's policies and

has appointed many Republicans to his Cabinet. Are you are saying that Obama is a right wing kook?
You know, of course, that there are people here that do not like any disparaging of Obama. You need to be more careful.

Anyway what does your post have to do with mine post? Other it is obvious you had trouble wrapping your head around it. Could it be because the excerpts weren't written at a 5th grade level, but at a educated collage level?

[LWolf]

11. Other: both. nt