[HN Gopher] Scientists are teaching drones to hunt down human sc...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Scientists are teaching drones to hunt down human screams
        
       Author : zdw
       Score  : 52 points
       Date   : 2021-06-18 19:02 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.washingtonpost.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.washingtonpost.com)
        
       | pixel_tracing wrote:
       | Breaking News: Couple threatens lawsuit against city for drone
       | that lit up bedroom with high intensity flash beams during wild
       | BDSM sexcapade
        
         | sergiomattei wrote:
         | Motels are going to have a hard time with this one.
        
       | NemuriBaku wrote:
       | If you're terrified of drones, that's an interesting feedback
       | loop.
        
       | mirkules wrote:
       | I don't see any way this could go wrong.
       | 
       | But in all seriousness, would this replace or augment current IR
       | detection of survivals in natural disasters? Searching from high
       | up might not be the most ideal position to search from - this
       | could work well outfitted on a rover. In fact, I would love to
       | see a tiny little rover that can crawl into spaces and search for
       | survivors, sounds and body heat.
        
         | toxik wrote:
         | Wheels are not good for uneven terrain such as rubles and
         | forests!
        
         | dimatura wrote:
         | Doesn't seem the most practical way to go about it, with drones
         | being so noisy and all. It probably doesn't make sense for this
         | to replace cameras (visible and IR), for all sorts of reasons.
         | But I could see it being helpful as an extra input in some
         | cases.
        
           | schelling42 wrote:
           | Sound has the advantage of going around corners though...
        
         | bee_rider wrote:
         | > I don't see any way this could go wrong.
         | 
         | We asked to robots to maximize the number of screaming humans
         | they found... it turns out that metric proved quite easy to
         | game.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | reedf1 wrote:
       | The headline!
        
       | klyrs wrote:
       | Awesome. When the kids play outside, it's nonstop screaming. Now
       | they'll have extra targets for their water/nerf guns
        
         | setr wrote:
         | It's a pretty distinctly different kind of scream though -- the
         | same reason we don't currently get scared when we hear kids
         | playing.
        
           | klyrs wrote:
           | Sure. I can tell when my kid's hurt over the din of the
           | rabble... mostly. But sometimes nothing's actually wrong and
           | it seems like a cry for attention and I run outside for
           | nothing. Just takes one kid recognizing that screaming bloody
           | murder summons the bots...
        
           | handrous wrote:
           | Excited-screaming, maybe. "My brother just threw my favorite
           | toy in a mud-puddle" screaming? Nope, that sounds exactly
           | like death or dismemberment is happening.
        
           | tooltower wrote:
           | Right, and there's no reason to worry about machines
           | mistaking one kind of scream for another.
        
       | happytoexplain wrote:
       | The sub-headline:
       | 
       | > Researchers developed a drone-carried acoustics system to find
       | people calling out for help
       | 
       | Quite a contrast!
        
         | avocad wrote:
         | That's a relief! If they teach them to replicate themselves,
         | many more people could be rescued.
        
           | dane-pgp wrote:
           | But they might not be able to reach people who are hidden
           | under the rubble of a collapsed building, for example.
           | Ideally the drones would be built using nanotechnology,
           | allowing them to be so small that they're almost invisible.
           | Of course, coordinating their movements would require quite a
           | powerful AI...
        
         | vagrantJin wrote:
         | Thank goodness.
         | 
         | For second there I thought terminator was becoming real in my
         | lifetime.
         | 
         | Or that military drones may be equipped with this sort of tech
         | to find civilians/soldiers then deliver an explosive payload
         | just for kicks.
         | 
         | Glad we are starting to use it for good. For now at least.
        
           | swader999 wrote:
           | I thought my wife was about to get swarmed.
        
         | mhuffman wrote:
         | >The sub-headline:
         | 
         | The sub-sub-headline: Researchers develop military tech to hunt
         | down targets that have only been wounded!
        
         | elefanten wrote:
         | Yup. And a great example of the clickbait dystopia we live in.
         | Dishonesty reigns in the public sphere.
        
           | excalibur wrote:
           | Assuming the technology will not be used for nefarious
           | purposes seems incredibly naive
        
             | jwhitlark wrote:
             | What's the nefarious use of finding someone who is already
             | screaming?
        
               | heavyset_go wrote:
               | Suppression of dissent.
        
               | grogenaut wrote:
               | Isn't one of the hottest movies right now about monsters
               | that kill anything that makes a noise?
        
               | munk-a wrote:
               | Locating winning lottery tickets?
        
               | harimau777 wrote:
               | Eliminating survivors
        
               | Steltek wrote:
               | There needs to be a name for comments that are so
               | sociopathic and terrifying that I jump in my seat. HN
               | seems to do this more than Reddit, which is also
               | disturbing.
        
               | dash2 wrote:
               | More generally, listening and detecting human speech and
               | intent has plenty of military uses, and they are the main
               | buyers of drones. It seems quite common for technologists
               | to come up with humanitarian justifications for what is
               | really new military hardware.
        
           | mycologos wrote:
           | Not to pick on this comment too much, but people's quick
           | trigger to label something "dystopia" contributes to this
           | dishonesty. Editors write headlines like this for the same
           | reason people like "dystopia" -- it's usually inaccurate, but
           | it gets attention.
        
           | infogulch wrote:
           | It's interesting, the difference is only in the intent, the
           | technology itself doesn't express any preference between
           | these headlines.
        
             | munk-a wrote:
             | But, intent is everything. "Man forces widespread epidemic
             | of cutting on society at large" vs. "Biden advocates for
             | nationwide vaccination" are similarly not particularly
             | distinct at a technical level but quite different
             | headlines.
             | 
             | Well, unless you're an anti-vaxer then I suppose they are
             | identical in multiple ways.
        
               | barbazoo wrote:
               | What does "Man forces widespread epidemic of cutting on
               | society at large" even mean?
        
               | munk-a wrote:
               | Man encourages people throughout society to be jabbed
               | with pointy things?
               | 
               | My two examples are meant to be alternative ways to
               | describe the vaccine rollout but one with the intent
               | removed and replaced with a sensationalized headline. You
               | could describe getting vaccinated as being cut, it isn't
               | entirely incorrect, it's just extremely misleading.
        
               | ttt0 wrote:
               | In case of technological progress, intent is nothing.
        
             | javajosh wrote:
             | The kindest thing I could say about the clickbait version
             | is that it has the ring of a riddle. I'm sure I'm not the
             | only one who took a moment to consider what it could
             | _really_ mean. Although, that in-and-of-itself is making it
             | effective at garnering attention, just via a different
             | psychological route!
             | 
             | That said, the verb phrase "hunt down" is an important part
             | of the "color" that, if you were describing it to a
             | computer you'd leave out.
        
       | yellow_lead wrote:
       | Useful for rescue operations and military err... applications.
        
       | tootie wrote:
       | Related existing tech is Shotspotter. Placed on rooftops in
       | cities it can detect and triangulate the sound of gunfire. Picks
       | up the occasional backfiring car though.
       | 
       | https://www.shotspotter.com/
        
         | dragonwriter wrote:
         | > Picks up the occasional backfiring car though.
         | 
         | It picks up more than occasional backfires besides actual
         | gunshots, which is connected to concerns about its use being a
         | pretext for selective policing in minority communities (or even
         | outright manufacturing evidence to support police narratives):
         | 
         | ---
         | 
         | https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/carolinehaskins1/police...
         | 
         | ---
         | 
         | "...a study of Chicago police data found that over a nearly
         | 22-month period ending in mid-April, almost 90% of ShotSpotter
         | alerts didn't result in officers reporting evidence of shots
         | fired or of any gun crime." https://apnews.com/article/chicago-
         | police-crime-shootings-be...
         | 
         | ---
         | 
         | https://www.kpbs.org/news/2019/jun/19/pros-and-cons-gunshot-...
         | (The series of "ifs" used in the police lieutenant's defense of
         | the value of the system is...quite impressive.)
         | 
         | ---
         | 
         | Simmons was accused of firing the first shot and charged with
         | the attempted murder of a police officer, among other offences.
         | Recordings by ShotSpotter were used against Simmons at trial,
         | but evidence surfaced that the service had initially
         | categorized loud noises in his neighborhood as the sound of a
         | helicopter overhead -- until Rochester police notified the
         | service that an officer-involved shooting had taken place.
         | ShotSpotter would then change the number of gunshots that it
         | had reportedly detected from three shots to four shots, and
         | then five shots.
         | 
         | After spending 18 months in jail and eventually being cleared
         | of attempted aggravated murder, aggravated assault of a police
         | officer, and two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in
         | the second degree, Simmons is now suing the city of Rochester,
         | two police officers, a former police chief, and ShotSpotter.
         | Matters were complicated when Paul Greene, the Forensic
         | Services Manager of ShotSpotter, admitted in court that the
         | audio file from the time of Simmons' shooting was gone. Greene
         | also admitted that unlocked or unencrypted ShotSpotter audio
         | files can be altered by ShotSpotter employees or police.
         | 
         | https://www.codastory.com/authoritarian-tech/gun-violence-po...
        
         | jfultz wrote:
         | The television show Person of Interest had an episode that
         | featured a technology called "ShotSeeker" that was modeled
         | after ShotSpotter. In the storyline, ShotSeeker is paired with
         | human oversight to help distinguish real gunfire from other
         | sounds. However, the police develop such high confidence in the
         | results that the program is co-opted to both hide real crimes
         | (by declaring actual gunshots fake) and to set up an attempted
         | murder by effectively "swatting" one of the characters.
         | 
         | https://personofinterest.fandom.com/wiki/ShotSeeker
        
         | rapnie wrote:
         | There's this cool application of using old smartphones to
         | locate chainsaws in the rainforest indicative of illegal
         | logging.
         | 
         | https://www.livingcircular.veolia.com/en/eco-citizen/topher-...
        
         | Judgmentality wrote:
         | > Picks up the occasional backfiring car though.
         | 
         | Never really used it, but from what I've heard (which is just
         | comments on the internet) it's unreliable enough that it's not
         | particularly useful.
        
           | btilly wrote:
           | Actually it is extremely useful. However it won't work as
           | well if you use a silencer. (Which are better named
           | suppressors, the gun is still quite loud but won't be doing
           | as much damage to your hearing.) As in, we can make it work.
           | But making it sensitive enough to catch quieted guns inside
           | of houses will also make it sensitive enough to generate a
           | ton of false positives.
           | 
           | This is one of the main reasons why there is a debate about
           | the use of silencers. And people who want to be able to use
           | silencers have an agenda to make the technology seem less
           | useful than it is.
        
           | heavyset_go wrote:
           | > _it 's unreliable enough that it's not particularly
           | useful._
           | 
           | Any machine or black box that law enforcement can use either
           | as pretext for doing whatever they want, or as something to
           | point to to absolve themselves of responsibility, has value.
        
             | dragonwriter wrote:
             | > Any machine or black box that law enforcement can use
             | either as pretext for doing whatever they want, or as
             | something to point to to absolve themselves of
             | responsibility, has value.
             | 
             | I think you left out "negative social" before the last word
             | there.
        
           | munk-a wrote:
           | Do you work in law enforcement? This sort of tech seems
           | particularly useful to move units in to respond to in
           | progress shootings especially to reinforce and pinpoint the
           | source of distress for 911 calls.
        
             | dragonwriter wrote:
             | Some law enforcement seems to love it, though others have
             | rejected it (some after using it for a while) because of
             | cost, studies of its low reliability (particularly, high
             | false positives), low benefit because actual gunshots tend
             | to get as much information from 911 calls as Shotspotter
             | provides, and community relations concerns.
        
         | sschueller wrote:
         | Is there any open source project like this? Locate a sounds
         | direction using multiple microphones?
        
       | dghughes wrote:
       | How many goats will it find. Ever hear a goat "scream"? Very
       | human-like.
        
         | alistairSH wrote:
         | Sheep more than goats, and more like a belligerent drunkard
         | than somebody in distress...
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y07TDTFSSMQ
        
           | grp000 wrote:
           | They sound like Serious Sam bomb guys.
        
         | slipframe wrote:
         | Mountain lions too, which sound disturbingly like women
         | screaming for their life.
        
         | avocad wrote:
         | In the morning to you too!
        
       | slumdev wrote:
       | Sounds like the working title of a Harlan Ellison short.
        
         | ralmidani wrote:
         | Or a ripoff of PKD's "Second Variety".
        
           | teddyh wrote:
           | Available here: https://web.archive.org/web/20150419140249/ht
           | tp://american-b...
        
       | loopback_device wrote:
       | All-Access Digital EUR5 every 4 weeks or just EUR50 EUR20 for the
       | first year
        
       | donw wrote:
       | Inexplicably, when launched, the drones immediately set off on a
       | direct heading to the closest JIRA user.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-06-18 23:02 UTC)