Pre-Crime Monitoring
April 28, 2016
Stopping crime before it happens is the perfect martial dream. It can save time, resources, and even lives. But for the average citizen, the idea of preventive crime monitoring is more like a science fiction nightmare from Steven Spielberg鈥檚 2002 tech thriller/Tom Cruise vehicle Minority Report.
The pitfalls of pre-crime monitoring are central to Spielberg鈥檚 underlying horror where, in the future, clairvoyant beings 鈥減revisualize鈥� violent crimes before they happen. All is well until the beings previsualize a crime nobody expects to happen, setting off a 145-minute chain of Academy Award-nominated events.
Minority Report鈥檚 claims about free will could keep a philosophy class going for hours, but the real relevance of the film, as with any serious science fiction, is in its prophetic power. No, we don鈥檛 have superhuman psychic mutants, but we do have big data, and as early as 2005, some to effectively identify negative trends and reduce crime in certain cities, like Memphis and Minneapolis. But that was more than a decade ago. A lot has changed since then, and the evolutionary rate shows no sign of cessation. We鈥檙e more connected now, and more and more of our lives are being sent to the cloud. As a result, we鈥檝e laid a strong groundwork for a total surveillance society.
Though some people are okay with the techno-Faustian bargain we鈥檝e bought into, most are still unsettled by the idea and the potentials of digital surveillance. Even with pre-crime tech entering its teen years, recent is rustling some feathers and bringing the field to a pivotal ethical crossroads. The tech isn鈥檛 going away, and it鈥檚 only going to get better. The challenge will be: how do we do it so we don鈥檛 all end up like Tom Cruise on the run?
China鈥檚 pre-crime monitoring program, developed by state-run defense contractor , reportedly captures data on 鈥渏obs, hobbies, consumption habits, and other behavior of ordinary citizens鈥� to predict potential crimes, writes Bloomberg reporter Shai Oster. There鈥檚 nothing notable about the data capture鈥攋ust look at the digital advertising industry鈥攂ut for crime surveillance purposes, its intentions are far more suspect. Especially in China鈥檚 program, where 鈥渢here are no safeguards from [Chinese] privacy protection laws and minimal pushback from civil liberty advocates and companies,鈥� adds Oster.
Surveillance is a mechanism of power, and without legal safeguards or civil, corporate or public pushback, the technology can evolve unchecked. The U.S. has its own safeguards in place鈥攁t least on paper鈥攚hich is why Apple was able to refuse the FBI access to the San Bernardino shooter鈥檚 iPhone a few weeks ago (). The safeguards are in place to guard the privacy of the American public, but in the eyes of the state, they鈥檙e like duct tape over the state鈥檚 camera lens. But because privacy laws in China are overwhelmingly favorable to the state over its public, , 鈥淐hina is poised to emerge as a leader鈥� in pre-crime monitoring technology.
China鈥檚 growing leadership position in pre-crime tech is founded on a military paradigm that favors domestic security over military spending. According to Tucker, China increased its security spending in 2011 by 13 percent to a total of 624 billion yen ($5.6 billion), over military spending at 601 billion yen ($5.4 billion). The increase in spending allowed the Chinese government to launch a national program, 鈥渞equiring 650 Chinese cities to reform their public security and safety infrastructures with state-of-the-art technologies,鈥� according to . Technologies in the overhaul include tracking technologies, video surveillance, physical identity and access management, cyber security, physical security information management, and other surveillance hardware and software.
This tech ramp-up is part of a greater Chinese effort towards 鈥渟ocial governance,鈥� or 鈥渟ocial management,鈥� which鈥攖hough difficult to define in English鈥攊s distinct from government oversight of economic and state governance: Instead, it speaks to how 鈥渢he government manages and regulates social affairs, social organizations and social life, with the guidance of law,鈥� according to . The push comes from the changes spurred by China鈥檚 increased urbanization, where the government is increasingly expected to maintain social stability. Including general social affairs in this larger state oversight effort is one piece of the larger surveillance pie, and with digital tech integral to modern social affairs, it makes practical sense for states to drive resources towards social surveillance.
To officiate the strength and scope of these resources, China drafted a new cybersecurity law last year authorizing 鈥渂road powers to control the flow of information,鈥� writes . Recognizing the democratizing ideology of open Internet, China already has in place restrictive Internet laws, and the new draft law says that the state鈥檚 Internet information department is 鈥渞esponsible for comprehensively planning and coordinating network security efforts and related supervision and management efforts.鈥� And instead of creating new cybersecurity initiatives, the new draft law instead elevates extant practices and regulations to the state level, ensuring the centralization and efficacy of state surveillance power.
Asked whether China鈥檚 increased spending on domestic security is part of a greater global trend, , the Maurice R. Greenberg senior fellow for China studies and director of the Digital and Cyberspace Policy Program, said the tech is instead being driven by China鈥檚 specific 鈥渃oncerns about social protests and threats to domestic control鈥濃�攐r what it calls terrorism. In a , Segal argued that despite the locality of its efforts, China is looking to the global stage as a reference and defense for their anti-terrorism surveillance, stating that the provisions of the cybersecurity and data collection laws are in accordance with 鈥渋nternational common practices.鈥�
In his article Segal adds, "The desire for data may only intensify under Xi Jinping鈥檚 leadership; the Chinese Communist Party appears increasingly worried about domestic stability and the spread of information within the country鈥檚 borders." It鈥檚 not something China takes lightly, either, if you recall the 2010 incident in Xinjiang where the state ended ten straight months of Internet blockage in the region following between the Muslim Uighurs and the Chinese Han. China blamed overseas groups using the Internet for inciting the violence, and shut down regional access to curb information sharing. The riots left around 197 people dead and another 1,600 injured and fit the context for China鈥檚 definition of terrorism, which its pre-crime monitoring program is now attempting to curb.
鈥淲hen the Chinese refer to cyber terrorism,鈥� Segal added in an interview, 鈥渢hey are referring to the spread of extremist ideas as well as the promotion of violence鈥攕ay, sharing of how to construct IEDs.鈥� China鈥檚 pre-crime monitoring program will flag any terrorist-like behavior, such as sudden influxes of cash, frequency of international calls, and other analyzed trends, allowing authorities to target specific instigators, freeze their accounts, and open up further information inquiries鈥攖o stop any terrorist acts before they happen. 鈥淭he issue for the U.S.,鈥� adds Segal, 鈥渋s that some forms of speech the Chinese consider terrorist鈥斺�榮plittism鈥� from Uighur or Tibetan activists鈥攖he U.S., would likely consider legitimate public discourse.鈥�
And here鈥檚 the grind, that one person鈥檚 terrorism is another鈥檚 free speech. 鈥淪ince all algorithms and data gathering are inherently political,鈥� Segal says. 鈥淭he system, if possible, would seem ripe for abuse.鈥� Power is concerned with self-preservation, and pre-crime monitoring, using big data and analytics for its support, is another tool in this arsenal. But the technology won鈥檛 stop, and it will only get better鈥攅specially as more of modern life gets sent to the cloud. For pre-crime monitoring to advance, be effective, and avoid Minority Report-scale misapplication, it will need to prioritize ethics over returns.
Benjamin van Loon is a writer, researcher, and communications professional living in Chicago, IL. He holds a master鈥檚 degree in communications and media from Northeastern Illinois University and bachelors degrees in English and philosophy from North Park University. Follow him on Twitter and view more of his work at .
April 28, 2016
Stopping crime before it happens is the perfect martial dream. It can save time, resources, and even lives. But for the average citizen, the idea of preventive crime monitoring is more like a science fiction nightmare from Steven Spielberg鈥檚 2002 tech thriller/Tom Cruise vehicle Minority Report.
The pitfalls of pre-crime monitoring are central to Spielberg鈥檚 underlying horror where, in the future, clairvoyant beings 鈥減revisualize鈥� violent crimes before they happen. All is well until the beings previsualize a crime nobody expects to happen, setting off a 145-minute chain of Academy Award-nominated events.
Minority Report鈥檚 claims about free will could keep a philosophy class going for hours, but the real relevance of the film, as with any serious science fiction, is in its prophetic power. No, we don鈥檛 have superhuman psychic mutants, but we do have big data, and as early as 2005, some to effectively identify negative trends and reduce crime in certain cities, like Memphis and Minneapolis. But that was more than a decade ago. A lot has changed since then, and the evolutionary rate shows no sign of cessation. We鈥檙e more connected now, and more and more of our lives are being sent to the cloud. As a result, we鈥檝e laid a strong groundwork for a total surveillance society.
Though some people are okay with the techno-Faustian bargain we鈥檝e bought into, most are still unsettled by the idea and the potentials of digital surveillance. Even with pre-crime tech entering its teen years, recent is rustling some feathers and bringing the field to a pivotal ethical crossroads. The tech isn鈥檛 going away, and it鈥檚 only going to get better. The challenge will be: how do we do it so we don鈥檛 all end up like Tom Cruise on the run?
China鈥檚 pre-crime monitoring program, developed by state-run defense contractor , reportedly captures data on 鈥渏obs, hobbies, consumption habits, and other behavior of ordinary citizens鈥� to predict potential crimes, writes Bloomberg reporter Shai Oster. There鈥檚 nothing notable about the data capture鈥攋ust look at the digital advertising industry鈥攂ut for crime surveillance purposes, its intentions are far more suspect. Especially in China鈥檚 program, where 鈥渢here are no safeguards from [Chinese] privacy protection laws and minimal pushback from civil liberty advocates and companies,鈥� adds Oster.
Surveillance is a mechanism of power, and without legal safeguards or civil, corporate or public pushback, the technology can evolve unchecked. The U.S. has its own safeguards in place鈥攁t least on paper鈥攚hich is why Apple was able to refuse the FBI access to the San Bernardino shooter鈥檚 iPhone a few weeks ago (). The safeguards are in place to guard the privacy of the American public, but in the eyes of the state, they鈥檙e like duct tape over the state鈥檚 camera lens. But because privacy laws in China are overwhelmingly favorable to the state over its public, , 鈥淐hina is poised to emerge as a leader鈥� in pre-crime monitoring technology.
China鈥檚 growing leadership position in pre-crime tech is founded on a military paradigm that favors domestic security over military spending. According to Tucker, China increased its security spending in 2011 by 13 percent to a total of 624 billion yen ($5.6 billion), over military spending at 601 billion yen ($5.4 billion). The increase in spending allowed the Chinese government to launch a national program, 鈥渞equiring 650 Chinese cities to reform their public security and safety infrastructures with state-of-the-art technologies,鈥� according to . Technologies in the overhaul include tracking technologies, video surveillance, physical identity and access management, cyber security, physical security information management, and other surveillance hardware and software.
This tech ramp-up is part of a greater Chinese effort towards 鈥渟ocial governance,鈥� or 鈥渟ocial management,鈥� which鈥攖hough difficult to define in English鈥攊s distinct from government oversight of economic and state governance: Instead, it speaks to how 鈥渢he government manages and regulates social affairs, social organizations and social life, with the guidance of law,鈥� according to . The push comes from the changes spurred by China鈥檚 increased urbanization, where the government is increasingly expected to maintain social stability. Including general social affairs in this larger state oversight effort is one piece of the larger surveillance pie, and with digital tech integral to modern social affairs, it makes practical sense for states to drive resources towards social surveillance.
To officiate the strength and scope of these resources, China drafted a new cybersecurity law last year authorizing 鈥渂road powers to control the flow of information,鈥� writes . Recognizing the democratizing ideology of open Internet, China already has in place restrictive Internet laws, and the new draft law says that the state鈥檚 Internet information department is 鈥渞esponsible for comprehensively planning and coordinating network security efforts and related supervision and management efforts.鈥� And instead of creating new cybersecurity initiatives, the new draft law instead elevates extant practices and regulations to the state level, ensuring the centralization and efficacy of state surveillance power.
Asked whether China鈥檚 increased spending on domestic security is part of a greater global trend, , the Maurice R. Greenberg senior fellow for China studies and director of the Digital and Cyberspace Policy Program, said the tech is instead being driven by China鈥檚 specific 鈥渃oncerns about social protests and threats to domestic control鈥濃�攐r what it calls terrorism. In a , Segal argued that despite the locality of its efforts, China is looking to the global stage as a reference and defense for their anti-terrorism surveillance, stating that the provisions of the cybersecurity and data collection laws are in accordance with 鈥渋nternational common practices.鈥�
In his article Segal adds, "The desire for data may only intensify under Xi Jinping鈥檚 leadership; the Chinese Communist Party appears increasingly worried about domestic stability and the spread of information within the country鈥檚 borders." It鈥檚 not something China takes lightly, either, if you recall the 2010 incident in Xinjiang where the state ended ten straight months of Internet blockage in the region following between the Muslim Uighurs and the Chinese Han. China blamed overseas groups using the Internet for inciting the violence, and shut down regional access to curb information sharing. The riots left around 197 people dead and another 1,600 injured and fit the context for China鈥檚 definition of terrorism, which its pre-crime monitoring program is now attempting to curb.
鈥淲hen the Chinese refer to cyber terrorism,鈥� Segal added in an interview, 鈥渢hey are referring to the spread of extremist ideas as well as the promotion of violence鈥攕ay, sharing of how to construct IEDs.鈥� China鈥檚 pre-crime monitoring program will flag any terrorist-like behavior, such as sudden influxes of cash, frequency of international calls, and other analyzed trends, allowing authorities to target specific instigators, freeze their accounts, and open up further information inquiries鈥攖o stop any terrorist acts before they happen. 鈥淭he issue for the U.S.,鈥� adds Segal, 鈥渋s that some forms of speech the Chinese consider terrorist鈥斺�榮plittism鈥� from Uighur or Tibetan activists鈥攖he U.S., would likely consider legitimate public discourse.鈥�
And here鈥檚 the grind, that one person鈥檚 terrorism is another鈥檚 free speech. 鈥淪ince all algorithms and data gathering are inherently political,鈥� Segal says. 鈥淭he system, if possible, would seem ripe for abuse.鈥� Power is concerned with self-preservation, and pre-crime monitoring, using big data and analytics for its support, is another tool in this arsenal. But the technology won鈥檛 stop, and it will only get better鈥攅specially as more of modern life gets sent to the cloud. For pre-crime monitoring to advance, be effective, and avoid Minority Report-scale misapplication, it will need to prioritize ethics over returns.
Benjamin van Loon is a writer, researcher, and communications professional living in Chicago, IL. He holds a master鈥檚 degree in communications and media from Northeastern Illinois University and bachelors degrees in English and philosophy from North Park University. Follow him on Twitter and view more of his work at .