One of the most prolific criminals in all of San Francisco tells @adam22 that “crime in San Francisco is over with” because of Flock cameras + drones. He complains that he can’t even do drivebys anymore.
It’s simple: when the risk of getting caught is too high, crime plummets.
It's been interesting and puzzling to witness the problems with accuracy in UK economic statistics over the past few years. (See the links in the next tweet for more.) It seems that the Office for National Statistics, ONS, now struggles to effectively measure basic figures such as employment, trade, and inflation. This resulted in a quite scathing government report published last summer, where Robert Devereux, a former permanent secretary, concluded that "most of the well-publicised problems with core economic statistics are the consequence of ONS’s own performance."
There's a lot of discussion about the travails facing the UK these days (including this big piece in The Atlantic a few weeks ago[1]), and the problems with the ONS feel like an unsettling microcosm of diffuse decline in broader institutional competence.
Anyhow: at Stripe, we became curious about the UK's published entrepreneurship data. While we observe a boom in many parts of the world, official figures don't show a similar increase in the UK. In the latest Stripe Economics post, we dug into the data, and, as far as we can tell, the official figures are probably misleading. The good and the bad news (mostly good, I think!) is that the UK is almost certainly witnessing an unmeasured boom in entrepreneurship: https://t.co/R7oTZNmxc6
UK-specific issues aside, I suspect that this measurement question is illustrative of forthcoming econometric challenges. Keeping the world's macro indicators up-to-date in response to the faster-than-usual changes wrought by AI will be both increasingly difficult and increasingly important in the coming years.
[1] https://t.co/OAnwRmpyON
@Ben04650002 You can't even comprehend a simple police statement, so I can fully understand why you can't/won't engage in the more technical rendering. Jog on now...
@Ben04650002@InspGadgetBlogs One minute you are worringly obsessed about the minutiae of the police statement, then when you get a comprehensive answer to your repeated "Why?" question, you run away. You were never interested in the answer, were you?
@RuthMBettie@GHWTowler If they hadn't made the statements, they would be pilloried for not following guidance in combatting the online speculation and thereby risking the integrity of the operation. It would have handed Defence Counsel the first small wedge in their case.
@LupineLives Is he really an upgrade on Starmer (who whipped his MPs to vote against him being referred to the Parliamentary Standards Committee)? Snivelling weasels, the lot of them.
@ourtone69@gmhales It was "no information" and they didn't rule out a link at all. The press mangled the official police statements and gave the impression that they had: https://t.co/SmoLYiGJe9
@King_Rat_II@gmhales They certainly hypothesize in investigations...but they have the data and info to help them do that that isn't available to the public.
@schoopydobloop@gmhales But if the Police are being asked the perfectly reasonable question about a political motive, then it's perfectly reasonable to give a true and accurate answer.