RTFA: http://www.nsf.gov/discoveries/disc_summ.jsp?cntn_…

Click on the Image to Watch NSF Video on DI-HOPE-KD

Law enforcement agencies have been doing this type of connect-the-dots work for decades, but it often requires weeks and sometimes months of painstaking formatting and reviewing by human eyes before useful data is discovered.

By looking for higher-order links–links that connect more than two dots–DI-HOPE-KD can do the same job in minutes and sometimes even seconds, saving a great deal of time and producing more useful and accurate information than traditional searches.
…
According to Pottenger, DI-HOPE-KD also allows different agencies and databases to collaborate and share information in an intuitive way without sharing all the specifics of that information. He gives the real-life example of a case where a framework like DI-HOPE-KD can tell investigators that a higher order link exists between a pseudoephedrine manufacturer in one town, a drug-dealing broker in another and an illicit meth lab in a third without revealing the details of the connection.

The investigators can then use other traditional means, including warrants and court orders, to pin down the nature of the connection and make arrests.

Pottenger believes there are far-reaching applications for this type of intuitive, yet privacy-enhancing data search, sharing and knowledge discovery technology in fields such as healthcare and retailing as well as in everyday tasks of information search and sharing.

He is also the CEO of Intuidex, a startup company working to commercialize DI-HOPE-KD, and is already collaborating with the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and others to demonstrate the value of the technology in the field.

Professor and Entrepreneur Pottenger has sold his genius to evil. The NSF has been funding the development of software that will supposedly piece together disparate pieces of information to identify possible criminal activity.

The worst aspect is the double speak involved in all of this. There are two levels at which the BS spews forth:

1. There is a hard-sell of the software being “privacy enhancing.” The way it supposedly enhances privacy, according to Pottenger, is that the computer uses information that typically requires the use of a warrant to make high-order connections and then sends law enforcement one piece of the puzzle — your telephone number is the example he uses in the video — and they reconstruct what the computer found using “traditional” means (that is, constitutional ones such as warrants and court orders). There is also a fundamental assumption that the human element is the one that will respect the privacy. But, if we trusted humans so implicitly, we wouldn’t need law enforcement in the first place. The only privacy enhancing component of this software are the 5th and 6th words in its name. Otherwise, it violates privacy. That’s why law enforcement cannot be told all the information the software used to flag a citizen.
2. The idea that this process will be more accurate because it tries to make high-order connections is not the whole truth. Connections at multiple dimensions mean connections that are less concrete, more abstract. That is: (you message your friend through facebook to schedule a trip to RadioShack) + (your friend purchases a 12V battery) + (your dad the gardener purchased some fertilizer 3 months ago) + (someone makes an explosive device within 50 miles of your home) = the FBI shows up at your workplace to interrogate you. Great.

Watch the video; you’ll see what I mean. This guy clearly thinks he’s doing a wonderful thing, but if you think for yourself you’ll find he’s doing the opposite of what he promises. I’m not sure if he’s a naive optimist or what, but I’m not drinking this kool-aid. If you like your law enforcement to err on the side of false positives, then this will be great news for you. I prefer the signal detection bias to go toward misses when it comes to imprisonment, so that the lives of innocent people are not ruined. That’s why we live in America for Pete’s sake. I’m very disappointed that our tax dollars are funding this project which is borderline constitutional (see Amendment 4) AND will be used for Pottenger to make bank. “Die Hope” is the realistic way to pronounce this acronym.

RTFA: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/344868_airport…

Travelers at Sea-Tac and dozens of other major airports across America are being scrutinized by teams of TSA behavior-detection officers specially trained to discern the subtlest suspicious behaviors.
TSA officials will not reveal specific behaviors identified by the program — called SPOT (Screening Passengers by Observation Technique) — that are considered indicators of possible terrorist intent.
But a central task is to recognize microfacial expressions — a flash of feelings that in a fraction of a second reflects emotions such as fear, anger, surprise or contempt, said Carl Maccario, who helped start the program for TSA.
“In the SPOT program, we have a conversation with (passengers) and we ask them about their trip,” said Maccario from his office in Boston. “When someone lies or tries to be deceptive, … there are behavior cues that show it. … A brief flash of fear.”
Such people are referred for secondary screening, which can include a pat-down search and an X-ray exam. The microfacial expressions, he said, are the same across many cultures.
Since January 2006, behavior-detection officers have referred about 70,000 people for secondary screening, Maccario said. Of those, about 600 to 700 were arrested on a variety of charges, including possession of drugs, weapons violations and outstanding warrants.

It’s when they pull treachery DIRECTLY from Orwell’s 1984 that YOU must ask yourself if this is justified by ANY law, or by ANY shred of evidence that the program works. I submit, as evidence from the article above, that the program has a 1% effectiveness rate.

I will do the math for you: that is 99% false positives. Folks, this is dangerously scary!