Is it though? Because dogs do it for a lot less in pay…
Dogs are significantly more subjective. And there’s a noticeable correlation with dogs trying to please their handler by indicating someone the handler is suspicious of.
Nothing is foolproof and its good to have more tools in the kit.
This kind of fundamental university based research is about to get a whole lot rarer in the US and that’s not great.
…but that’s my preparation H and my wart remover! Yes I spilled a little gasoline on my self while getting gas this morning. C’mon officer let’s be reasonable?
… I hereby sentence you to 45 years without parole!
Generative AI assisted in the writing of this story.
No shit, good gawd. The way it went in circles repeating itself. Yeesh.
Even the dogs are lostjobs to AI. When will it stop?
Bomb sniffing devices have existed for quite some time. Is the news more that they can sniff out more types of explosive? Because that was a big limit I am aware of from hearing ahout these years ago; they only work with certain chemicals so it’s not able to detect 100℅ of all possible explosives.
Dogs work. Oversold automated systems are unneeded unless they can provide the service for less than room and board of a g shepard.
The machines can sniff them out from further away, more accurately and through things while also being cheaper than caring for a living being. They can also be strapped to a robot so nobody, not even an animal, are put into danger.
I bet that it is not true that either they can do it better than a dog, and or for cheaper. If it is being offered cheaper right now it will not remain so.
All Tech hypes their product. People believe it. It does not mean it is accurate.
But no machine could ever match the skill of Sam Valiant, Private Nose!
Oohhh, does this mean we can stop putting dogs in traumatizing and potentially life threatning situations on the police force?!
Tangent fun fact: after the reunification of west and east Germany, the patrol dogs for the east German wall were put up for adoption, and found loving homes :)
As long as this doesn’t have an 80% false positive rate like the dogs do.
I would not blame the dogs so much is the handlers. The handlers can get a false positive on command.
But all of these computerized programs also give authorities the ability to initiate false positives you better believe it. From The Unseen higher-ups down to the guy running the program on the ground.
That’s a feature, not a bug
I don’t think it’s the dogs that have the false positive rate, it’s the handlers.
Which is why dogs hitting on something should never be reasonable cause.
Although I’m a bit biased because a drug dog hitting on Claritin D in my front seat is why I spent 19 weeks in alternative school. Those fuckers picked flakes of what they called weed out of my floorboards.
Man, that sucks.
And yeah, I agree that a drug dog shouldn’t automatically trigger probable cause, but instead merely reasonable suspicion, meaning they can detain, but not search. They shouldn’t even be able to request a warrant based only on a drug dog hit. They should need multiple articulable reasons to suspect you of a crime to get to the point of a warrant, search, or arrest.
It worked out for me. I got an entertaining story about being blackmailed by my school board, scout leaders, and local sheriff.
Plus, I graduated 2 months early because my school just sent over all my work for the semester and I did it in like 2 weeks.
Depends on the price
⚠️ Attention Hollywood! ⚠️
Smell-O-Vision could be just around the corner!
Where the movie can smell you? Because that’s what this tech does. It doesn’t create smells for us.
Third time’s the charm?
Can it rate my Farts?
In all seriousness, we will eventually be able to do a lot of health diagnostics with technology like this. The applications mentioned in the article are frankly not very imaginative. Finding TNT: cool. Finding cancer early: amazing.
