Does Detroit's Project Green Light really make the city safer?
When Detroit was pushing this program two years ago, they used some skewed data, such as a 50% reduction in crime at participating locations
Now that there are more participating locations and many more cameras, the data isn't as clear
That piece you linked to is the best objective coverage I've seen yet by any journalist - because it calls into question the actual value of the Green Light (Genetec) program - instead of attempting to drive public perception based on obviously biased 'insiders' opinions using skewed numbers (see linked article).
I have yet to see any conclusive evidence that the Green Light program does anything other than allow participants to imagine that their $4K expenditure actually keeps them 'safer' than they were without it.
"Statistics are the tool of the devil" - Mama Boucher
Agreed
It seems to be more of a way for Comcast to make money as they private label Genetecs Statocast and require the businesses to purchase a separate internet connection.
This also shows how its not possible to monitor that many cameras, as discussed in this post: https://ipvm.com/reports/live-video-monitoring-usage-statistics
These larger city surveillance projects will mainly be used for post incident evidence until analytics becomes more available and socially acceptable.This was part of a Motorola project that I see thier acquisition of Avigilon being a major part of in thier future implementations. That's when we will start to see more analytics kick in.
Detroit PD has been selling this to the businesses as way for them to be constantly "monitored", preferential treatment by promising much faster response time (15min instead of 1 1/2 hour), and doing a 3x day physical checkin by an officer. Now that it's scaled, it's a different story.
Ask questions and get answers to your physical security questions from IPVM team members and fellow subscribers.