Melanie > Recent Status Updates

I’ve been loving this book but I’m not sure I buy this final act conflict. It feels…forced to make a final act conflict.

What is takeaway point/purpose of this book?

"This book is...my struggle to understand the problem [my father] represents in me. In profiling, we see people as we need them to be, even if it blinds us to the ambiguities of reality."

"The problem with predictive policing is the policing part" - Andrew Guthrie Ferguson, prof at American University. Analytics to ID at-risk youth can be useful but funding should go to better-equipped social service agencies.

In 2011, Time magazine called predictive policing 1 of 50 greatest inventions of the year.

"It's more accurate to say that algorithms reflect policing patterns rather than crime patterns."

"What we measure affects what we look for and read as important."

Inputs that classify "high crime" might come from old arrest figures that are artificially elevated (stop & frisk, excessive pot charges in Black areas, etc.)

- Behaviors in hunting among ancient humans look like those of modern-day car thieves
- Habits of earthquakes (with aftershocks following main event) match those of gang activity (murders often followed by a retaliation)

Brantingham + LAPD repurposed earthquake-forecasting methodologies & algorithm to analyze police data on past LA crimes and predict where they'd occur next; led to 7.4% reduction in crime [2/2]

1990s - philosophical shift in criminal policing; "instead of merely reacting to individual 'incidents,' police must proactively solve general problems." Result was new data-sharing network among federal, local, & state agencies w/ dozens of hubs around country known as fusion centers.

Jeffrey Brantingham - UCLA anthropologist, developed math models, found algorithms for 1 purpose can apply to a very diff one [1/2]

CompStat - focused energy on neighborhoods where crimes clustered. "Act small to prevent big" (broken windows policing, also applied to counterterrorism - focus on small immigration infractions to increase odds of ensnaring big time terrorists).

School resource officers were often the first to ID vulnerable youth; SHOULD offer services to get them back on track, but often responsible for some of the most aggressive policing in the county.

Juveniles put on secret list of "prolific offenders" (at-risk + history of criminally-related interactions) were relentlessly pursued and prosecuted, and tried as adults so they'd be locked up for max amt possible.

"Scoring system" for kids -

- Evidence of criminal past (arrest records, gang activity)
- Bad grades, missing school, socializing with delinquent friends
- Sometimes entirely out of their control (incarcerated parent, being a victim of abuse, witnessing household violence)
- Used the database of child welfare/abuse history from FL Dept of Children & Families to ID kids who had "adverse childhood experiences"

[2/2]

How they IDed "seeds of criminal activity":

- Most juvenile offenders came from "abusive, neglectful, or otherwise disadvantaged upbringings"
- 40% of juvenile offenders had witnessed violence at home, 80% had incarcerated parent (never mind that that same paper concluded that therapy is more cost-effective with better outcomes & less crime than policing).

[1/2]

"Intelligence-Led Policing" (ILP) - Pasco County (Tampa, FL); wanted to stop crime before it happened. Minority of offenders commit majority of crimes (in Pasco County, 6% of pop = 60% of crime, much of US the same); could use fewer resources & reduce crime faster. Precision-target "problem people/places" and "take them out" by spending more time in high-crime neighborhoods & charging people to fullest extent of law.

Trying to think through what I think the main takeaway with this chapter was and how it relates to the overall book/thesis. Maybe that actual criminal profiling wasn't really useful or helpful here, since he was so idiosyncratic? And it came down to this very specific linguistic quirk, which was not really part of the accepted set of methods, because "profiling" kinda got nowhere?

Kaczynski admitted that "wrath - not concern for society - was his true motive." "My motive for doing what I am going to do is simply personal revenge. I do not expect to accomplish anything by it." Spoke of technology primarily in terms of manipulative effects; had become convinced he'd never be psychologically free.

Maintained he wasn't "crazy" tried to put off every effort to give him an insanity defense.

No case law at this point where language-based evidence was used to obtain a warrant; would have to find something truly unique ("linguistic smoking gun.") Fitz found "eat our cake and have it too" going through old letters provided by David (bro) & Wanda (mom) in hopes of exonerating Ted, in a draft of a response to the Saturday Review about an article on privacy. Called it a "linguistic fingerprint."

Fitzgerald's work on Unabomber case recently turned into miniseries called Manhunt; "his linguistic work was the most accurate profile of the Unabomber." Set him apart from BSU's more traditional methods at a time when they were coming under closer scrutiny (some agents had raised doubts internally about merits of profiling; researchers began publishing studies challenging efficacy).

Manifesto published in Washington Post on 9/19/95 - his brother saw phrase "cool-headed logician" which Ted had used years before to tell him that he was not one, but he'd never heard anyone else say it.

Georgetown U linguist analyzed "all 35,000 words for unusual turns of phrase, regionalisms, acronyms, and other linguistic clues" - rare mistake of oddly transposed "you can't eat your cake and have it too."

Unabomber case was the longest-running most expensive case in FBI history.

James R. Fitzgerald ("Fitz") - joined BSU - looked for things like if the perpetrator left crime scene in organized/disorganized state, if anything seemed intentionally staged, if modus operandi indicated a particular form of emotional gratification.

Very hard to compare the very few serial bombers in history (eg Mad Bomber George Metesky); bombers are very different from other killers, may not even know victims.

In 1995, sent several media outlets 56-page essay warning about cataclysmic threat tech posed to humankind. Tech gadgets were developed to seduce, sedate, and ultimately control the public; tools of psychological manipulation, providing users a false sense of gratification while distracting them from the technocrats’ true goal: to turn them into human automatons, serving the whims of the ruling class.

Once the Unabomber actually killed someone, the FBI had a ton of pressure on them from the public about why they still hadn't caught him or even identified a viable suspect. What was the motive? How did he choose his victims? Bomber went silent for 7 years, then struck again in 1993. He also played mind games with the FBI, sending them on red herring paths. It was a big deal that he was so unpredictable/confusing.

One of the 1985 bombs "targeted the U of M psych professor James V. McConnell, who famously advocated using sensory deprivation, drugs, hypnosis, and psychological manipulation to gain 'absolute control over an individual's behavior' and 'reshape our society drastically.'"

A big part of why Unabomber case wasn't resolved earlier was a delay in linking first 3 bombs because of bureaucratic setbacks, interagency communication issues, etc. Postal Service had jurisdiction over mail bombs; FBI handled university/airline bombings.

Targets seemingly chosen at random; started in 1978, continued 7 years, 4 devices went off in 1985 alone leading FBI to declare it the "Year of the Unabomber."

... "And in his monomaniacal pursuit to prevent techno-tyranny, Kaczynski wasn't so different from Murray, who similarly believed that healing society required human suffering. Murray said his work would eradicate monsters, but instead, it made one of himself, and possibly of a teenage boy." [2/2]

"Much has been written about Ted Kaczynski's madness, some undoubtedly true, but given his experience at Harvard, his fears about science and the government were founded in reality. The CIA was conducting mind-control studies at universities and he was the unwitting lab rat of one of its experimenters." ... [1/2]

"Underlying resentment and contempt." As this went on over 3 years, TK began to have nightmares & revenge fantasies; dreamed of becoming 'an agitator, rousing mobs to frenzies of revolutionary violence.' Developed 'an intense fear of mind control and dreamed about fighting back against his tormentors.' [2/2]

Henry Murray, at Harvard -- humiliation study -- intentionally sought out vulnerable personalities, like Ted Kaczynski (shy, 17, ranked high in alienation metrics, one of the only Harvard boys to come from a working-class background). Insulted his looks & intelligence; results concluded he had the most severe reactions to the sessions of all the students. [1/2]

"Even Robert Ressler [pioneering FBI profiler] admitted that inciting public panic was an intentional FBI strategy to gain support: Construct a crisis, then offer oneself as the only solution. ... After building up public fear and then trust, the FBI made its case for expansion."

... But on the inside people kinda grew disenchanted and saw it as "voodoo" and believed it often led to self-fulfilling prophecies. Many of the era's most notorious murderers (Dahmer, Rifkin) were arrested for unrelated crimes. Basically a lot of why it was played up and promoted as such a Big Thing that would be So Groundbreaking was to justify federal power expansion and save face after J. Edgar Hoover. [3/3]