Ask A Genius 417 – Monitoring Deviancy
October 19, 2018
[Beginning of recorded material]
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: The right and the left have valid arguments here. They tend to argue two points here. Conservatives argue fatherlessness. Liberals argue patriarchal structures in society. Both make sense.
If you look at the prison population, the ISIS population, and others, they are fatherless very often, including the women. The structures around the society. They encourage the idea that women are objects or their form, in general, is something that men can own.
If you look at the African-American community in rap videos, often, it is not necessarily the best representation of women is not being objectified. School shootings tend to be mostly white boys.
Rick Rosner: This argues against privacy and for algorithms to spot potential shooters. Because what comes up after a shooting is that there were all sorts of tells, in the case of the Parkland shooter, that guy had been turned into the cops dozens of times for being a psycho and various people had dropped the ball.
There was the guy who’s dad gave him guns back and then he went on a rampage. The cops came and took the guns. They made the dad promise not to give the kid guns. Then the dad gives the guns back, and then the kid shoots up a place.
I just argue; there are all these influences in populations in general. It is a tiny minority who become shooters.
Jacobsen: But if you look at the media, it is women as objects.
Rosner: Like today, DJ Khaled is all over Twitter being made fun of, because he is saying that he is the king of the house because he gets blown but does not go down on his wife. This is one of the biggest rap producers being an idiot.
Most people are able to look at this for what it is, which is braggy nonsense. Rap, no matter how misogynistic some of it might be, does not cause most people who listen to it to commit rape or homicide.
Yes, you can exert pressure to make rap less misogynistic. But in terms of minimizing the number of shooters, we should probably develop things. We have this sinister algorithmic stuff like Cambridge Analytica, used to figure out who is voting for whom and how to change minds and stir trouble.
You can use the technology is a similar way, to monitor people’s web presence to pinpoint people who need to be looked in on – to see if they are building an arsenal in their bedroom.
Every time a person shoots up a motherfucking place. The reporters do the post-disaster research and find out that the person had been turned into a cop a gazillion times and the neighbors were afraid of the guy.
None of this made it to the point of definite turning in. Maybe, we need an agency. If there were a branch of some law enforcement agency, I don’t know. If it was devoted to promoting the finding of pre-crime, it is like Minority Report.
Jacobsen: How will this not infringe on fundamental rights of people? In China, they have mood chips in the caps of some workers in order to know when they need a break, when they need to keep working, and when, potentially, to demote or promote them.
Rosner: My answer is I don’t know how you do it. If you tasked people, like a segment of the FBI, to figure out what you could do, and how it couldn’t infringe, and if it infringes then it wouldn’t piss everybody off, every time a person shoots up a place; we find evidence of them being a psycho beforehand.
Is there any way to get at this information beforehand and take action beforehand? It may not work before. If you find reports of people, and if they come in, then you can monitor them if they become an active shooter or not – as they are likely to do it.
Like those cops who examine this kid, who show a kid as a disturbed person, the cops give the guns to the dad. But if that agency had been instructed properly, or trained properly, maybe, they would not have believed the dad’s bullshit to not give the kid guns.
[End of recorded material]
American Television Writer
Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Editor-in-Chief, In-Sight Publishing
 Four format points for the session article:
- Bold text following “Scott Douglas Jacobsen:” or “Jacobsen:” is Scott Douglas Jacobsen & non-bold text following “Rick Rosner:” or “Rosner:” is Rick Rosner.
- Session article conducted, transcribed, edited, formatted, and published by Scott.
- Footnotes & in-text citations in the interview & references after the interview.
- This session article has been edited for clarity and readability.
For further information on the formatting guidelines incorporated into this document, please see the following documents:
- American Psychological Association. (2010). Citation Guide: APA. Retrieved from http://www.lib.sfu.ca/system/files/28281/APA6CitationGuideSFUv3.pdf.
- Humble, A. (n.d.). Guide to Transcribing. Retrieved from http://www.msvu.ca/site/media/msvu/Transcription%20Guide.pdf.
License and Copyright
In-Sight Publishing and In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Based on a work at www.in-sightjournal.com and www.rickrosner.org.
© Scott Douglas Jacobsen, Rick Rosner, and In-Sight Publishing 2012-2018. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Scott Douglas Jacobsen, Rick Rosner, and In-Sight Publishing with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.