297
South Korea gives 400 stalking victims app to track their stalkers in real time (www.dexerto.com)
submitted 1 day ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
60 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 43 points 1 day ago (8 children)

...and a great security/relief for victims. I'm a vivid apologetic for privacy and security, but this seems like an acceptable thing.

People seem to be fine to be transparent and 24/7 surveilleid with their phones. Some even seem to be fine to install doorcams from US-bigtech or spy-devices that can switch on a light. Heck, they even pay for those!

This at least is a vers useful application of privacy invasion.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 26 minutes ago

    Yeah, assuming courts take the rights of the accused seriously it could be a win win, especially awaiting trial and during reintegration after prison. More safety and security for the victim and less need for more restrictive measures for the accused/released. It could easily be the difference between being stuck in jail for months and being granted bail.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 21 hours ago

    People seem to be fine to be transparent and 24/7 surveilleid with their phones. Some even seem to be fine to install doorcams from US-bigtech or spy-devices that can switch on a light. Heck, they even pay for those!

    yeah, not us

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -5 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (5 children)

    Copy-paste from another comment I did:

    The problem is when you think about actual non-stalkers.

    I think this is a too rough, crude, gross, extreme, disproportionate and easy to abuse and misused “solution” for that problem.

    There are many overly narcissistic and self-centered people who are going to be thinking that anyone who walks in the same direction as they are necessarily an stalker, and then there is the issue of revenge, blackmail, hate crimes and so on that a person can commit with an application of that nature.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 21 minutes ago

    Ok, but consider the falsely accused who may be stuck in jail awaiting trial. Yes, this is absolutely a burden on the accused, but it's a significantly lighter burden than other means of ensuring safety for the accuser.

    It definitely should be used with caution and as part of an attempt to find a balance between the needs of the accused and accuser. But fortunately that seems to be the case at the moment.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 10 hours ago (2 children)

    Well, if someone is falsefully labeled a stalker, then what happens? He won't come near.

    Also, as said, the chance this stalker is already fine with being tracked all around by every device he owns, is probably near 100, so who cares?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 5 hours ago (1 child)

    Copy-paste because it's essentially the same response:

    Well, I have to admit that I didn't read the article, just the title, now I have read it and understood the system.

    Sorry, my bad for making a hasty conclusion.

    I still feel that it can be abused because for a non-stalker is difficult to actually prove in a meaningful way that they're not an stalker, and as such can be easily mislabeled. That's specially problematic when you take into account things like pretty privilege, poverty traps, class dynamics, etc.

    But at least now it seems a bit more reasonable. I just hope that it's used in a fair and responsible way.

    But also:

    Well, if someone is falsefully labeled a stalker, then what happens? He won't come near.

    Imagine that person works, lives or has something to do regularly there (i.e., medical checkouts, or accountability stuff, or legal stuff, idk). It's a huge problem if it's misused.

    And I'm not even against the victims, as almost everyone here thinks that I am because of the fact that I think this is a bit problematic. I just think that a better solution should be developed.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 hours ago

    I'm with you that it isn't perfect. I also don't assume malicious intent from you.

    But (probably depending a lot on location) here nothing is done to protect victims. I work for free in a shelter where abused people end up, and the impotence they face is maddening. Unless your stalker viciously attacks or even kills you, nothing can and will be done.

    Sure, you're right, if the accused stalker is no stalker at all, every system fails. But that applies to everything in the justice-system. We can never ever be 100% sure. Countless people were executed worldwide just to later learn they were innocent.

    BUT I would bet that the amount of false-positives is much smaller than the amount of true positives. So maybe 50 victims is helped, 1 innocent non-stalker pays a hefty price. Numbers pulled outta my arse, but provably not too far off.

    Question is, better a not perfect system or none at all? Better to protect 2 victims or protect 1 innocent? Ideally both, but also near impossible.

    It is also a very thin veil here. A stalker, by definition, hasn't done anything really solid criminal YET. But the victim is in real danger. Where to draw the line and how to proove being followed (or not following someone)?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent