Penis_Bees

Hey clams have feelings too.

Actually, they don't have central nervousness.

Wouldn't even need that, just take any new active shooter footage and feed it to the AI and see how often it fails to detect. You already know it's a true positive and you're seeing if the machine fails to register

It's economical if you neglect that once someone brandishes the gun, usually someone will be calling the 911 faster than the positive result can be screened.

If that's generally the case, the effectivity goes way down.

To work around that you need positive results tested faster, meaning more labor.

Might be more effective just to put metal detecting turnstiles at every school.

You're also using a fallacy. Because your father that said folks was a shit person, the word folks being changed isnt inherently helpful.

It's like me saying because my abusive dad wore red a lot, if people will wear a single blue boot is shows they're inclusive.

Its awesome that they're doing this. I'm totally cool with virtue signally. But the logic you're presenting as an argument is pretty terrible, especially if you're going to cry fallacy yourself.

How likely is it that a person has a bad actor attempt to interact with their network? How frequently does this happen? Is there a way to know what your risk level is to assess whether it's worth investing in?

Like, if i have nothing of value in my home, crime rates are low over all, and I live in a safe area, I'm unlikely to increasing my home security. I want to be able to apply this logic to my web security