I guess you could say I'm wanting more enforcement/prosecution, not necessarily more physical police presence. One could make the case that the reason more policing was advocated/promoted in the first place and grew to this level was because we had a problem of enforcement and conviction.
Better and more automated enforcement might reduce the amount of police we want/need and the amount of police interactions we have as well. The quicker we get there, the quicker we can actually decide which laws are non-sense and perhaps just require fines instead of physical jail time.
Imagine a hypothetical perfect scenario whereby we have a non-corruptible AI that watches security-camera footage that is next to ubiquitous in public areas. Suppose it has really good facial recognition capabilities too and can clearly detect + see who committed an assault/rape/murder. Have a bit of "manual" vetting by prosecutors (add double-blind + other steps to prevent bias) before proceeding, and voila you have N-amount less need of having police patrolling around to "deal" with this specific crime that can be automatically picked up.
Even being able to automatically pick up on a murder/assault/rape happening and automatically and immediately dispatching police can save lives, so many lives. Just this simple scenario is one that should be so powerful to convince people of the benefits, yet hypothetical "big brother", "privacy" and "potential abuse" counter-arguments are somehow more important than peoples' lives.
Better and more automated enforcement might reduce the amount of police we want/need and the amount of police interactions we have as well. The quicker we get there, the quicker we can actually decide which laws are non-sense and perhaps just require fines instead of physical jail time.
Imagine a hypothetical perfect scenario whereby we have a non-corruptible AI that watches security-camera footage that is next to ubiquitous in public areas. Suppose it has really good facial recognition capabilities too and can clearly detect + see who committed an assault/rape/murder. Have a bit of "manual" vetting by prosecutors (add double-blind + other steps to prevent bias) before proceeding, and voila you have N-amount less need of having police patrolling around to "deal" with this specific crime that can be automatically picked up.
Even being able to automatically pick up on a murder/assault/rape happening and automatically and immediately dispatching police can save lives, so many lives. Just this simple scenario is one that should be so powerful to convince people of the benefits, yet hypothetical "big brother", "privacy" and "potential abuse" counter-arguments are somehow more important than peoples' lives.