Nothing to do with the states definition of safety, but just an excuse to do more surveillance and collect more data.

Im guessing they will stop official political parties and unions from buying ads, but you will still see ai slop “<politician> was just arrested, you won’t believe what he did!” Alongside a deepfake image.

They over hype their marketing which can lead to a false sense of security. Reign in the marketing department and present their tools for what they are and they’d be more trustworthy.

Yeah, despite the wording, I suspect they are looking at the patterns of use with smart meters rather than just “high amounts?” Grow op houses would be easy to see, as they only use power when the lights are on, flat usage, because no one is actually living there. Do you run lights 24x7 with indoor growing? idk. The trouble is, any system like this will catch a few, then they will relax the constraints to “catch more” and boom, now you have false positives. The criminals will also figure it out and mask their usage better by cycling banks of lighting, using batteries, parking some EVs in the driveway or whatever. That cat-and-mouse game will just see increasing privacy invasion and more false positives.

Data scientist here; there simply are not enough murders to model this, so they will need to use proxies for “likely” murderers (like any sort of violent crime). That means the model will very strongly target people who are over-policed (minorities) and those more likely to actually get caught and charged for things, and thus be in the training data set (poor people). It will also fail spectacularly for this purpose because even a highly accurate model will produce almost 100% false positives -again, because actual murders are so vanishingly rare. The math just doesn’t work.