Security robot on patrol - Video Washington Post
Luddite: (adjective) one of a group of early 19th century English workmen destroying laborsaving machinery as a protest; broadly: one who is opposed to especially technological change - Merriam-Webster
By Greg Saville
The story of the Luddite resonated last week with word from San Francisco about a controversy surrounding the K-5 Security Robot. The K-5 was featured a few years ago on this blog: “On the threshold of a robotics revolution."
Since then the journey of the security robot has not been straight; it has been drowned in a Washington DC fountain and it has mistakenly run over a toddlers leg at a Palo Alto shopping center.
And last week, according to Newsweek, the security robot was removed from duty after deterring homeless encampments near the San Francisco SPCA. Apparently homeless people vandalized the SPCA robot, angry about being singled out by the SPCA and the security robot.
LUDDITE OR TECHNOPHILE
The issue is layered. On one hand, security robots are the latest technology and like all new technologies they can be applied in ways both sacred and profane. There are places, like underground parking lots, where an automated security patroller with surveillance tools can keep vigilant watch and help make isolated places safer.
In the San Francisco case, SPCA representative Krista Maloney says“staff wasn't able to safely use the sidewalks at times because of the encampments… since the SPCA started guarding its facilities with the robot (known as K9) a month ago, the homeless encampments have dwindled and there have been fewer car break-ins.”
But beneath the surface lurks a darker story.
|There must be a better way. Photo Wikimedia Commons|
THE DARK SIDE
This blog has reported on the so-called hostile architecture movement, especially CPTED tactics used to dehumanize places to exclude certain groups over other groups. Dealing with homeless encampments, which by definition means dealing with homeless people, with a security robot, is a questionable tactic. And the homeless have been outraged. Since the security robot began patrolling in front of the SPCA, the Washington Post claims it has been "allegedly smeared with feces, covered by a tarp and nearly toppled by an attacker."
Are there better, more humane, solutions? In some communities, temporary housing called Housing First programs, seem to work. In fact, the Canadian city of Medicine Hat, Alberta claims to have eliminated homelessness with the Housing First strategy. Why isn’t San Francisco helping the SPCA and the homeless with such a program?