London Underground begins scanning passengers' faces

Post by inigyou » Wed, Aug 12, 2026, 10:56 AM UTC

psd1 wrote: post #399

t0bia_s wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why anarchy = criminal?

"Anarchy" in that phrase is fucking wrong. Unsophisticated people assume that anarchy means "no rules", which is false. It means no rulers, not no rules. (More precisely, it means no non-rulers.) A better term would be "warlordism", if you want to emphasise the lawlessness of the financial class, or maybe "feudalism" to emphasise that the financial class and the political class are congruent.

Post by inigyou » Wed, Aug 12, 2026, 10:58 AM UTC

account42 wrote: post #422

kakacik wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is never going to fly, and expecting it is waste of time and energy that could have been used more productively. Think for a second or two about the type of folks who get, succeed and even thrive in politics over decades. Not your regular Joe, not a nice friendly balanced individual. No, biggest fuckups with massive daddy issues, school bullies, unresolvable inferiority complexes, sociopaths to the core, for who…

Why do you think they should get a choice about it?

Post by account42 » Wed, Aug 12, 2026, 10:59 AM UTC

tarxvf wrote: post #284

Traster wrote: post #13

I really don't understand why they do trials for this. What would be the failure case for the trial? "We carried out the trial for 6 weeks over X period of time, we arrested Y people, at that rate we've decided this is not compatible with modern liberal democracy, we would've traded a free society for Y+2 arrests over X period but we just didn't quite get there"? As suggested by other people - this is just going to b…

It's to get people used to the idea without giving enough surface area to fight it socially. Same thing happened with the body scanners at airports in the US, now with facial recognition at airports, and a number of other privacy concerns. It's a well-worn and proven playbook. At first it's a trial, experimental. Then it's standard, but optional and with incentives to do it. Then it's standard but you can opt out and…

Post by inigyou » Wed, Aug 12, 2026, 10:59 AM UTC

account42 wrote: post #432

rob74 wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Wrong opinions" as in death threats and similar light-hearted stuff?

I wonder when the catch all "death threats" ever became a commonly accepted excuse for locking people up. That should be reserved for cases where people are a threat to others, which is only tangentially related to the direct statements they have made.

Post by inigyou » Wed, Aug 12, 2026, 11:02 AM UTC

proc0 wrote: post #2

21st century authoritarianism. Humans learned nothing from the 20th century.