I'd be less opposed to it if it was equally applied to everyone and not just immigrants. It becomes another tool to disenfranchise, disable and disadvantage a subset of society.
Illegal immigrants are by definition disenfranchised. They are not citizens, so they do not get the franchise, which is the right to vote. That’s as it should be according to the U.S. Constitution, and the basic law of (nearly?) every democracy.
Where does it say that foreigners can't vote in the constitution? Up until the 20th century the only requirement to vote in most states was residency, not citizenship. Many places only required 6 months stay to vote no matter who or where you were from, others required a commitment to long-term residency.
It wasn't until women's and black's voting rights started becoming a popular issue that voting was redefined to mean only citizens. And the only purpose of such a thing was to suppress the voice of these people for the benefit of those already in power.
I am not an American and I obviously have no right to meddle in your affairs. But only today Trump tweeted out Obama being against immigration and then from their the rabbit hole went deeper and there was a video of gasp, bernie sanders calling open borders a "Koch brother" conspiracy. I'm beginning to wonder if anyone high up in America really has any integrity? I fail to see anyone who is consistent in their views…
> bernie sanders calling open borders a "Koch brother" conspiracy. Quite right. It wasn't just that Bernie disagrees with open borders, in that video he is visibly upset. He really doesn't like it. (It was the Vox interview I assume, unless you saw another one) Also if you are old enough you might remember large anti-globalization protests around G8, Bilderberg and other such meetings. It is kind of baffling how just…
So who is doing this? And why? I only know the top leaders of US politics and all of them pretend that they are holy and the other side is pure evil.
Funnily a child comment to you points out that "trump puts children in cage" and I followed the issue and somebody said it was an Obama era photo and they were detained by Obama because the so called parents were actually traffickers which I of course would support Obama for
Don’t Worry!!! Face recog startup founder here. Amazon’s tech only allows them to monitor a specific people list in real time. So search period should be limited. Otherwise it’s so expensive to do that. It only tracks for specific target list on real time cameras or photos. When it comes to searching on archives Amazon is so expensive to do it. As Reminisce Inc we are a photo delivery company. We have a face search tech ( similar to face recog but different, ours is exponentially faster than existing ones). Our tech is the only solution that allows us to search for specific list in archives. However we use our tech only to deliver souvenir photography to event attendees. We will not sell it to government. You can check for your photos in our db here it gives you the result in 15 seconds https://www.reminis.app
I'd be less opposed to it if it was equally applied to everyone and not just immigrants. It becomes another tool to disenfranchise, disable and disadvantage a subset of society.
I made a comment below about how does this violate privacy rights? I think we all feel at a certain level, making it easier to identify people feels unnatural and unnerving, may be because for long swaths of history we had a certain level of anonymity just by the nature of reality. Should that be something that is our right? Does that mean we should explicitly impede the efficiency of the government in doing things l…
FBI/police put a gps tracker on a guys car for long term tracking. Ruled 4th amendment violation, unanimous. Differing reasons. The trespass reason wouldn’t seem to apply but the long term expectation of privacy would seem to apply. Oral arguments included ‘beeper’ vehicle tracking which is labor intensive, vs gps which they can do automatically behind their desk...
Do people have a right to not be identified in public? In public, your right to privacy doesn't protect you from having your picture being taken. Then, what if someone identifies you from your picture? How about if they use a CV system to speed it up? What's the argument here? BTW, as I expand upon below, I'm against surveillance of private communications, I think we all are. As far as I understand it, this is not su…
It’s one thing for you to go out in public, it’s another thing when “public” follows you around like a private investigator snapping photos of you everywhere. The right to privacy is the right to be able to go about your business unimpeded. It’s a core idea on which the bill of rights was founded. It’s not written of course, but I’d argue it’s a fundamental human right.
The Bill of Rights was written in an era when most Americans lived in small towns where everyone was recognized everywhere. The anonymity of urban and metropolitan life is perhaps a happy accident, but it wouldn’t have been perceived as a fundamental right to people living in a predominantly rural country.
I'd be less opposed to it if it was equally applied to everyone and not just immigrants. It becomes another tool to disenfranchise, disable and disadvantage a subset of society.
Illegal immigrants are by definition disenfranchised. They are not citizens, so they do not get the franchise, which is the right to vote. That’s as it should be according to the U.S. Constitution, and the basic law of (nearly?) every democracy.
I agree with your comment but am unsure what is the point you're trying to make? My point was that these techniques might be used to later disenfranchise immigrants, legal or otherwise.
I am not an American and I obviously have no right to meddle in your affairs. But only today Trump tweeted out Obama being against immigration and then from their the rabbit hole went deeper and there was a video of gasp, bernie sanders calling open borders a "Koch brother" conspiracy. I'm beginning to wonder if anyone high up in America really has any integrity? I fail to see anyone who is consistent in their views…
I think you have a wonderful observation. I don't think so lot of people know what is right. I think most people's definition of right is totally driven by political ideology consumed via mass media and social network echo chambers. I think most of us aren't educated about this topic to know the real long-term effects of open borders or isolationism. I think all sides have to put the emotion and rhetoric down and view it through multiple lenses. What does open borders look like for our economy and form of government in 10. 25, or 50 years? Does it likely lead to a place America loses the good parts of its national identity because the amount of people coming in can't be assimilated into our philosophies in our constitution? Does isolationism lead us to a place where we aren't longer a world leader and some horrible state fills the vacuum on the world's stage?
I certainly don't know. How do we define right and wrong in an era where ever issue of morality is polarized? Or where it's okay for one politician to do something but not for another politician? I think in the case of Google, they are selling their souls by providing services to a government that persecutes Muslims (and their own people), but we can't forget that they also have cooperated with the U.S. government which has committed just as many atrocities here and around the world. It's not in this moment that Google crossed the line. I think unfortunately, the great experiment of democracy is just about over. I fear it will be looked upon by historians as this emergent phenomenon that occurred between massive tyrannical empires.
Don’t Worry!!! Face recog startup founder here. Amazon’s tech only allows them to monitor a specific people list in real time. So search period should be limited. Otherwise it’s so expensive to do that. It only tracks for specific target list on real time cameras or photos. When it comes to searching on archives Amazon is so expensive to do it. As Reminisce Inc we are a photo delivery company. We have a face search t…
Kudos for the principled stance. Hope you can maintain that in the face of investor pressure.
Are you saying it's prohibitively expensive to archive footage to later recog against (storage), or is the recog itself the expensive part (compute)?
Don’t Worry!!! Face recog startup founder here. Amazon’s tech only allows them to monitor a specific people list in real time. So search period should be limited. Otherwise it’s so expensive to do that. It only tracks for specific target list on real time cameras or photos. When it comes to searching on archives Amazon is so expensive to do it. As Reminisce Inc we are a photo delivery company. We have a face search t…
.... what? This reads a lot more like an advertisement than a comment about the story, with a bit of sarcasm?
I am not an American and I obviously have no right to meddle in your affairs. But only today Trump tweeted out Obama being against immigration and then from their the rabbit hole went deeper and there was a video of gasp, bernie sanders calling open borders a "Koch brother" conspiracy. I'm beginning to wonder if anyone high up in America really has any integrity? I fail to see anyone who is consistent in their views…
> bernie sanders calling open borders a "Koch brother" conspiracy. Quite right. It wasn't just that Bernie disagrees with open borders, in that video he is visibly upset. He really doesn't like it. (It was the Vox interview I assume, unless you saw another one) Also if you are old enough you might remember large anti-globalization protests around G8, Bilderberg and other such meetings. It is kind of baffling how just…
I'm pretty sure the people getting tear gassed over globalization at the G8 were against capital leveraging international workers to destroy domestic labor power and the ones getting tear gassed recently are fighting against policies targeting immigrant and refugee communities. It seems pretty consistent to want to protect workers and also fight xenophobia.