Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

San Francisco proposal would ban government facial recognition use in the city

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 75 posts

Re: San Francisco proposal would ban government facial recognition use in the city

#61

Post by selestify »

spullara wrote: post #59
run414 wrote: post #58

Some of comments here are suggesting that facial recognition wouldn't be necessary if San Francisco would just fix the root cause of its crime problem. There is a common pattern I've noticed in discussions about San Francisco. Person A: San Francisco should implement . Person B: That's just a bandaid over the problem. It's better to just fix . Usually, the solution to requires large changes to our economic system or…

SF is broken because they refuse to punish bad behavior. Pising and pooping on streets and sidewalks. Breaking into cars. Using heroin and meth in public. Disposing of needles wherever you feel like. Setting up a tent in the park. Most other cities would stop this from happening but SF won't.

Why wouldn't they punish such behavior? That sounds ridiculous

Re: San Francisco proposal would ban government facial recognition use in the city

#62

Post by shrikant »

OldManAndTheCpp wrote: post #49
PopeDotNinja wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a worthless radio In 1999, I sold the stock radio from my 2000 Dodge Neon on eBay for $40!

A time traveling radio does seem pretty novel, to be fair.

Weirdly enough, the 2000 Dodge Neon was available for sale from early-to-mid 1999, so parent commenter may not be mistaken!

Re: San Francisco proposal would ban government facial recognition use in the city

#63

Post by michaelt »

selestify wrote: post #61
spullara wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SF is broken because they refuse to punish bad behavior. Pising and pooping on streets and sidewalks. Breaking into cars. Using heroin and meth in public. Disposing of needles wherever you feel like. Setting up a tent in the park. Most other cities would stop this from happening but SF won't.

Why wouldn't they punish such behavior? That sounds ridiculous

Some people believe mentally ill homeless drug addicts are the tragic, powerless victims of a society which has made housing and medical care unaffordable and deprived them of political representation; that putting a homeless person in jail guaranteeing them food and a bed for a week is unlikely to be much of a deterrent; and that the things that would be an effective deterrent are inhumane.

Personally I don't agree, but I can see why a person would think that way.

Re: San Francisco proposal would ban government facial recognition use in the city

#64

Post by imtringued »

isostatic wrote: post #51
alottafunchata wrote: post #20

I for one want criminals apprehended. This is more of the typical San Francisco hoopla.

I have nothing to hide, so I have nothing to fear

If the police had one's detailed driving history including speed limits and how fast one was driving at any given moment then how many speeding tickets would one get?

Even someone who obeys the speed limit would get dozens of tickets per year.

Re: San Francisco proposal would ban government facial recognition use in the city

#65

Post by renholder »

throwawaysea wrote: post #56
djrobstep wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wrong, if you're struggling to survive, "stealing" from the comfortable is absolutely morally right. The fact that people are forced into such awful situations strengthens the message of helping the downtrodden: Everybody is entitled to the necessities of life, so as to never be placed in such a predicament.

A lot of those folks who are committing petty crimes aren’t downtrodden struggling to survive though. Many are junkies and a class of permanently homeless that refuse help/services and refuse to rejoin society. Why should law abiding citizens have to bear their costs?

>Why should law-abiding citizens have to bear their costs?

You seem to negate the fact that the costs are burdened by law-abiding citizens to have them in jail/prison, anyway.

Certainly, the costs of social structures for those people are far less than a for-profit system of incarceration; which, as it is currently structured, only benefits from a minimum volume of people being maintained in the incarceration system, itself?

You admit that there's different classes of people who commit the petty crimes, so that - in and of itself - demonstrates that each class would require specific redress for their situation.

Finally, since they are petty crimes, in and of themselves, wouldn't facial recognition be rough the equivalent of dropping a bomb on an ant hill? The scope of the effect far-outweighs the supposed benefits.

Re: San Francisco proposal would ban government facial recognition use in the city

#66

Post by isostatic »

imtringued wrote: post #64
isostatic wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have nothing to hide, so I have nothing to fear

If the police had one's detailed driving history including speed limits and how fast one was driving at any given moment then how many speeding tickets would one get? Even someone who obeys the speed limit would get dozens of tickets per year.

How? Assuming the information is accurate, how would someone who didn't exceed the speedlimit get dozens of tickets per year?

Re: San Francisco proposal would ban government facial recognition use in the city

#68

Post by SOLAR_FIELDS »

throwawaysea wrote: post #56
djrobstep wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wrong, if you're struggling to survive, "stealing" from the comfortable is absolutely morally right. The fact that people are forced into such awful situations strengthens the message of helping the downtrodden: Everybody is entitled to the necessities of life, so as to never be placed in such a predicament.

A lot of those folks who are committing petty crimes aren’t downtrodden struggling to survive though. Many are junkies and a class of permanently homeless that refuse help/services and refuse to rejoin society. Why should law abiding citizens have to bear their costs?

Not sure about breaking into cars specifically but the recent popular video where the former NASA engineer designed a device to film people stealing packages off of doorsteps seems to both confirm your statement about not being downtrodden but dispute the idea that thieves are homeless or junkies. Almost all of the people that he caught on film stealing in that video were normal looking middle class people that had cars, apartments, houses and didn’t seem to have any mental illness other than a complete lack of empathy for others.

Re: San Francisco proposal would ban government facial recognition use in the city

#69

Post by TeMPOraL »

stickfigure wrote: post #9

The third time my car was broken into (to steal - no joke - a crappy stock car stereo from the 90s), I'd have voted for mandatory cameras and facial recognition on every street corner. Maybe sentry guns too. Instead I moved out of SF. Good luck, folks.

As others mention, facial recognition won't help in this case (because masks). I'm partial to sentry guns, though.

Re: San Francisco proposal would ban government facial recognition use in the city

#70

Post by stickfigure »

djrobstep wrote: post #53
doctorpangloss wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really don’t think the people breaking into cars can ever be spun into protagonists, of any story. Advocating for them harms the message of helping the downtrodden and treating them humanely, because it seems totally out of touch with the emotional impact of totally gratuitous property crime on its victims.

Wrong, if you're struggling to survive, "stealing" from the comfortable is absolutely morally right. The fact that people are forced into such awful situations strengthens the message of helping the downtrodden: Everybody is entitled to the necessities of life, so as to never be placed in such a predicament.

What's your address? Asking for a friend.
Post reply on HN