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

Ban Facial Recognition at Festivals

banfacialrecognition.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 160 posts

Re: Ban Facial Recognition at Festivals

#101

Post by otterley »

jmpman wrote: post #96
otterley wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re dismissing the possibility that the first-generation immigrants who listen to these radio stations were admitted legally.

I used the word “majority”, which doesn’t precluded that “some” are here legally. If I had to quantify my suspicion of Spanish radio listeners in my city, I’d say that 90% are likely illegal immigrants. If I was in Florida, I’d say that 10% are likely illegal immigrants. Don’t interpret my observation of illegal immigration existing as condemnation of a group of people who migrated across vast distances and dangerous…

Your figure is not even an observation; it is a guess. There are paid statisticians doing this job whose data you can cite that would make your argument more compelling.

Re: Ban Facial Recognition at Festivals

#102

Post by logicchains »

i_am_nomad wrote: post #62
acollins1331 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay so you think setting up FR at burning man so we can deport some people that went to burning man does any net good for society? Why? Because our culture is changing too quickly? Shameful. Do you also think deporting the 11m people here illegally would be good for society? Protip: it would be devastating.

Deporting the 11m illegal immigrants here would result in higher wages for low-income citizens and reduce inequality. So you think paying poor people more money is a bad thing? Why? Why do you love income inequality so much?

Why do you think citizens deserve to be paid more than citizens of another country? By what moral logic do they deserve better treatment just because of where they're born?

Re: Ban Facial Recognition at Festivals

#103

Post by Hnrobert42 »

bsenftner wrote: post #27
greggman2 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what changed? FR didn't exist 10 years ago but the events did so why do the events need FR now?

Yeah, 10 years ago a venue receiving threats had to purchase additional insurance, hire additional security, and run a SWAT team like surveillance operation. After that became routine, every venue that can host any gathering of any size became a security sink that ate attention and distracted potential opportunities as public levels of casual violence simply skyrocketed to the levels we see today.

Does the SWAT perform surveillance?

Re: Ban Facial Recognition at Festivals

#104

Post by pushpop »

blfr wrote: post #80
paganel wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Known terrorists shouldn’t be free in the first place, least of all in an Western country. And if they are free I suppose that are actively on the run (hence the “known” part) so I don’t think they’re in the mood for a concert or a Ligue 1 match. As such whenever the powers that be use the terrorists line for stuff like this I call them bullshitters, because that’s what they are.

Terrorists attend these events to, you know, commit acts of terrorism, not enjoy the music.

Members of terrorist cells do. However they’re not terrorists until the actual act of terrorism.

Re: Ban Facial Recognition at Festivals

#105

Post by glenda »

Festivals should just start inviting bounty hunters instead of using facial recognition.

Or maybe they could just put shock collars on every attendee in case they begin to act in an unacceptable manner.

In fact, once it's proven to work at festivals we can extend this to schools!

Re: Ban Facial Recognition at Festivals

#106

Post by Hnrobert42 »

bsenftner wrote: post #22
michaelt wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was my understanding that most people who threaten venues do so anonymously, making facial recognition useless - can you cite any sources saying this isn't the case?

Most people that threaten venues do so via email, or make statements of intent in social media. Places where their identity is known or easily acquired. People who make these threats are emotional and non-rational. The threats are bogus, but must be followed up due to liabilities. I know, because I and one of the security guys that has to respond to them.

Since you handle these threats professionally, can you help settle this discussion? How many threats do concerts receive on average? What percentage are made anonymously? What percentage via email? Over what date range are your data valid?

Re: Ban Facial Recognition at Festivals

#107

Post by pgcj_poster »

mc32 wrote: post #15
anilakar wrote: post #4

Why are most of the tweets mentioning deportation? Surveillance aside, since when has it been a human right to attend a festival in a country you are not allowed to reside in?

Because it’s the cause celebre today. The causes are often cultivated by different loose organizations like influential people, moneyed people, media and eventually elementary schools. Sometimes the issues are leftist, sometimes rightist. Today leftist ideas are in ascension, ten years from now, who knows. Ten years ago it wouldn’t have been a thing. There were other issues. These things come and go like fashion. Twe…

> today its “there should be no borders” which is the opposite of self determination of nations.

It is not. To quote Zach Weinersmith

"Every time I talk about immigration, someone says 'but the US has the right to control borders.' Sure! Yes!

The US also has the right to create a branch of the military containing only monkeys wearing tiny hats. That has no bearing on whether it's good policy or not!"

Re: Ban Facial Recognition at Festivals

#108

Post by jmpman »

Hnrobert42 wrote: post #81
jmpman wrote: post #68

I’ve always used the number of Spanish speaking radio stations on the dial as a litmus test for how much illegal immigration exists in my city. First generation and second generation don’t typically listen to to the Spanish speaking stations, so the demand is being driven by the initial immigrants, the majority of whom are illegal (in my city). No matter how much I hear about illegal immigration being cracked down up…

Source?

You’re asking for my source of Spanish speaking radio listener immigration status statistics?

Re: Ban Facial Recognition at Festivals

#109

Post by BurningFrog »

empath75 wrote: post #7
anilakar wrote: post #4

Why are most of the tweets mentioning deportation? Surveillance aside, since when has it been a human right to attend a festival in a country you are not allowed to reside in?

Someone always makes this comment every time illegal immigration is mentioned as if the law is the final word on what is just. And then they’ll complain about someone going to prison for being a whistleblower or pirating movies or cheer on the protestors in Hong Kong.

The proposal here is to make a new law.

When people argue both that laws are bad, and we need a new law to improve society, I wonder if they're really thought things through.

Re: Ban Facial Recognition at Festivals

#110

Post by logicchains »

Erlich_Bachman wrote: post #77
logicchains wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's insane that people will go on about how important it is to treat people equally regardless of their race, gender, skin colour or sexuality, but also argue it's perfectly fine and moral to discriminate based on place of birth. Because people clearly have a lot more control over where they're born than they do over their skin color or gender..

Because of the tax dollars (or euros or whatever) which the residents pay and the immigrants don't? Ok so you are saying the right to be anywhere should be given to anyone. Is the right to spend my tax money (which was used up to build infrastructure, institutions, healthcare, etc. etc.) also something that should be given to anyone else in the entire world? How can you possibly think this is just? That every random…

>That every random person should be able to use publicly paid infrastructure that they haven't paid for?

Did you pay for the country's infrastructure upon your birth, or did you freeload for at least 18 years before contributing anything back to it in taxes?

Post reply on HN