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

121–130 of 160 posts

Re: Ban Facial Recognition at Festivals

#121

Post by logicchains »

i_am_nomad wrote: post #115
logicchains wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The illegal immigrants aren't staying in your home, they're staying with whomever they're paying rent to. What right do you have to tell him who he can rent to?

Good question. If he also decides not to rent to black people, certainly, that’s his business, and I have no right to tell him who to rent to. Correct?

If you're asking me personally, then yes it's none of your business what he's doing with his property. If he's not renting to black people, that means more tenants for people who aren't racist to rent to. But that aside, housing discrimination laws are based on the moral principle that people should not be treated worse based on their skin colour. Upon what moral principle is the notion that people should be treated worse based on their place of birth based?

Re: Ban Facial Recognition at Festivals

#122

Post by angry_octet »

acollins1331 wrote: post #87
i_am_nomad wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

You honestly believe that deporting 11m people from this country would just drive up peoples wages? It wouldn't have incredible ripple effects across our economy as 5m jobs go un-done and many businesses go under? Maybe if you look at it on 30-40 year timescales things will stabilize, but you just ruined the lives of every american you said you want to help by starting a recession that would be much much worse than 2…

There is no convincing some people, there has been too many years of conservatives/populists (including right wing unions) telling them the economy is a zero sum game. In reality, the deportation of even 1m would plunge the economy into recession, businesses would collapse from lack of key workers, capital would move to where cheap production was possible, etc.

It's the same with income tax cuts -- someone things their $500 tax cut is great, but ignores the $5000 tax cut those on higher incomes (whether wages or company/real estate ownership) receives, and then complains when there are more homeless people and schools can hire enough teachers. It's bait and switch on a generational scale.

Re: Ban Facial Recognition at Festivals

#123

Post by angry_octet »

derriz wrote: post #46
angry_octet wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are in Europe, how can you not be aware of undocumented refugees from North Africa and Syria? What you are saying is completely delusional.

Where in Europe are you talking about? The majority of immigrants in any EU country come from other EU countries. Of the remainder, less than 10% arrived as refugees. The vast majority of refugees (over 90% I’d guess) are documented and those from Syria or North Africa constitute only a fraction of all refugees. The average European is highly highly unlikely to have ever encountered an undocumented refugee from Syria…

Well I know from personal experience that Sweden and Germany have lots of migrants from there, as well as France and Italy of course. They tend to be official refugees in the northern countries, but there are many undocumented, and also from the East. It is also notorious that countries will shuffle undesirables to another country, e.g. sending Africans back to Italy, sending Roma anywhere else.

Re: Ban Facial Recognition at Festivals

#125

Post by jmpman »

otterley wrote: post #101
jmpman wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Where would I find such statistics? I don’t doubt they exist.

My figure is a direct observation having worked landscaping and construction jobs in my town along side people who are illegal and open about it. Then, interacting with the second and third generation friends in school, they weren’t listening to the Spanish radio stations.

Re: Ban Facial Recognition at Festivals

#126

Post by user9572 »

glenda wrote: post #105

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!

It will probably be proven to work in schools first as most parents don't think children should have privacy anyway

Re: Ban Facial Recognition at Festivals

#128

Post by whatawaste »

jmpman wrote: post #125
otterley wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Where would I find such statistics? I don’t doubt they exist. My figure is a direct observation having worked landscaping and construction jobs in my town along side people who are illegal and open about it. Then, interacting with the second and third generation friends in school, they weren’t listening to the Spanish radio stations.

So you are just pulling numbers out of thin air. You don’t know the total population of Latinos or the population of people who crossed a border without going though a port of entry or over stayed their visas.

Re: Ban Facial Recognition at Festivals

#129

Post by [deleted] »

i_am_nomad wrote: post #115
logicchains wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The illegal immigrants aren't staying in your home, they're staying with whomever they're paying rent to. What right do you have to tell him who he can rent to?

Good question. If he also decides not to rent to black people, certainly, that’s his business, and I have no right to tell him who to rent to. Correct?

[deleted]

Re: Ban Facial Recognition at Festivals

#130

Post by hk__2 »

i_am_nomad wrote: post #56
acollins1331 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it so important for you to kick them out?

I can’t answer for sergiotapia, but I will say that you cannot have unconstrained immigration and high-quality public goods at the same time. Also, rapid unconstrained immigration causes equally rapid changes in culture, and it’s not unreasonable at all for existing citizens to object to that.

Constrained immigration policies and kicking out the people who were able to pass through are different things.
Post reply on HN