121–130 of 145 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can regulate the NSA and CIA too, if you really want.
Those agencies both monitor and retaliate against members of Congress. The NSA and CIA regulate government, not the other way around.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most countries banned mines, but not US: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottawa_Treaty
Ottawa treaty only bans anti-personnel mines, not anti-vehicle or command activated. The US bands persistent anti-personnel mines, but not mines that only last a day or so. This argument gets more convoluted once you read up on it. As I mentioned in spaetzleleeser’s comment below, the US is one of a few countries that has a policy banning persistent anti-vehicle mines (they ban all persistent mines in general), so in…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a fact the US should be deeply ashamed of. I had no idea how bad the land mine and unexploded bomb situation is until I visited Cambodia and Laos where even 50 years after the war people are still getting their limbs blown off.
Read up on the difference between persistent and non-persistent land mines [1]. The US only uses non-persistent mines that last usually 24-72 hours. The issue with 50 years later is not accurate since non-persistent mines haven’t been commonplace for decades and officially outlawed in 2004 [2]. Only place the US allows persistent mines is at the DMZ. There’s also a distinction between anti-personnel mines and anti-ve…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ottawa treaty only bans anti-personnel mines, not anti-vehicle or command activated. The US bands persistent anti-personnel mines, but not mines that only last a day or so. This argument gets more convoluted once you read up on it. As I mentioned in spaetzleleeser’s comment below, the US is one of a few countries that has a policy banning persistent anti-vehicle mines (they ban all persistent mines in general), so in…
Anti-vehicle mines don’t really matter, they pose no threat to civilians.
Should police collect iPhones away in those cities where face recognition is banned?
You should also collect Sony Alpha cameras too. Many of them have a preferential focus feature which uses face recognition. You add up to five faces, prioritized, and it focuses to them if it recognizes in the crowd of people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anti-vehicle mines don’t really matter, they pose no threat to civilians.
Definitely. It is known that civilians never use vehicles.
1. They require tons of pressure to detonate; it’s adjusted for a tank, not ordinary car, and
2. They don’t end up in unexpected places - they are placed on the roads, and thus are easy to find and detonate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those agencies both monitor and retaliate against members of Congress. The NSA and CIA regulate government, not the other way around.
The NSA and CIA are both foreign focused. The FBI is internally focused within the US.
The NSA's warrantless surveillance program (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_warrantless_surveillance_(...) and the CIA's Operation CHAOS (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_CHAOS) are two examples of this behavior.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> strict legal framework for its implementation And that might turn this technology into something that only big company can afford, artificially created a pro-monopoly environment. The problem is complex.
Problem with a strict legal framework for implementation is that it takes 1 person just a few days to get a face recognition system working using generic frameworks for deep learning. The laws can be as strict as you like, but its like introducing a law saying you cant watch nude cartoons at home. Even if you somehow eliminated all the existing ones, its just a pen and paper away.
There are plenty of things that are easy to do but have strict legal frameworks around them. Quick examples include copyright laws, use of force/violence and driving rules.
> CBP says it has processed more than 100 million travelers using face recognition and prevented more than 1,000 “imposters” from entering the US at air and land borders. I wonder how many of those 1000 were incorrectly bounced back
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don’t tell Nest… Seriously, this means every home outdoor security camera is potentially illegal. This can’t be true.
Of course it is. You can’t put up a camera on your porch and shoot your driveway and part of the street. To follow the law you have to point it so it’s only covering your driveway or lawn and no public space. It’s pretty simple restrict the field of view with a screen in front or bit of tape over the camera if needed. Does everyone do that? Probably not. But that doesn’t change how the law is written.