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

NYPD bypassed facial recognition ban to ID pro-Palestinian student protester

thecity.nyc

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 211 posts

Re: NYPD bypassed facial recognition ban to ID pro-Palestinian student protester

#151

Post by tracker1 »

gr_norm wrote: post #65
one-note wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quite a lot. The #1 right, for instance: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_t... Curious why this is downvoted?

I've noticed many right-leaning tech types give quite a lot of lip service to free speech when it's about someone getting banned from a mailing list for being an asshole, and not so much when it's the government quashing protest against genocide. I'll personally always defend the idea of free speech, no matter the side.

I've been pretty consistent in terms of supporting people saying things and even expressing views I find abhorrent.

I don't consider throwing rocks/bricks at people "free speech". I also don't consider launching fireworks into crowded buildings "free speech" either.

Re: NYPD bypassed facial recognition ban to ID pro-Palestinian student protester

#152

Post by mardifoufs »

stefan_ wrote: post #94
femiagbabiaka wrote: post #22

How many rights will we be asked to give up in order to squash anti-war sentiment?

This guy was accused of hurling a rock at a protester, it seems we are trying to defend the right to peaceful protest? Like, this guy was identified off video of him throwing a rock at a protester that hit them in the face. By all accounts this is someone who is trying to violently suppress peoples rights. That he got off on police misconduct in the investigation is a loss to society, no matter how many waxing words…

Okay and? They still bypassed a ban to do that. I guess we can just bypass any law, checks and balances whenever we really feel like someone might have committed a crime.

Re: NYPD bypassed facial recognition ban to ID pro-Palestinian student protester

#153

Post by jajuuka »

noqc wrote: post #141
jajuuka wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Self defense isn't "you killed 1,200 people of our people so we're going to kill 60,000+ of your people (majority of which are children), destroy any all your hospitals and educational centers and prevent basics like food, water and medical supplies from getting to you." At what point do you listen to humanitarian organizations and the UN? Amazing that you think 24 people is a genocide but not 60,000+.

[flagged]

Again, this isn't self defense. Maybe you're just not familiar with what self defense is. Self defense is not going to another country and murdering civilians en masse. Calling 60,000 deaths collateral damage is pure insanity. If China nuked HK and claimed self defense would you have the same sympathy?

It's comically to talk about International Law when Israel has so many violations that Netanyahu has a warrant for his arrest by the ICC. It's also incredibly convenient that the IDF indiscriminately bombs and shoots civilians and civilian structures and claims they were Hamas. Including journalists. The cherry on top is preventing anyone else from confirming it. The IDF has continually done this. Claimed all houses are secret ICBM sites and that all civilians in other countries are terrorists. With zero evidence and when they are proven factually wrong they say some captain screwed up and that they will investigate. Yet it keeps happening.

Every civilian in Gaza is starving and cannot get any aid at all because Israel is denying all foreign aid or distribution. These are text book conditions of genocide. I look forward to the future when these atrocities are finally acknowledged. But I have no doubt that will be after the people responsible are long gone sadly.

Re: NYPD bypassed facial recognition ban to ID pro-Palestinian student protester

#154

Post by ToValueFunfetti »

gr_norm wrote: post #113
ToValueFunfetti wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I'll personally always defend the idea of free speech, no matter the side. You attacked the idea of free speech for the other side in the same comment where you said this. I would assume based on reference to government infringements that you're referring to the first amendment as "free speech" if you hadn't specifically emphasized "idea"; conservatives have no real first amendment case, but they do get censored and…

No? I would defend the first example too, which is why I specified the idea rather than the letter (the 1A). Is it so rare to see someone who genuinely cares about this stuff, not just for those who agree with me? That I think they're an asshole is irrelevant.

Oh, sorry, I misunderstood you. If someone is being an asshole on a mailing list, I don't think it's a free speech issue to remove them, and I took that example in context to mean you were saying all conservative gripes were non-issues like that.

>Is it so rare to see someone who genuinely cares about this stuff, not just for those who agree with me?

Yes, absolutely. I can name maybe 8, including the both of us.

Re: NYPD bypassed facial recognition ban to ID pro-Palestinian student protester

#156

Post by mardifoufs »

tracker1 wrote: post #139
thisislife2 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a separate issue. The US is an exception where evidence that is collected illegally (see 'fruit of the poisonous tree' - https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree ) is not allowed in court. Thus, US law enforcements have come up with many creative means (like Parallel Construction - https://restorethe4th.com/our-new-brief-on-parallel-construc... ) to hide the fact that evidence was collected…

I definitely see both sides in this... it's a bad use of resources, that I'm not completely convinced police should be barred from all access to, if it exists... on the flip side, the context of protecting an a-hole throwing rocks at a protest irks me as well. I'm actually against parallel construction and feel that is far more dangerous than a lot of other activities in that it literally prevents you from knowing yo…

But I don't get the two sides here. From what I understood, the police aren't allowed to use facial recognition. I mean at that point, why not just allow the cops to search without warrants, and do whatever they have to do to catch bad guys?

Like I can totally see the potential debate about if this type of ban should be in place. Sure! But the fact is, that's the current situation. The police can't, and shouldn't, just ignore or bypass rules if they feel like they're too limiting. The police should have basically 0 say (a part from voting) in what the rules they have to follow are.

If I start deciding to ignore laws and rules that I don't like, that would probably be a crime. So why should the police be able to do the same?

Re: NYPD bypassed facial recognition ban to ID pro-Palestinian student protester

#158

Post by bmacho »

jajuuka wrote: post #124
noqc wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Self defense isn't "you killed 1,200 people of our people so we're going to kill 60,000+ of your people (majority of which are children), destroy any all your hospitals and educational centers and prevent basics like food, water and medical supplies from getting to you." At what point do you listen to humanitarian organizations and the UN? Amazing that you think 24 people is a genocide but not 60,000+.

It is self-defense by any means.

You might want to argue that it is unfair as a revenge or something?

Re: NYPD bypassed facial recognition ban to ID pro-Palestinian student protester

#159

Post by mtalantikite »

andrewla wrote: post #90
jasonlotito wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This headline is extremely misleading because it leads you to believe that they are IDing this person because they are a "Pro-Palestinian Student Protester". It read like a privacy issue. Then I read your comment, and was confused. > More proper would be "NYPD Bypassed Facial Recognition Ban to ID Rock-Throwing Assailant" This is inaccurate. The charges were dismissed. At best, it's an alleged rock-throwing assaila…

[flagged]

> why mention that he was a "Pro-Palestinian Student Protester"? That does not seem relevant at all

Because it seems highly unlikely that if I were to walk out of my apartment right now, walk down to the waterfront, and throw a rock at a group of people sitting at Marsha P Johnson park that the NYPD would even respond to the call. Never mind getting a fire marshal involved to run my photo through a facial recognition program. They've got more important things to deal with. (I'd also, of course, never do this).

This was a protest movement that was a national story and included congressional hearings, so it does seem relevant to have the context.

Post reply on HN