Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
[flagged]
The US actively supports Israel financially and militaristically. That's the difference. Those are my tax dollars killing innocent children over there in Gaza.
NYPD bypassed facial recognition ban to ID pro-Palestinian student protester
161–170 of 211 posts
Re: NYPD bypassed facial recognition ban to ID pro-Palestinian student protester
#162Earlier 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]
> If it is a privacy issue, why mention that he was a "Pro-Palestinian Student Protester"? That does not seem relevant at all;
It provides context. The US has an extensive history of illegal/unconstitutional/questionable surveillance of protesters. This could be seen as either another example of exactly that or, at the very least, as a warning that the police in NY are willing to illegally use facial recognition when it suits their interests.
Re: NYPD bypassed facial recognition ban to ID pro-Palestinian student protester
#163Re: NYPD bypassed facial recognition ban to ID pro-Palestinian student protester
#164Re: NYPD bypassed facial recognition ban to ID pro-Palestinian student protester
#165>A city fire marshal used FDNY’s access to a facial recognition software to help NYPD detectives identify a pro-Palestinian protester at Columbia University, circumventing policies that tightly restrict the Police Department’s use of the technology. Why does the fire department need access to run facial recognition?
It is not so important that the fire marshal has facial recognition, because the office chose that option because access was then free of charge and a mere handshake to them. If not the fire marshal, some independent 3rd party. This is a known trivial loophole to facial recognition bans. (Former lead dev of globally leading FR system.)
Sorry, can you clarify this? I’m not understanding. I think you’re saying
- the fire marshal happened to be the route chosen in this case
- but there are many other routes
- so the fire marshal detail is kindof insignificant.
Is that a correct understanding? If so, I still wonder why the fire marshal has access?
Re: NYPD bypassed facial recognition ban to ID pro-Palestinian student protester
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
[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 h…
[flagged]
Re: NYPD bypassed facial recognition ban to ID pro-Palestinian student protester
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
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, ju…
I'm not suggesting they should bypass current laws. I do question if it should be against the law to check against an existing data source like facial recognition. One could have put the picture out to the press, and asked, "hey, do you know this person?" type of thing and gotten the same answer.
I get that it's a slippery slope and it is a bit invasive to even establish many of these databases... not to mention the license plate tracking, cell tracking, etc. I also don't like jerks throwing rocks at people.
Re: NYPD bypassed facial recognition ban to ID pro-Palestinian student protester
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s the same basic thing as a spear being the same as a nuclear weapon. “They both kill people!” Walking around with a photo versus walking around with a hundred million photos and asking everyone simultaneously should not be considered about the basic same thing.
It is very bad to throw spears at people, despite the existence of nuclear weapons.
Yes, but throwing a spear and detonating a nuclear weapon are not equal levels of violating. They're both on the spectrum, but there is still a big difference
Re: NYPD bypassed facial recognition ban to ID pro-Palestinian student protester
#169How many rights will we be asked to give up in order to squash anti-war sentiment?
[flagged]
Do you genuinely not see the difference to society between cops putting in footwork to find someone, and being able to instantly find anyone they want for any reason with nearly zero effort?