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

Facial recognition vans to be rolled out across police forces in England

news.sky.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 636 posts

Re: Facial recognition vans to be rolled out across police forces in England

#441

Post by eptcyka »

jameslk wrote: post #283
ethersteeds wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you unaware of Flock pushing their cameras to all the small town sheriffs? It's definitely not just in New York City. I live in an incorporated area whose population is less than 10,000. The police have mounted Flock license plate cameras pointing both directions at every road leading out. Every shopping center is adding them too. Also: not being subject to pervasive surveillance when you're in the middle of nowh…

There’s Flock, there’s police drones, there’s Ring cameras everywhere, etc. yes I’m aware My point wasn’t to say there’s no monitoring in the US. It’s that there’s extreme variance in population densities which therefore means less opportunity and necessity for the same uniform surveillance in many places compared to countries with more even population densities. Whether the power of the federal government keeps expa…

Yeah, all the people who stand to lose from oppressive surveillance can just gtfo into the desert, that will solve their problems and definitely isn’t what the surveyors wanted then to do in the first place. Yeah, like, if you do not like being surveilled in the society, have you considered not participating in it? This marginally better than being exiled forcefully.

Re: Facial recognition vans to be rolled out across police forces in England

#442

Post by permo-w »

zosima wrote: post #409
fao_ wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's almost like huge organizations built off the backs of many different parties working in tandem, will at times have contradictory aims.

In that case it would be nice to see any effort from EU against government surveillance. Sure GDPR and what not, but they're full of loopholes for allowing government to do what private parties are not.

the EU has literally banned facial recognition by law enforcement across the entire bloc.

HN has terrible EU Derangement Syndrome:

any time its mentioned here, suddenly there are tens of people lining up to blindly shit on it, usually for laws it hasn't actually passed, or literal anti-truths like your comment, despite the fact that it is consistently passing the best tech-focused laws of any major governmental body anywhere, and the proposed laws that everyone repeatedly loses their minds over have never once actually come to pass. even when they released the DMA and DSA, possibly the two most HN-friendly pieces of legislation of all time, half the comments were attempts at criticism, basically seemingly because people here just love to hate the EU, sans facts

Re: Facial recognition vans to be rolled out across police forces in England

#443

Post by teamonkey »

skeezyboy wrote: post #410
teamonkey wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Realistically, CCTV probably will help catching and prosecuting the people who invaded your home. But CCTV doesn’t act as a deterrent like a bobby on the street would. And because there’s a lack of visibility of criminals being caught, it just feels like the police are doing nothing. If they’re caught down the line it’s unlikely you’d hear about it anyway. The police can’t tell you without it being proven in court un…

>Realistically, CCTV probably will help catching and prosecuting the people who invaded your home. not if the police cant be bothered to investigate. they dont bother with anything non-violent.

Not true.

If the CCTV gives a clear and obvious result they will pursue it. If there’s a string of thefts they will investigate and use the CCTV to provide evidence. CCTV won’t always provide that but sometimes it does.

What they won’t do is send Columbo to track down your laptop, because your laptop is worth a few minutes of police time at best, and by the time you report it it’s already been fenced and there is almost zero chance of recovery. They should prioritise violent crime.

Re: Facial recognition vans to be rolled out across police forces in England

#444

Post by graemep »

kypro wrote: post #240
orra wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Must be a truly dangerous place... I don't know if you're awaee, but the number of arrests for terrorism has skyrocketed in recent months, in the UK. Sounds terrifying, until you realise people were arrested as terrorists for holding placards. (That fact is of course terrifying, but in a chilling way).

You forgot to mention those people are holding placards in support of an illegal "terror" group whose objective is to protest the unnecessary human loss of life in Palestine by spray painting British military equipment. Obligatory legal notice that I obviously do not support said group, but historically terrorists would actually need to commit acts that instil a sense terror in people to further their political objec…

> spray painting British military equipment.

Spraying paint down military jet engines rendering them inoperable until repaired, at a cos of millions of pounds.

> historically terrorists would actually need to commit acts that instil a sense terror in people to further their political objective

The legal definition of terrorism in the UK has for many years (at least all of the current century, I think a lot longer) included "serious damage to property":

https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/terrorism

and I think causing many millions of pounds worth of damage is clearly serious.

I do not entirely agree with the definition (I particularly oppose making collecting information and disseminating publications terrorism) but it is what has long been accepted.

Re: Facial recognition vans to be rolled out across police forces in England

#445

Post by zosima »

permo-w wrote: post #442
zosima wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In that case it would be nice to see any effort from EU against government surveillance. Sure GDPR and what not, but they're full of loopholes for allowing government to do what private parties are not.

the EU has literally banned facial recognition by law enforcement across the entire bloc. HN has terrible EU Derangement Syndrome: any time its mentioned here, suddenly there are tens of people lining up to blindly shit on it, usually for laws it hasn't actually passed, or literal anti-truths like your comment, despite the fact that it is consistently passing the best tech-focused laws of any major governmental body…

> the EU has literally banned facial recognition by law enforcement across the entire bloc.

This is simply wrong:

They have banned _live_ facial recognition - and with exemptions such as e.g. for terrorism and other severe crimes, which is becoming quite broad.

They are allowing facial recognition when done after-the-fact for law enforcement. Probably also for petty crimes.

Re: Facial recognition vans to be rolled out across police forces in England

#446

Post by zosima »

permo-w wrote: post #439
zosima wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EU is on exactly the same road, just with a (tiny) delay.

except no, the EU has specifically outlawed facial recognition in public places

They have outlawed _live_ facial recognition in public places. And with exemptions such as e.g. terrorism, which I'm guessing is what UK is going to go for with protesters.

Re: Facial recognition vans to be rolled out across police forces in England

#447

Post by graemep »

dathinab wrote: post #121
Shank wrote: post #22

The UK is quickly deploying surveillance state technology that people once decried China for. Whether or not this is ethical or useful, I wish the hypocrisy would be acknowledged. The OSA, the Apple encryption demands, LFR, …, it’s clearly a trend. Has society really become this dangerous that we must deploy these things?

> The UK is quickly deploying surveillance state technology that people once decried China for. they always had been or at least tried, for decades by now, the only thing which had been holding them back was the EU frequently being like "no wtf UK, that is against human rights, EU law, etc." > Has society really become this dangerous that we must deploy these things? no, and it also has a long track record of not onl…

> was the EU frequently being like "no wtf UK, that is against human rights, EU law, etc."

The EU courts have sometimes been helpful, but the EU lawmakers have been atleast as bad as the UK: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Retention_Directive

As other comments have pointed out the EU has also pushed a lot of other privacy invasive legislation.

Re: Facial recognition vans to be rolled out across police forces in England

#448

Post by renegat0x0 »

somenameforme wrote: post #308
Shank wrote: post #22

The UK is quickly deploying surveillance state technology that people once decried China for. Whether or not this is ethical or useful, I wish the hypocrisy would be acknowledged. The OSA, the Apple encryption demands, LFR, …, it’s clearly a trend. Has society really become this dangerous that we must deploy these things?

The first time I taught, it was a rather interesting experience realizing how little capacity teachers actually have to deal with e.g. a disruptive student. Yeah you can pass them along to the disciplinarian or whatever, but in the end it's often empty threats - especially if the parents themselves don't particularly care, which in the case of highly disruptive students is nearly always the case. But if a class itsel…

I come from Poland, where the streets are generally quite peaceful. Some of my friends from France and Germany say things feel less peaceful there. They believe immigration has played a role in that. I’m not here to agree or disagree — I can only share my own experiences.

The more disruption there is in society, the more people seem willing to accept increased control by authorities. I'm not necessarily saying this is part of some grand plan, but it does seem convenient for politicians when circumstances justify stronger control measures.

Re: Facial recognition vans to be rolled out across police forces in England

#449

Post by cwmoore »

card_zero wrote: post #318
dylan604 wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that precisely the point. If there are so many laws that are so easily broken, you have a reason to pickup anyone of interest at any time.

Eh, I see what I wrote was ambiguous. I meant "not hard to defy the law", you're on "not hard to be tripped up by the law".

Same jail

Re: Facial recognition vans to be rolled out across police forces in England

#450

Post by zuminator »

falleng0d wrote: post #388
nunodonato wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

sure, we will trust USA to talk about human rights.

Don’t attack the messenger, attack the message.

A more applicable cliché might be,"Consider the source."
Post reply on HN