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

461–470 of 636 posts

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

#461

Post by zuminator »

gregorygoc wrote: post #208
pmarreck wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It still arguably complies with the Paradox of Tolerance. Terrorists (as well as their supporters) are intolerant and non-pluralist. Therefore, for a pluralist society to survive, it must be intolerant of one thing- intolerance.

It’s basic game theory. If someone is not nice to you, you have to be not nice for them.

Are you talking about the tit-for-tat strategy in the Prisoner's Dilemma? That's a particular toy model with an exaggeratedly punitive payoff matrix. But not every daily interaction can be reasonably mapped onto that matrix. A random interaction with a brusque stranger in a queue isn't necessarily going to result in a good outcome for your being rude ('defecting') in a tit-for-tat. If anything it might cause you more stress and embarrassment than if you'd remained mum.

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

#462

Post by bboygravity »

lemoncookiechip wrote: post #451
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?

>Has society really become this dangerous that we must deploy these things? Over the last hundred years, violent crime has droped sharply worldwide. Over the last twenty years, it has fallen alot in developed countries such as Western Europe, North America, Japan and South Korea. In the United Kingdom, both violent and property crime have gone down in the past two decades. The main exception is fraud, scams and cyber…

Yeah, I mean if the UK is covering up and not counting 1000's of underaged girls being raped (with some police literally participating in the rape) the statistics are bound to look better than they are in reality.

Having said that, I don't think the surveillance state they're setting up even has the intent to change any of that.

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

#463

Post by chillingeffect »

pixelpoet wrote: post #422
arethuza wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a far bigger problem with adults having calls in public places with their phones on speaker... should they be "restrained" as well?

IMO it shouldn't even get that far, to questions of how much we should be allowed to ask of others in the name of basic decency; there's been a massive shift from people being self-regulating and trying to be considerate to others, to the conversation changing to something like, "how dare you even speak to me while I'm blasting tiktok loudly, I'm going to look up the letter of the law and see what the maximum disrupt…

Ive identified several aspects. Moral injury, new status baseline due to social media, and lack of awareness of effects our digital powers. Not enough time to type on this phone keybd but if ppl upvote i'll elaborate.

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

#464

Post by seabass-labrax »

philipallstar wrote: post #150
dathinab wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's a cliche, but if you have nothing to hide, and intend to protest peacefully, why are you covering your face? because who says the state (and the people acting for it, e.g. police) are always the good guys there is a VERY long history of people being systematically harassed and persecuted for things which really shouldn't be an issue, and might not have been illegal either (but then the moment a state becomes t…

> like just looking at the UK, they e.g. "thanked" Alan Turing for his war contributions by driving him into Suicide because he was gay Well. Maybe[0]. [0] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-18561092

Just because there is a chance he did not kill himself, that does not negate the fact that homosexuality was illegal, and that the state expended resources to prosecute him! British people now overwhelmingly see such policies as reprehensible, regardless of who might or might not have considered suicide because of them.

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

#466

Post by HKH2 »

sReinwald wrote: post #456
HKH2 wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, I thought you were dogwhistling. A dominant culture means a step back from individualist values. The most effective 'policies' are created through communities not through law. We cannot rely only on the law for a healthy society; it is necessary but not sufficient. Rebelling against cultural norms is not the problem. The problem is when people escalate quickly because of it and threaten others. That means the…

You randomly bring up multiculturalism as a problem to be solved in response to a story about a rude teenager of unknown cultural background, and assume I'm dogwhistling? Please elaborate because all I'm seeing here is projection. But I see we've pivoted from "multiculturalism bad" to pseudo-intellectual theorizing about collective cultural conformity. Very smooth. Different packaging, still trying to sell the same p…

> pseudo-intellectual

More name-calling. You still haven't addressed my initial question yet. I'll rephrase it again for you: How do you enforce norms without a dominant culture? Do we even need norms at all?

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

#467

Post by thecopy »

la_mezcla wrote: post #194

Isn't UK a democracy? Why then have the people not rejected the initiative? Ah, right - they haven't even been asked.

In a first-past-the-post electoral system (UK, USA), it always degenerates into 2 parties, which over time becomes entrenched and diverge from popular opinion.

A proportionally representative system in IMO better from this perspective.

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

#468

Post by permo-w »

zosima wrote: post #459
permo-w wrote: post #455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

my friend, I'm sorry but this is simply a factual bridge too far. the EU has quite specifically brought out wide-ranging laws heavily restricting the very thing the UK is doing, plus a load of other very positive restrictions on the use of AI and biometrics in general, and yet your conclusion is that they're on the same path? it's like if I say I'm never going to eat meat except rare unavoidable occasions, and you th…

What is non-factual? We have another token legislation from EU forbidding private parties to most anything, and carefully inserting loopholes for authorities and government to do as they please. True, the restrictions on live facial recognition is a bit more severe for law enforcement than usual. But: A. It's not something most people here care about a lot. Law enforcement are still allowed to use AI to create a file…

>forbidding private parties to most anything

well thank fuck for that! besides financial self-interest, why would you want private parties doing anything with AI and biometrics whatsoever? if anyone is to at all, it should be publicly accountable bodies that aren't operating based on a profit motive, but really it should be none at all!

>It gives them political points, because now people less-in-the-know will think that they are actually protecting privacy, which is again, not true.

this entire sentence stinks of "I just don't like the EU and I'm just going to criticise it no matter what". people in the know? people who have read the law specifically stating that facial recognition can only be used in severe, clearly-defined cases, with judicial approval, in highly time-limited windows? people who've read that if it is to be used post-hoc, it has to have judicial authorisation linked to a criminal offence. and you're saying that this in no way protects privacy?

the UK is rolling out AI police vans all over the country to try and recognise people they have on lists. no judicial approval is required, there's no time-limit, and as far as I'm aware there's no restriction on what crimes it's used for either. private companies are allowed to use it, obviously equally with no judicial approval

essentially mate, I think you need to have a good look at whether your opinions here are coming from "I genuinely think the EU's legislation is an issue here" or "I don't like the idea of the EU in general and I'm going to criticise anything it does"

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

#469

Post by pinoy420 »

octo888 wrote: post #366
dathinab wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

trying to become a EU member state citizen as a UK citizen is still much easier then for many other countries through often not on paper, but in practice, like the people which can throw rocks in your path do that less likely in the end it's a question of job (in country you want to move to), money/liquidity, and moral restraints you have. Like e.g. buying yourself citizen ship through an arranged marriage should be…

Are you recommending immigration fraud with a straight face?

[dead]

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

#470

Post by permo-w »

zosima wrote: post #460
permo-w wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20240308IP... if you're going to change the central focus of your comment, do it in a reply not an edit

I edited mine after you edited yours. Here is an article about live/post facial recognition: https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-ai-facial-recognition-tec...

I edited mine to add additional observation, leaving the central focus the same. your edit entirely changed the meaning of your comment, changing the meaning of my reply
Post reply on HN