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

471–480 of 636 posts

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

#471

Post by arrowsmith »

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…

Palestine Action broke into a British military base and sabotaged millions of pounds' worth of equipment. What did you expect the government to do exactly — shrug it off? What kind of message would that have sent?

The Terrorism Act 2000 gives "serious damage to property" as one definition of terrorism so I find it hard to argue that the government was doing anything more than neutrally applying the law here. Those protestors knew full well they were supporting a proscribed group and they were warned what the consequences would be. Protesting in support of Palestine remains entirely legal in the UK just as long as you don't use the name and branding of this one specific group.

I'll probably regret posting this but there are some extremely disingenuous half-truths in this thread and I think that readers should know the full context.

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

#472

Post by jon-wood »

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 kind of wonder how much of the apparent paranoia from politicians is that they always hear the worst. I doubt its coincidence that Home Secretaries almost invariably turn into huge supporters of surveillance and cracking down on things, and I think that probably comes from the fact they get a briefing everyday from various organisations who's entire reason for existence is to find and keep track of the very worst people. If I were in that position I imagine I'd find it difficult to keep perspective as well.

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

#473

Post by arrowsmith »

chongli wrote: post #219
potato3732842 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The purpose of the system (the police in this casse) is what it does. Always been that way, always will be. It's just a little harder to bury your head in the sand than it used to be.

The purpose of the system (the police in this casse) is what it does. Nope. That's an ideology, not a statement of fact. It completely negates the possibility that systems can become corrupted (or simply fail) and no longer work towards their original purpose.

"systems can become corrupted (or simply fail) and no longer work towards their original purpose"

Er, that's exactly what "the purpose of a system is what it does" means.

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

#474

Post by seabass-labrax »

laughing_man wrote: post #320
bko wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Has society really become this dangerous that we must deploy these things? From the article: > Under the plans, 10 live facial recognition (LFR) vans will be used by seven forces across England to help identify "sex offenders or people wanted for the most serious crimes", according to Home Secretary Yvette Cooper. I guess it depends on how dangerous these criminals are. If there was someone offing kids randomly in…

I'd bet good money "sex offenders and people wanted for the most serious crimes" end up being just a tiny fraction of the use to which the systems are put to in practice. The age verification law was supposed to be protecting children from adult content, but on the very first day they used it to lock down video of political demonstrations.

I am pretty sure that the government did not directly instruct websites to remove protest footage in the case you are referring to. There is substantial ambiguity in the Online Safety Act, so it is only natural that companies that don't have a stake in what they're publishing will be quick to consider it too risky to show.

This is important, because if your point ever becomes a significant argument against the Online Safety Act, it is likely that the government will be able to retort that it was the online services voluntarily censoring - conveniently ignoring, of course, the context which you and I know of.

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

#475

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 »

pengstrom wrote: post #428
somenameforme wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 think politicians are right to be afraid. Surveillance of this magnitude isn't a ballot-box-level grievance. It's a Guy Fawkes/V-level injustice. They're stepping into territory where the very people they're supposed to stop might instead turn justified.

It is fascinating, isn't it. It is like a downwards spiral with a line most people would not even think of considering crossing. That said, current version of the surveillance appears a little more pervasive ( and to an extent a little self-imposed ) so I wonder if that 'feeling justified' will even matter. Examples do exist of enduring dictatorships with extremely efficient intelligence apparatus turned on its populace.

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

#476

Post by arrowsmith »

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.

Tony Blair's biggest legacy was to take power out of Parliament and spread it wafer-thin over a byzantine network of quangos, courts, public sector bodies and Whitehall bureaucracies to ensure that no matter who you vote for, nothing ever changes.

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

#477

Post by bookofjoe »

PeterStuer wrote: post #381
kombine wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was taking an intercity coach to Glasgow recently and a teenage kid was on his phone browsing social media without headphones. I made a comment that he should use headphones or turn the volume off. He got defensive and angry. I did not to escalate, and put my earplugs on. I do believe certain parcels of the society need to be restrained.

Go to any hospital waiting room, and 80% of the time there will be a 60+ year old woman playing some inane phone game with the sound on max. Callous anti-social phone behavior isn't just the prerogative of teens.

However, you won't notice the noise from her phone because it will be inaudible compared to the wall-mounted TV playing at high volume 24/7.

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

#478

Post by bookofjoe »

graemep wrote: post #421
vincnetas wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on public space. Busy street, who cares. Silent intercity bus, maybe. Library, for sure.

Exactly. I would expect it not to bother anyone on a busy street, but I would expect to told to stop it in a library, and to be kicked out in a theatre.

Phones on silent in a theatre yet with a sea of bright silent phone screens surrounding you as people watch TikTok, text, etc., the movie won't be very entertaining. Why I stopped going to movie theatres about 10 years ago.

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

#479

Post by arrowsmith »

ksajadi wrote: post #316

This is the same country that couldn’t introduce driver’s licences with pictures for privacy and surveillance for years. What happened?

Decades of neoliberalism and mass immigration (but I repeat myself) dissolved all the ties — family, community, faith, national identity — that once bound us together. Now there's no social solidarity or cohesion and no-one trusts each other, so they turn to the all-powerful state as the only thing left that can maintain order.

Neoliberalism's end game.

Post reply on HN