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

531–540 of 636 posts

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

#531

Post by skeezyboy »

teamonkey wrote: post #443
skeezyboy wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 alm…

> If the CCTV gives a clear and obvious result they will pursue it.

And how are you defining "clear and obvious"? Because unless the robber writes his name and address on some paper and holds it to the camera, it wont get investigated mate.

> 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.

Which is exactly what I said, they dont bother with non-violent crime. But if laptops arent worth investigating, they should make stealing one legal, or at the very least tell the public they cant be bothered with laptops. Because I was under the impression you could ring the police to enforce the law, not just the parts they deem "worth police time"

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

#532

Post by Xss3 »

fennecfoxy wrote: post #360
Xelbair wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We could trust the government to be good no. you cannot. ever. even if you have perfect faith in current government, you're one election away from something different. CCTV is also extremely ineffective in crime prevention in general, and actually catching criminals - one of few studies(back when i did write my thesis on subject related to it) used different areas of UK to measure crime fighting capability and effe…

Totally agree; because us humans are animals. Without editing the genetic history of our evolution and hence all a manner of behaviours out of ourselves this will never change - because would we be human afterwards? It's human to help your friend because they're in need; that's how tribes work. But it's just as human to disparage or sabotage someone who isn't a part of your tribe, to not care about them. To lie and c…

Cutting the amount of police per person from 1 per 1000 to 1 per 10,000 under conservative rule did a lot of damage.

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

#533

Post by impossiblefork »

arrowsmith wrote: post #517
impossiblefork wrote: post #505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I expected prosecutions for sabotage rather than for terrorism. The UK has very broad terrorism legislation, but conventionally terrorism is something directed at civilians, and it's not something we usually tar, for example, resistance groups with. I think you even have to be able to kill people in internal political conflict without being called a terrorist. There are many circumstances during which such…

FWIW the specific activists who entered the base were charged with "conspiracy to commit criminal damage" and "conspiracy to enter a prohibited place knowingly for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or interests of the UK", not terrorism. [0] [0] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3dp5158720o

Yes, but then the organization was proscribed as a terrorist organization.

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

#534

Post by achempion »

bondarchuk wrote: post #495
youngtaff wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn’t believe everything you read in the Daily Mail or that comes out of Farage or Yaxley-Lennon‘s mouth

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotherham_child_sexual_exploit...

Thanks for posting the link, can't believe it was happening in 2016

> The police collected bags of clothes the girl had saved as evidence, but lost them two days later. The family was sent £140 compensation for the clothes and advised to drop the case.

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

#535

Post by miningape »

skeezyboy wrote: post #412
Freedom5093 wrote: post #332

This would lead to a rise in doctors and accountants wearing the combo of Canada goose jacket, balaclava and man-sling-bag in summer.

[flagged]

Yes, the English isles were crime riddled sh*t-holes until only recently. Rapes were so common girls had to cover their whole body to avoid unwanted attention.

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

#537

Post by CalRobert »

Stevvo wrote: post #528
CalRobert wrote: post #508

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh? The US has all of that. You can move freely between states.

Internal movement doesn't count. Only a real hell-hole like North Korea will prevent you moving around in your own country.

The EU and US are roughly equivalent in size. I’m not sure it’s fair to say that doesn’t count.

It’s (nominally) a union of states after all

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

#538

Post by arrowsmith »

impossiblefork wrote: post #533
arrowsmith wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW the specific activists who entered the base were charged with "conspiracy to commit criminal damage" and "conspiracy to enter a prohibited place knowingly for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or interests of the UK", not terrorism. [0] [0] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3dp5158720o

Yes, but then the organization was proscribed as a terrorist organization.

There's no legal mechanism to ban/proscribe a group in the UK except under terrorism legislation: https://www.perplexity.ai/search/for-what-reasons-other-than...

If the government wants to shut this group down (which I think is a reasonable response to an attack on our military) then I'm not sure what other options were available to them. And like I said, what they did seems to meet the legal definition of terrorism (regardless of whether that definition is a good one.)

Of all the arguments we could be having about Palestine, I'm really not going to shed any tears for Palestine Action.

But I'm not here to get lost in the weeds, I just objected to the misleading half-truths that were being presented above. Most people reading this don't follow UK news closely and might come away with the impression that the government is banning pro-Palestine protest entirely, or is making it illegal to merely "hold placards". That's an outrageous distortion, and it hardly helps the pro-Palestine cause. I couldn't let it slide.

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

#539

Post by extraisland »

arrowsmith wrote: post #492
extraisland wrote: post #487

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is often not understood by many people who simply say "well you should vote harder" or "we need system of voting". The government structure seems to be setup in such a way that any meaningful change is rejected.

This was the Brexiteers' biggest folly, I think. They blamed the EU for the fact that power had become completely unaccountable to the public. But the call was coming from inside the house: in theory we reclaimed our sovereignty, in practice your vote still doesn't matter and your opinion still isn't wanted. Now the same crowd is turning their attention to the ECHR. It won't help.

I don't think remaining in the EU would have helped matters considering they are enacting their own spooky internet/tech legislation. I don't know enough about the ECHR to comment.

I think it is a combination of many things. To make meaningful change each one of these entities (quangos) will have to be examined, reformed or reviewed.

I am not sure it is even possible for that to happen without a collapse and/or crisis at this point.

I listened to a podcast with Dominic Cummings last night and he is of the opinion that the UK government is extremely weak at the moment and if there was another black swan event that they would crumble. I don't know if that is true, but it seems plausible.

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

#540

Post by [deleted] »

renegat0x0 wrote: post #448
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 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 i…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN