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

Agenda Behind the Facial Recognition Tech Used by ICE and the FBI Revealed

motherjones.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 69 posts

Re: Agenda Behind the Facial Recognition Tech Used by ICE and the FBI Revealed

#51

Post by blix »

sightbroke wrote: post #47
blix wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obama also created ICE as we know it today. And normalized drone strikes.

How are drone strikes any different than a pilot, a warplane, and advanced precision bombs/missiles? Except they're cheaper to run and don't physically risk a pilot.

The issue is not really with the difference in impact between drone attacks and other types of aerial attacks, but with the dramatic increase in scale, resulting from reduced cost and risk.

It probably would have been more accurate to say something like "mass extra-judicial assasination/execution of individuals opaquely labelled as 'militants,' including US citizens, in foreign jurisdictions" instead of "drone strikes," but the latter is shorter and I thought would be understood as implying the former.

Re: Agenda Behind the Facial Recognition Tech Used by ICE and the FBI Revealed

#52

Post by generalizations »

orwin wrote: post #50
generalizations wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The trick is to call them something else If it's politically expedient, that is. For one thing, they were far less violent than the BLM protesters. Yet one group is called 'protestors' and the other 'insurrectionists'.

Didn't they kill one police officer? Or was it two? In a single afternoon? Please tell me how many police officer did the BLM protesters killed per day, just to confirm how violent they were.

If you go look it up, it was zero, IIRC. Don't believe everything you're told.

How many arsonists were among the j6 folks?

Re: Agenda Behind the Facial Recognition Tech Used by ICE and the FBI Revealed

#53

Post by sightbroke »

blix wrote: post #51
sightbroke wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are drone strikes any different than a pilot, a warplane, and advanced precision bombs/missiles? Except they're cheaper to run and don't physically risk a pilot.

The issue is not really with the difference in impact between drone attacks and other types of aerial attacks, but with the dramatic increase in scale, resulting from reduced cost and risk. It probably would have been more accurate to say something like "mass extra-judicial assasination/execution of individuals opaquely labelled as 'militants,' including US citizens, in foreign jurisdictions" instead of "drone strike…

That appears to be an issue of policy not one of technology.

Because they'd more than likely target those same individuals with less precise weapons if not for the given alternative.

Re: Agenda Behind the Facial Recognition Tech Used by ICE and the FBI Revealed

#54

Post by jauntywundrkind »

malcolmgreaves wrote: post #29
kelipso wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You just forgot the Palestine protests or what.

They didn’t call for mad violence against protestors. They didn’t call for arresting protestors. I imagine you won’t admit you have no evidence based in reality.

And they didn't have Dem backed companies surveilling and trying to track protestors.

Re: Agenda Behind the Facial Recognition Tech Used by ICE and the FBI Revealed

#55

Post by evanjrowley »

evanjrowley wrote: post #2

So a journalist at Mother Jones is shocked, but did anyone here on HN not predict this strategy long before Trump got his 2nd term?

My comment here was based on the fact that the US government has been developing biometrics databases since the late 1960s. The 'agenda' for decades has always been to monitor and control the population. When protesters do things like suicide bomb buildings from inside their Tesla, torch Tesla dealerships, attack Tesla drivers, and call for the shooting of ICE agents, is it any wonder that DHS will utilize these tools against political protesters?

Re: Agenda Behind the Facial Recognition Tech Used by ICE and the FBI Revealed

#56

Post by blix »

sightbroke wrote: post #53
blix wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is not really with the difference in impact between drone attacks and other types of aerial attacks, but with the dramatic increase in scale, resulting from reduced cost and risk. It probably would have been more accurate to say something like "mass extra-judicial assasination/execution of individuals opaquely labelled as 'militants,' including US citizens, in foreign jurisdictions" instead of "drone strike…

That appears to be an issue of policy not one of technology. Because they'd more than likely target those same individuals with less precise weapons if not for the given alternative.

The technology enables the policy. If the cost and risk were higher, there would be fewer strikes.

Re: Agenda Behind the Facial Recognition Tech Used by ICE and the FBI Revealed

#57

Post by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF »

stanislavb wrote: post #46
flower-giraffe wrote: post #41

Why did this fall of the front page so quickly? Older posts with less points are still there?

Yup, I was wondering the same. It might the so called "flamefilter", yet, it's suspicious.

Flags will downrank posts without changing the score.

Re: Agenda Behind the Facial Recognition Tech Used by ICE and the FBI Revealed

#58

Post by sightbroke »

blix wrote: post #56
sightbroke wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That appears to be an issue of policy not one of technology. Because they'd more than likely target those same individuals with less precise weapons if not for the given alternative.

The technology enables the policy. If the cost and risk were higher, there would be fewer strikes.

They invaded two countries simultaneously (one landlocked). Then used secret stealth helicopters to fly a hit squad into an allied nations territory for one particular individual.

I don't think this is a fruitful debate but I doubt risk & cost are as much a determining factor as you'd like.

Re: Agenda Behind the Facial Recognition Tech Used by ICE and the FBI Revealed

#59

Post by _DeadFred_ »

generalizations wrote: post #33
malcolmgreaves wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Insurrectionists are not protestors.

> The trick is to call them something else If it's politically expedient, that is. For one thing, they were far less violent than the BLM protesters. Yet one group is called 'protestors' and the other 'insurrectionists'.

They physically broke into our nation's Capital. That is not a 'politically expedient' statement. That is not 'protesting'. They interrupted our Government and government activity had to be postponed. THEY STOPPED THE GOVERNMENT, the election process, and by extension the peaceful transfer of how that had never be prevented before in the nations history. That is not protesting no matter how many air quotes you put around it.

And after they broke in, for this first time in history the traitorous, racist, loser Confederate flag was flown inside out capital building.

Re: Agenda Behind the Facial Recognition Tech Used by ICE and the FBI Revealed

#60

Post by _DeadFred_ »

sudoshred wrote: post #35
onemoresoop wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we’re entering a dystopian era…

At what point would you be certain?

Once it's way past the time/chance/ability to stop things. At least that's what Germans said when asked 'how could you let it happen'. Or Russians. 'We didn't think it was quite enough to take action'.
Post reply on HN