5 ms·

Mainly what it will likely be used for is similar to how cell phone tower data is used today. It gives you a list of people in an area at a given time, which yo

Mainly what it will likely be used for is similar to how cell phone tower data is used today. It gives you a list of people in an area at a given time, which you can correlate with other information like whether they are there often or out of habit, and whether they are breaking a routine. Add ALPR camera data, and a public records graph, and using those selectors against other areas means you can narrow a list of suspects fairly quickly. Arguably, surveillance merely polarizes crime instead of reducing it, where if good people are too worried about the consequences of defending themselves, it creates an effective %100 success rate for committing crimes and an insignificant chance of eventual charges - there is little disincentive to to criminals becoming super aggressive. London is already the most surveiled city in the western world, and yet still notorious for violent street crime. Adding facial recognition to the current regime of cell towers, ALPR, cameras at every corner, cab cameras, and public transit cameras, is meaningless. What is most likely is that facial recognition will be used the way it is used everywhere else in the world - for political pacification, not crime reduction.

sandworm101 8y ago
London police are also addicted to cctv. A crime without footage isnt investigated. Today they only investigate motivations and wintess reliability. If the physical act cannot be confirmed with footage, it didn't happen. So we need either more cameras to catch everything, or far fewer to get cops to start investigate crime again.
orcdork 8y ago
"London [...] still notorious for violent street crime" Which I find fairly strange all things considered - the crime index (https://www.numbeo.com/crime/rankings.jsp https://www.numbeo.com/crime/rankings.jsp - admittedly this might not be the most accurate source) shows quite a gap between other similar cities like New York - a fairly common comparison. As a resident of a few years now, I definitely wouldn't say I felt London to have that kind of feel, if anything violent crime has the effect of being shocking because it is so uncommon. I find it quite disheartening to see London's relatively soft-touch approach lose out over "automated" policing, there's quite a bit of grumbling lately over the reduction in actual people on the streets, mainly over police cuts.
- fwdpropaganda 8y ago
  London has some really bad areas though.
  - theoh 8y ago
    Some really disadvantaged areas, maybe. But not really dangerous for the HN crowd unless you go looking for trouble. There's nowhere I know of in London where I wouldn't feel safe even walking on foot, and the worst parts keep getting gentrified.
    - growlist 8y ago
      Depends on the time of day though doesn't it?
      - theoh 8y ago
        I used to study architecture, and about ten years ago (after drinking too much) decided to visit an architecturally famous but rough estate at night. (It was Robin Hood Gardens.) I walked around and the place was, most significantly, empty. I got hailed aggressively by some guys but a fast walk was enough to get out of there without being confronted. There is danger, all right, but I think you would probably agree that it's not the obvious, conspicuous risks that lead to violent crime. It's the places that don't seem dangerous where it happens, because those are the places where victims are present and not focusing on their safety.
- Theodores 8y ago
  It is one of those glass half full things. If you have been the victim of a mugging then you will start seeing scooter-gangs everywhere, before you never noticed them and crime was only something you read about. Incidentally these guys are quite a London thing, so if you are at the traffic lights on your bike/scooter/car and you see two or more scooters with no number plates and pillion passengers then you might want to start saying your prayers. The former chancellor of the exchequer had his phone nabbed by the legendary moped gang thieves so it is not only in areas that are deprived where crime is a problem. Don't walk and text in Central London, you will only be asking for it. They wear helmets and balaclavas underneath so I do not see how facial recognition can help. Only arming the public with fully automatic assault weapons can deter these ultra-violent thugs who happen to normally be only 15 years old.
ksrm 8y ago
>and yet still notorious for violent street crime Notorious among American right-wingers, perhaps. I haven't heard this or the "no-go areas" guff from anywhere else.
- growlist 8y ago
  There is evidence from the Police themselves to suggest official figures should be taken with a pinch of salt: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25022680 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25022680 'Almost a million crimes a year are disappearing from official figures as chief constables attempt to meet targets, a study by the police watchdog has disclosed.' https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11236805/A-million-crimes-reported-by-public-left-out-of-police-figures.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11236805/A-mil...
vilmosi 8y ago
> yet still notorious for violent street crime As a resident, I have to say I'm pretty surprised to hear this. Is London that different vs similar sized cities?
sametmax 8y ago
There is a huge difference between the intent and the potential. You can also have a benevolent dictator. But if you avoid the dictator all together, you remove the incertainty. With orher signals like the brexit, porn censorship, and cctv every where, this is very disturbing. But the most important signal is how the population accepts it. It smells like a disaster in the making.
- 75dvtwin 8y ago
  what is similar about Brexit and porn censorship? As far as signals of coming dictatorship in UK?
  - sametmax 8y ago
    Isolationism and reduction of freedom.
    - 75dvtwin 8y ago
      I would argue, that Brexit was a faint sign, that UK still have hope. Brexit was 'No' vote to thought-police, political-corruption, and selective outrage. It was a 'yes' vote for national sovereignty, and empowered diversity of opinion (where a diversity means to be 'different' compared than the 'rich /powerful/famous' line of vote) To me the early signs of Dictatorship are: a) Uniformity of thought (and, therefore, active thought police). b) The culture of Selective outrage (that then leads to selective law enforcement for your citizens). c) Paid (and therefore 'fake') victims. d) The identification if a 'single powerful enemy' that must be attacked preventively (or else everybody will get hurt) --- So a treatment that prevents Dictatorship, is to ensure that the economical, political and military power of a country (or a union) is well spread, and controlled by local votes (as much as possible), rather than representative vote It does bring 'less efficiency', but it is that type of entropy (introduced by uncertainty of diverse opinion of larger populous) -- that is necessary to prevent dictatorships.

sandworm101 8y ago

London police are also addicted to cctv. A crime without footage isnt investigated. Today they only investigate motivations and wintess reliability. If the physical act cannot be confirmed with footage, it didn't happen. So we need either more cameras to catch everything, or far fewer to get cops to start investigate crime again.

orcdork 8y ago

"London [...] still notorious for violent street crime" Which I find fairly strange all things considered - the crime index (https://www.numbeo.com/crime/rankings.jsp https://www.numbeo.com/crime/rankings.jsp - admittedly this might not be the most accurate source) shows quite a gap between other similar cities like New York - a fairly common comparison. As a resident of a few years now, I definitely wouldn't say I felt London to have that kind of feel, if anything violent crime has the effect of being shocking because it is so uncommon. I find it quite disheartening to see London's relatively soft-touch approach lose out over "automated" policing, there's quite a bit of grumbling lately over the reduction in actual people on the streets, mainly over police cuts.

fwdpropaganda 8y ago
London has some really bad areas though.
- theoh 8y ago
  Some really disadvantaged areas, maybe. But not really dangerous for the HN crowd unless you go looking for trouble. There's nowhere I know of in London where I wouldn't feel safe even walking on foot, and the worst parts keep getting gentrified.
  - growlist 8y ago
    Depends on the time of day though doesn't it?
    - theoh 8y ago
      I used to study architecture, and about ten years ago (after drinking too much) decided to visit an architecturally famous but rough estate at night. (It was Robin Hood Gardens.) I walked around and the place was, most significantly, empty. I got hailed aggressively by some guys but a fast walk was enough to get out of there without being confronted. There is danger, all right, but I think you would probably agree that it's not the obvious, conspicuous risks that lead to violent crime. It's the places that don't seem dangerous where it happens, because those are the places where victims are present and not focusing on their safety.
Theodores 8y ago
It is one of those glass half full things. If you have been the victim of a mugging then you will start seeing scooter-gangs everywhere, before you never noticed them and crime was only something you read about. Incidentally these guys are quite a London thing, so if you are at the traffic lights on your bike/scooter/car and you see two or more scooters with no number plates and pillion passengers then you might want to start saying your prayers. The former chancellor of the exchequer had his phone nabbed by the legendary moped gang thieves so it is not only in areas that are deprived where crime is a problem. Don't walk and text in Central London, you will only be asking for it. They wear helmets and balaclavas underneath so I do not see how facial recognition can help. Only arming the public with fully automatic assault weapons can deter these ultra-violent thugs who happen to normally be only 15 years old.

ksrm 8y ago

>and yet still notorious for violent street crime Notorious among American right-wingers, perhaps. I haven't heard this or the "no-go areas" guff from anywhere else.

growlist 8y ago
There is evidence from the Police themselves to suggest official figures should be taken with a pinch of salt: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25022680 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25022680 'Almost a million crimes a year are disappearing from official figures as chief constables attempt to meet targets, a study by the police watchdog has disclosed.' https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11236805/A-million-crimes-reported-by-public-left-out-of-police-figures.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11236805/A-mil...

vilmosi 8y ago

> yet still notorious for violent street crime As a resident, I have to say I'm pretty surprised to hear this. Is London that different vs similar sized cities?

sametmax 8y ago

There is a huge difference between the intent and the potential. You can also have a benevolent dictator. But if you avoid the dictator all together, you remove the incertainty. With orher signals like the brexit, porn censorship, and cctv every where, this is very disturbing. But the most important signal is how the population accepts it. It smells like a disaster in the making.

75dvtwin 8y ago
what is similar about Brexit and porn censorship? As far as signals of coming dictatorship in UK?
- sametmax 8y ago
  Isolationism and reduction of freedom.
  - 75dvtwin 8y ago
    I would argue, that Brexit was a faint sign, that UK still have hope. Brexit was 'No' vote to thought-police, political-corruption, and selective outrage. It was a 'yes' vote for national sovereignty, and empowered diversity of opinion (where a diversity means to be 'different' compared than the 'rich /powerful/famous' line of vote) To me the early signs of Dictatorship are: a) Uniformity of thought (and, therefore, active thought police). b) The culture of Selective outrage (that then leads to selective law enforcement for your citizens). c) Paid (and therefore 'fake') victims. d) The identification if a 'single powerful enemy' that must be attacked preventively (or else everybody will get hurt) --- So a treatment that prevents Dictatorship, is to ensure that the economical, political and military power of a country (or a union) is well spread, and controlled by local votes (as much as possible), rather than representative vote It does bring 'less efficiency', but it is that type of entropy (introduced by uncertainty of diverse opinion of larger populous) -- that is necessary to prevent dictatorships.