5 ms·

Not defending anybody, but I think the point in the article is sound. If my child were missing, I would want every technical resource possible to be available

by cwalv 8y ago

Not defending anybody, but I think the point in the article is sound. If my child were missing, I would want every technical resource possible to be available to find her. Having "big brother" be able to identify me quickly in a crowd doesn't seem that bad on balance ... if I'm in public, I expect to be viewed.

jriot 8y ago
You stated the classic and the cliche argument of safety over privacy.
- cwalv 8y ago
  I meant to distinguish "when I'm in public" explicitly; in cases where I have a reasonable expectation of privacy I would not want to give that up.
jazzyjackson 8y ago
I think maybe you've never been pulled over by an officer because you 'fit the description of a suspect' You, as a bystander, can be caused great inconvenience (where the line of injustice gets crossed is up for debate) through someone else's expectation of safety.
- cwalv 8y ago
  You're right, I haven't (I wonder what percent of the population has?). I find it hard to believe that law enforcement using facial recognition would really make that problem much worse than it already is though.
  - deelowe 8y ago
    China is already experimenting with pre-empting crime by attempting to monitor their vast network of cameras using ML systems.
alexandercrohde 8y ago
Hmm, I don't really follow that calculus. I guess the way I look at it are the odds of my child being abducted are one in a 300,000. On the other hand, a significant portion of the world (30%?) lives under oppressive regimes. So there's that. That's such a huge margin that I have trouble understanding any other way of looking at it.
- cwalv 8y ago
  So do you believe that restricting the use of this tech in the US would prevent oppressive regimes from using it? Or even slow them down?
  - alexandercrohde 8y ago
    I certainly believe that [it would slow them down]. Firstly, I think the odds of America becoming a repressive regime, though low, are much higher than the 1/300,000 chance of a particular child being abducted... Remember, the US had a criminal president in the 70s. Secondly, I think allowing this technology in America makes it more tolerated in other countries. Perhaps facial recognition in public should be banned by international treaty.
  - pretendscholar 8y ago
    Why would that be true when the US has actively propped up bad regimes again and again for realpolitik reasons?

by cwalv 8y ago

jriot 8y ago

You stated the classic and the cliche argument of safety over privacy.

cwalv 8y ago
I meant to distinguish "when I'm in public" explicitly; in cases where I have a reasonable expectation of privacy I would not want to give that up.

jazzyjackson 8y ago

I think maybe you've never been pulled over by an officer because you 'fit the description of a suspect' You, as a bystander, can be caused great inconvenience (where the line of injustice gets crossed is up for debate) through someone else's expectation of safety.

cwalv 8y ago
You're right, I haven't (I wonder what percent of the population has?). I find it hard to believe that law enforcement using facial recognition would really make that problem much worse than it already is though.
- deelowe 8y ago
  China is already experimenting with pre-empting crime by attempting to monitor their vast network of cameras using ML systems.

alexandercrohde 8y ago

Hmm, I don't really follow that calculus. I guess the way I look at it are the odds of my child being abducted are one in a 300,000. On the other hand, a significant portion of the world (30%?) lives under oppressive regimes. So there's that. That's such a huge margin that I have trouble understanding any other way of looking at it.

cwalv 8y ago
So do you believe that restricting the use of this tech in the US would prevent oppressive regimes from using it? Or even slow them down?
- alexandercrohde 8y ago
  I certainly believe that [it would slow them down]. Firstly, I think the odds of America becoming a repressive regime, though low, are much higher than the 1/300,000 chance of a particular child being abducted... Remember, the US had a criminal president in the 70s. Secondly, I think allowing this technology in America makes it more tolerated in other countries. Perhaps facial recognition in public should be banned by international treaty.
- pretendscholar 8y ago
  Why would that be true when the US has actively propped up bad regimes again and again for realpolitik reasons?