3 ms·

As usual, politicians start to claim privacy rights when it comes to them, and yet this technology is already being tested throughout major European cities. Th

As usual, politicians start to claim privacy rights when it comes to them, and yet this technology is already being tested throughout major European cities. The hypocrisy is real.

close04 7y ago
Well to be honest those politicians will also be affected by the facial recognition tech used in the cities they live in just as any other citizen. If I were them I'd actively try to buck the trend not just wash my hands of it. But I think the point they want to make is that they did not mandate using it. Something along the lines of "you can use it but don't blame me for setting the trend" I'd guess.
bilekas 7y ago
the EU allows its countries to pursue their own policies, this is not hypocrisy, its simply clarifying that the EU itself will not be implementing this technology. What individual countries do is not up to the EU parliment.
- eufandom 7y ago
  Except when it comes to mass migration, human rights to protect terrorists, bureaucracy and other useless measures. Tuen the eu suddenly forgets about subsidiarity and moreover it bullies nations into submission.
- eufandom 7y ago
  It doesnt really, european countries are frequently bullied into submission. I.e. allowing 1 million undocumented aliens in, bureaucracy and all other things the far left of HN will flag. It will, without doubt, collapse die to the opposite of allowing countries do what they see fit for their own citizen safety.
  - bilekas 7y ago
    > I.e. allowing 1 million undocumented aliens in Human rights and trying to be decent to people fleeing wars is now a bad thing ? Also collectively agreeing to help these people.. Collectively. Countries can have their own policies. What Bullying are you talking about ?? I will refer to my previous statement as it seems some people don't really understand how the EU works. The EU is a memebership of collective countries, not some all powerfull entity of controlling its memebers and telling them what to do. > collapse die to the opposite of allowing countries do what they see fit for their own citizen safety You don't really get it, but please believe what you like. I'm going to take a stab and say you're pro-brexit too ?
    - eufandom 7y ago
      Not at all, it’s a good thung. But not chaotically and at that scale. Also not by bullying countries which already have helped pretty much all countries where such issues happen. It seeks like you still think the eu is an equal memberships club - germany issued a diktat, all others had better obeyed it, or else... I am against brexit and pro reform. The EU is dated and operates through bully power. If it doesnt reform it will collapse. Critique from within is what can actually prevent its collapse. If people dont want mass migration, or whatever they strongly oppose then the eu better take it into account, or else there will be no eu to do all the good it can do even without chaos. People like you who strongly oppose reform and blindly believe the eu is perfection is what pushes even those that want reform into the camps of brexit and the far right. Seems like there is no more middle ground. A shame really.
      - bilekas 7y ago
        > People like you who strongly oppose reform and blindly believe the eu is perfection I don't think it's perfect, in fact I don't know of any system thats perfect, but how it operates in pricipal is okay, and how that reform and improvement is done could be quicker but I'm not going to claim it's going to collapse. The single market is the main selling point of the EU. Not imigration control, those issues are state decided. IE by the respective members. > germany issued a diktat, all others had better obeyed it, or else... What are you refering to ? Genuinely, what has been adopted by members that was not agreed to and has hurt their citizens ?
  - ben_w 7y ago
    > I.e. allowing 1 million undocumented aliens in What exactly are you talking about? On the one hand, if a subpopulation is undocumented, you can’t know how many there are. On the other, I’m sure you’re referring to the million asylum seekers that Germany in particular looked after at the same time that another EU state, Hungary, was putting up barbed wire fences on their borders so that none went into Hungary. Germany wanted some other nations to help out, but everyone else effectively (not necessarily literally) said no. Also, to preempt a common reply at this point, asylum seekers don’t get to take advantage of EU free movement rules.
    - eufandom 7y ago
      >> On the other, I’m sure you’re referring to the million asylum seekers that Germany in particular looked after at the same time that another EU state, Hungary, was putting up barbed wire fences on their borders so that none went into Hungary. Germany didn't want, Germany diktated. And just because Hungary, as any sovereign nation, has decided to protect its borders it doesn't make Hungary "evil". I know they don't take advantage of EU free movement rules, they take advantage of Germany's need for cheap labour to cover retirement costs. A chat with any average German person will tell you about the social tensions this madness brought into the country. And that madness is pushing voters to the far right. Pretty irresponsible, and your example shows exactly the issue with the EU - because Hungary, a sovereign member state, went against what Germany wanted, they've pretty much been cornered. Now Germany is riddled with social tension, and day by day reports of far right gaining popularity are in the press headlines. You've pretty much proven my point, thanks.
    - eufandom 7y ago
      Also speaking about Germany and its do good attitude, I heard citizens of certain EU member states are to be reported to the police when staying at hotels in certain regions. Is that acceptable that all citizens of EU nations can be treated as criminals? Man the hypocrisy level is just unbelievable.
- C1sc0cat 7y ago
  Countries are supposed to implement the directives but some countries play fast and loose in how they implement directives. eg TUPE (employment law) is quite different in Spain Vs the UK
  - bilekas 7y ago
    It is true some members dont always play by the rules, even something as significant as GDPR has questionable implementation coverage even in Belgium. I know myself Ireland has some questionable Tax issues which dont really help the other countries get a fair playing field. Enforcement is an issue, it wasnt really imagined that you would agree to something as a group and then walk away and say : "Well forget that".
- lprd 7y ago
  Interesting. I've been living in France for about 8 years now (I'm a US expat) and I really need to understand more about the EU's functions and abilities. I understand that there are different legislative bodies of Europe, but not sure how each applies. Do you have any material to help educate me on the subject? Thanks for the insight!
  - bilekas 7y ago
    https://europa.eu/european-union/law_en https://europa.eu/european-union/law_en The europa.eu site has ever piece of information available, it can be a bit wordy and legal but there is usually references to bodies and the precedents they have taken etc.
  - dmitriid 7y ago
    > I understand that there are different legislative bodies of Europe, but not sure how each applies. As a very crude analogy with the US, you could view EU parliament as federal government and country parliaments (and governments) as state governments. Laws at the EU level are applicable to all countries, but individual countries have a lot of leeway in in implementation, enforcement and their own laws (as long as the don't contradict EU laws).
    - simion314 7y ago
      >As a very crude analogy with the US, you could view EU parliament as federal government and country parliaments (and governments) as state governments. I think this is not correct because from what I know in US you don't ever need unanimity to pass federal laws but let me know if I am wrong.
      - dmitriid 7y ago
        That's why it's a crude analogy :) The devil is in the details, as always.
AsusFan 7y ago
Did you read the article at all? The European Union is already planning to introduce a temporary ban on facial recognition in public spaces - PRECISELY because the technology is being rolled out throughout European cities without first assessing the impact on rights such as privacy. The story is about a leaked draft of a plan to introduce the same technology on the parliament itself - which would be inconsistent with the previous point. I don't see any hypocrisy here.
- weystrom 7y ago
  > The story is about a leaked draft of a plan to introduce the same technology on the parliament itself I did, and that's what I mean. They don't want it in the parliament and yet the subway station I use every day has facial recognition system in place, there is even a sign that says "it's for your safety". I'll believe in a ban when they'll take it down.
  - AsusFan 7y ago
    What part of "The European commission is expected to announce the ban this month, covering the use of the technology in stations, stadiums and shopping centres and lasting three to five years, to allow regulators time to assess the impact of the fast-developing technology." is confusing you? If you had followed the links, you'd know that there is a draft for the ban circulating since at least early January, and is due to come into effect sometime in February. Again: this is being rushed through precisely because of behaviors such as the one you describe. I fail to understand what there is to be outraged about here. Your exact complaint is in the process of being addressed (assuming you live in the EU).
    - izzydata 7y ago
      I get the impression he is saying it would have never been an issue for them if it wasn't ever going to be implemented at parliament specifically. It was not an issue to use it on every body else. If they could get away with it they would probably ban it from being used on themselves and continue to implement it everywhere else.

As usual, politicians start to claim privacy rights when it comes to them, and yet this technology is already being tested throughout major European cities. The hypocrisy is real.

close04 7y ago

Well to be honest those politicians will also be affected by the facial recognition tech used in the cities they live in just as any other citizen. If I were them I'd actively try to buck the trend not just wash my hands of it. But I think the point they want to make is that they did not mandate using it. Something along the lines of "you can use it but don't blame me for setting the trend" I'd guess.

bilekas 7y ago

the EU allows its countries to pursue their own policies, this is not hypocrisy, its simply clarifying that the EU itself will not be implementing this technology. What individual countries do is not up to the EU parliment.

eufandom 7y ago
Except when it comes to mass migration, human rights to protect terrorists, bureaucracy and other useless measures. Tuen the eu suddenly forgets about subsidiarity and moreover it bullies nations into submission.
eufandom 7y ago
It doesnt really, european countries are frequently bullied into submission. I.e. allowing 1 million undocumented aliens in, bureaucracy and all other things the far left of HN will flag. It will, without doubt, collapse die to the opposite of allowing countries do what they see fit for their own citizen safety.
- bilekas 7y ago
  > I.e. allowing 1 million undocumented aliens in Human rights and trying to be decent to people fleeing wars is now a bad thing ? Also collectively agreeing to help these people.. Collectively. Countries can have their own policies. What Bullying are you talking about ?? I will refer to my previous statement as it seems some people don't really understand how the EU works. The EU is a memebership of collective countries, not some all powerfull entity of controlling its memebers and telling them what to do. > collapse die to the opposite of allowing countries do what they see fit for their own citizen safety You don't really get it, but please believe what you like. I'm going to take a stab and say you're pro-brexit too ?
  - eufandom 7y ago
    Not at all, it’s a good thung. But not chaotically and at that scale. Also not by bullying countries which already have helped pretty much all countries where such issues happen. It seeks like you still think the eu is an equal memberships club - germany issued a diktat, all others had better obeyed it, or else... I am against brexit and pro reform. The EU is dated and operates through bully power. If it doesnt reform it will collapse. Critique from within is what can actually prevent its collapse. If people dont want mass migration, or whatever they strongly oppose then the eu better take it into account, or else there will be no eu to do all the good it can do even without chaos. People like you who strongly oppose reform and blindly believe the eu is perfection is what pushes even those that want reform into the camps of brexit and the far right. Seems like there is no more middle ground. A shame really.
    - bilekas 7y ago
      > People like you who strongly oppose reform and blindly believe the eu is perfection I don't think it's perfect, in fact I don't know of any system thats perfect, but how it operates in pricipal is okay, and how that reform and improvement is done could be quicker but I'm not going to claim it's going to collapse. The single market is the main selling point of the EU. Not imigration control, those issues are state decided. IE by the respective members. > germany issued a diktat, all others had better obeyed it, or else... What are you refering to ? Genuinely, what has been adopted by members that was not agreed to and has hurt their citizens ?
- ben_w 7y ago
  > I.e. allowing 1 million undocumented aliens in What exactly are you talking about? On the one hand, if a subpopulation is undocumented, you can’t know how many there are. On the other, I’m sure you’re referring to the million asylum seekers that Germany in particular looked after at the same time that another EU state, Hungary, was putting up barbed wire fences on their borders so that none went into Hungary. Germany wanted some other nations to help out, but everyone else effectively (not necessarily literally) said no. Also, to preempt a common reply at this point, asylum seekers don’t get to take advantage of EU free movement rules.
  - eufandom 7y ago
    >> On the other, I’m sure you’re referring to the million asylum seekers that Germany in particular looked after at the same time that another EU state, Hungary, was putting up barbed wire fences on their borders so that none went into Hungary. Germany didn't want, Germany diktated. And just because Hungary, as any sovereign nation, has decided to protect its borders it doesn't make Hungary "evil". I know they don't take advantage of EU free movement rules, they take advantage of Germany's need for cheap labour to cover retirement costs. A chat with any average German person will tell you about the social tensions this madness brought into the country. And that madness is pushing voters to the far right. Pretty irresponsible, and your example shows exactly the issue with the EU - because Hungary, a sovereign member state, went against what Germany wanted, they've pretty much been cornered. Now Germany is riddled with social tension, and day by day reports of far right gaining popularity are in the press headlines. You've pretty much proven my point, thanks.
  - eufandom 7y ago
    Also speaking about Germany and its do good attitude, I heard citizens of certain EU member states are to be reported to the police when staying at hotels in certain regions. Is that acceptable that all citizens of EU nations can be treated as criminals? Man the hypocrisy level is just unbelievable.
C1sc0cat 7y ago
Countries are supposed to implement the directives but some countries play fast and loose in how they implement directives. eg TUPE (employment law) is quite different in Spain Vs the UK
- bilekas 7y ago
  It is true some members dont always play by the rules, even something as significant as GDPR has questionable implementation coverage even in Belgium. I know myself Ireland has some questionable Tax issues which dont really help the other countries get a fair playing field. Enforcement is an issue, it wasnt really imagined that you would agree to something as a group and then walk away and say : "Well forget that".
lprd 7y ago
Interesting. I've been living in France for about 8 years now (I'm a US expat) and I really need to understand more about the EU's functions and abilities. I understand that there are different legislative bodies of Europe, but not sure how each applies. Do you have any material to help educate me on the subject? Thanks for the insight!
- bilekas 7y ago
  https://europa.eu/european-union/law_en https://europa.eu/european-union/law_en The europa.eu site has ever piece of information available, it can be a bit wordy and legal but there is usually references to bodies and the precedents they have taken etc.
- dmitriid 7y ago
  > I understand that there are different legislative bodies of Europe, but not sure how each applies. As a very crude analogy with the US, you could view EU parliament as federal government and country parliaments (and governments) as state governments. Laws at the EU level are applicable to all countries, but individual countries have a lot of leeway in in implementation, enforcement and their own laws (as long as the don't contradict EU laws).
  - simion314 7y ago
    >As a very crude analogy with the US, you could view EU parliament as federal government and country parliaments (and governments) as state governments. I think this is not correct because from what I know in US you don't ever need unanimity to pass federal laws but let me know if I am wrong.
    - dmitriid 7y ago
      That's why it's a crude analogy :) The devil is in the details, as always.

AsusFan 7y ago

Did you read the article at all? The European Union is already planning to introduce a temporary ban on facial recognition in public spaces - PRECISELY because the technology is being rolled out throughout European cities without first assessing the impact on rights such as privacy. The story is about a leaked draft of a plan to introduce the same technology on the parliament itself - which would be inconsistent with the previous point. I don't see any hypocrisy here.

weystrom 7y ago
> The story is about a leaked draft of a plan to introduce the same technology on the parliament itself I did, and that's what I mean. They don't want it in the parliament and yet the subway station I use every day has facial recognition system in place, there is even a sign that says "it's for your safety". I'll believe in a ban when they'll take it down.
- AsusFan 7y ago
  What part of "The European commission is expected to announce the ban this month, covering the use of the technology in stations, stadiums and shopping centres and lasting three to five years, to allow regulators time to assess the impact of the fast-developing technology." is confusing you? If you had followed the links, you'd know that there is a draft for the ban circulating since at least early January, and is due to come into effect sometime in February. Again: this is being rushed through precisely because of behaviors such as the one you describe. I fail to understand what there is to be outraged about here. Your exact complaint is in the process of being addressed (assuming you live in the EU).
  - izzydata 7y ago
    I get the impression he is saying it would have never been an issue for them if it wasn't ever going to be implemented at parliament specifically. It was not an issue to use it on every body else. If they could get away with it they would probably ban it from being used on themselves and continue to implement it everywhere else.