6 ms·
I am not fan of the DEA, but this trend of generating bad PR for tech providers of governmental agencies ridiculous. Attack the agency or vote in politicians to
by megaman821 6y ago
I am not fan of the DEA, but this trend of generating bad PR for tech providers of governmental agencies ridiculous. Attack the agency or vote in politicians to change or dismantle them. As of 2020 Millennials are the largest adult generation. They have more voting power than the Boomers, if they actually get out and vote.
- gowld 6y agoWhen we have vote-by-Twitter, young people will vote.
- mulmen 6y agoWhy would I involve Twitter? The USPS takes care of that for me. Or I just use a ballot drop by my office or grocery store.
- durkie 6y agoWhat's ridiculous about it? Why is attacking the agency fair game but you can't attack the company?
- megaman821 6y agoIt just such a poor solution to the problem. The DEA has hundreds of suppliers. I don't think attacking GM for selling them Suburbans is going to make much of a difference. Plus, from the commenting here of HN, it appears there is a large group of people that want more regulations on facial recognition irregardless of its use within the DEA. These conflations of messages do resonate very well with me. Reforming the DEA and adding regulations to facial recognition are two important issues that stand on their own. The solutions to the issues are more the responsibility of government rather than corporations.
- catalogia 6y ago> It just such a poor solution to the problem. That's a strawman though, nobody thinks "the solution" is attacking only Microsoft, nobody proposes that, and nobody is doing that. The question is whether both the DEA and Microsoft should be criticized, or if Microsoft should get a free pass for some reason. Microsoft isn't being singled out either, numerous government contractors have been criticized for taking those contracts. Criticism of military contractors in particular is very common, you know that.
- empath75 6y agoWhy not both?
- flattone 6y agoIt seems like they vote. Aside from voting, we’re dealing with rates of change which outpace voting results like a f1 car overtaking speed walkers.
- B4CKlash 6y agoVoting with your wallet is an extremely powerful and simplistic tool. Generating bad PR enforces the former and informs the latter (actual voting) You make the process of handcuffing the DEA in any capacity sound easy.... but lets walk through some high level steps: You would need to formulate enough PR to generate a movement, that PR would probably need to span political parties, those political parties (because we only have two) would need to work well between themselves to systematically allow for such an approval to pass. Ignoring the fact that most voters are no single-issue voters AND ignoring the fact that gerrymandering has removed/hamstrung entire voting demographics. It's a mind-numbing exercise to think of generating enough support in today's environment to effect serious change though voting.
- mulmen 6y agoThe inability to make “serious” change quickly or at a national level is a feature. What seems to be missed is how much easier this is at a local level. I’d like to see a lot more advocacy for restrictions on local police departments. I’d happily support a local law that prohibits police use of facial recognition technology.
- B4CKlash 6y agoI guess i'm not sure what you're advocating. Why are we shielding companies from consumer sentiment?
- megaman821 6y agoI don't really care about the companies here, just on what is effective. Would you rather have a handful of companies put a moratorium on selling to facial recognition tech to governments or state and local ordinances banning their use no matter what company the tech is from?
- pessimizer 6y agoI didn't know they were offering a choice.
- _jal 6y agoThe DEA disagrees with your strategy. They target both supply and demand. But do tell: why should arms dealers get a PR pass? (Make no mistake, facial recognition is a tool of mass repression.)