> Facial recognition at 95% can be very useful in helping to find people, initiate investigations. It doesn't have to provide grounds for arrest, let alone evid

> Facial recognition at 95% can be very useful in helping to find people, initiate investigations. It doesn't have to provide grounds for arrest, let alone evidence for a trial. Even getting asked to come down to the station to give a statement based on an incorrect facial recognition is not something I would want to deal with for the sake of "the greater good". 95% seems awfully low accuracy, and even without an arrest this will cause a lot of headaches for many honest citizens. > No - there doesn't need to be any compensation if there wasn't any malfeasance or incompetence in the system. To the extent our public servants are all acting above bar, using efficient, fair and lawful methods, then 'compensation' is not really the issue. Sounds like a utopia, definitely not the world we live in.