17 ms·
Activists turn facial recognition tools against the police
- mcguire 6y ago"What's good for the duck is good for the dander."
- tantalor 6y ago> What's good for the duck is good for the dander Did you have a stroke just now? It's "What's good for the goose is good for the gander"
- OkGoDoIt 6y agoSeems like one of those phrases you only hear someone say offhandedly, and might not actually see written down. I can totally understand how it could be easy to mishear it somewhere along the chain of people who heard it from other people.
- roywiggins 6y agoSee: eggcorns https://eggcorns.lascribe.net/ https://eggcorns.lascribe.net/
- monkeybutton 6y agoEggcorns! I've been needing a word for those phrases, thank you.
- devilduck 6y agoMangling common cliche phrases is a pretty entertaining activity. Sometimes you gotta shit or get off the fan.
- reaperducer 6y agoThis is what happens when people stop reading books.
- RandallBrown 6y agoThen you just end up pronouncing things wrong. How many American children grew up reading Harry Potter pronouncing Hermione as "Hermi-Own" until the movies came out?
- reaperducer 6y agoThen you just end up pronouncing things wrong. No, then you get used to applying the pronunciations of word fragments from one word to another. Reading doesn't make you pronounce things wrong. Not reading does. It's why so many people on YouTube embarrass themselves by confidently getting certain words hilariously wrong. How many American children grew up reading Harry Potter pronouncing Hermione as "Hermi-Own" until the movies came out? Is this common? I can't say that I know a lot of children, but the ones I do know had no problem with it. I know because one named a stuffed animal after her, and another asked her mother if she could change her own name to Herminoe.
- devilduck 6y agoUntil you realize some people are doing it on purpose and others are getting mad about it
- andreareina 6y ago> Be kind. Don't be snarky. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- PrinceKropotkin 6y agoYou can tell the people who wrote these rules don't actually use the forum.
- doodpants 6y agoPardon me, but I think you are mistaken. The correct phrase is "Pardon me, but I think you are mistaken.", not "Did you have a stroke just now?"
- fsflover 6y agoSee also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24737171 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24737171 Apple requested to shut down 3 Telegram channels used by the people of Belarus to expose the identities of their oppressors.
- PrinceKropotkin 6y agoWhy did they do that? Presumably they're worried about pissing off the state/were leaned on but the linked article doesn't say.
- zepto 6y agoIt’s questionable whether the police are the ‘oppressors’. Individual officers don’t have much power and aren’t members of the ruling class. It’s also rarely the case that when there is a transfer of power, for the police to all be fired, which you’d think would be the case if they were the oppressors who had just been overthrown. Doxxing police may be an effective strategy, but it’s also true that social media driven mobs end up killing people, sometimes in error. Standing up against oppression is necessary, but it’s also messy, and nobody really smells of roses.
- hawkoy 6y agowhat happens if you make facial recognition illegal but NSA or other government agencies still use it? How would you punish them? Change the director? Fire employees? Fine them or money cuts?
- bun_at_work 6y agoThere's a conflict there, but generally the intelligence agencies try to avoid doing illegal things. They do morally wrong things, for sure, but finding a legal argument is difficult, because they try to operate within the law.
- Jon_Lowtek 6y agohahahahaha no only if an officer looks at the data a warrant is required, as long as only automatons process it, the rules do not apply
- fsflover 6y agoLet's see if NSA stops the surveillance then: U.S. court: Mass surveillance program exposed by Snowden was illegal (reuters.com) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24362047 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24362047
- reaperducer 6y agoHe wrote "generally." Pointing out a single case does not negate his statement.
- jeromegv 6y agoSingle case that is basically the major and only role that the agency has been playing is not a « single case ».
- bun_at_work 6y ago> only role that the agency has been playing... wut Do you know what the NSA does? Maybe look it up...
- lucasnortj 6y agoPortland could do with a little more excessive force
- maallooc 6y agoActivists, more like domestic terrorists.
- the_only_law 6y agoOne Man’s Terrorist Another Man’s Freedom Fighter
- buzzy_hacker 6y agohttps://archive.md/kp6Wg https://archive.md/kp6Wg
- youareostriches 6y agoFor those who wish to improve the OpenOversight project, the project is accepting contributions: https://github.com/lucyparsons/openoversight https://github.com/lucyparsons/openoversight https://openoversight.lucyparsonslabs.com/about https://openoversight.lucyparsonslabs.com/about
- sieabahlpark 6y agoI'm not sure I want my name or anyone I know to be involved in something that can be used for domestic terrorism. Why must we use facial recognition and doxx cops? What does this actually improve besides just getting the badge number and reporting it? The data makes it so anyone can anonymously threaten law enforcement even if law enforcement was acting entirely within the law. This place is turning into a reddit pigstie. People from around the country and world claiming to know the "best way to enforce the law" unilaterally. Every state has their own way of doing it. If a cop makes a mistake they're fearing for their literal life because some social justice terrorist somewhere in the country, under a different set of laws, has it out for the officer and can go and threaten or firebomb their house or family (this isn't a strawman). I think this hatred is so misplaced on cops, it needs to be on the politicians who wrote the law not the ones enforcing the law. Did it occur to anyone that the politicians are the ones vilifying them, the same ones who wrote the laws that the cops use to enforce said laws?
- rmason 6y agoHow are you going to get anyone to become a policeman? This whole doxxing your opponents movement scares me. I will grant you that allowing police to use tape to cover their name tags is wrong on many levels. But if protesters use this technology to target policemen's families, why would anyone in their right mind take the job?
- sieabahlpark 6y agoIt's almost like acting like a domestic terrorist group should have consequences or something...
- dragonwriter 6y ago> How are you going to get anyone to become a policeman? Ideally, you aren't; you are going to disband the centralized, omnipurpose paramilitary law enforcement entities known as "police departments", redistribute law enforcement responsibilities among domain-specific entities that for the most part are not exclusively, or even centrally, law enforcement, and not violate the public trust the way police departments have broadly and systematically done over an extended period of time.
- jacob2484 6y agoKey part is "ideally". In Minneapolis, council is already backtracking on defund the police movement as crime has spiked, mostly affecting the poor. Is there an example of a country where there is no police?
- rbjorklin 6y agoNone that I know of but my understanding was that people take issue with the police using military equipment and tactics. Most western police forces are trained to deescalate which doesn’t seem to be the case in most(all?) US states.
- alehul 6y agoOne of the most interesting points here is that people are looking at the United States, comparing it to Western Europe, and saying "we need to defund police" or "we need to disarm police." The metric we should look at is not GDP per capita (which is how the U.S. bears similarity to Europe), it is crime. If you look at intentional homicide rates among large countries (>1m population), the U.S. is comparable to countries like Ecuador, Argentina, Kenya, and Pakistan [1]. The U.S. intentional homicide rate is bigger than Western European countries by a factor of 4 or 5. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intention...
- bra-ket 6y agoOh, great, now let Antifa loose on individual police officers, harass their family, burn their homes for daring to arrest a "peaceful" protester. 'cancel culture' is probably the most fascist thing since those infamous nazi brown shirts. It really is domestic terrorism.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- athenot 6y ago> the police “are not going to appreciate it to begin with.” Maybe it's time to reuse the old argument but now in the opposite direction: "If the police is not doing anything wrong, they have nothing to fear."
- avmich 6y agoI was thinking about the public, would the public appreciate his release or non-release, and whose opinion should weight more and why.
- bilbo0s 6y agoTouché. This is a tough issue. On the one hand, what about undercover cops? On the other, it's known that the framers of the Constitution meant for the people to have access to arms partly as a hedge against governmental use of arms against the people. If facial recognition is a tool that the government will use against the people, then the framers clearly envisioned restricting the government's ability to prevent people from using facial recognition. By default I tend to side with the Constitutional order, so I favor the people having unrestricted access to facial recognition tech. That said, I do see the chaos facial rec will bring. Not only for police, but frankly, for everyone else as well. Better start finding a side door out of that hotel tryst with your secretary fellas. Hypothetically, the wife could use some popular new facial rec service that runs against all the public photo or video upload sites for the day. You could be busted if you go out the front door of the hotel just when some college girl is snapping a selfie to share with the world. Or some dad thinks sharing a picture of his son's football team, taken at just that instant, would be really cool. All of which show you and your secretary exiting the hotel in the background.
- lostgame 6y ago...or, you could; y'know, not cheat on your wife. Always an option. :P I get your point, just poor example.
- silicon2401 6y agoI don't think this is a valid criticism. You seem to be criticizing the idea of a man cheating on his wife, as if the parent comment was endorsing the behavior. The parent comment was giving an easily-imagined example of how facial recognition can impact an everyday person. You don't have to be in the spotlight to be affected - you could be affected by facial recognition even if you're trying your best to go unseen, which the parent comment does a great example of demonstrating.
- cwkoss 6y agoWould be cool to make a "not a hotdog" style phone app where you hold your camera up to someone's face and it tells you if they are a recognized cop or not.
- bilbo0s 6y agoOr even just a new "Google-Like" facial rec service that trawls and indexes the public content on photo and video upload sites all day. You hold your phone up to someone's face and it returns a list of "results". The photo of the subject in uniform standing in front of a police cruiser would tell the tale.
- kinghajj 6y agoTangentiality related, but im surprised that, with the rise of cryptocurrency, "death prediction" markets still haven't become a thing.
- gremlinsinc 6y agoThey are, it's called life insurance.
- kibwen 6y agoAlthough you can't generally take out a life insurance policy on someone without their express permission. Talk about perverse incentive!
- Viliam1234 6y agoIf your partner starts nagging you into buying a life insurance, you should get really cautious.
- wtvanhest 6y agoMaybe... but after we had a baby, I bought life insurance to protect the family from the unforeseen loss of income in the event anything happens to me. I was talking to the person doing my physical and he mentioned that most men he sees are being ‘nagged’ in to buying insurance by their wives after a baby. I found that to be interesting. It’s ultra irresponsible to not have some coverage, and if I were on the other side, I would nag too.
- e40 6y agoIs this true? I have seen many articles about companies taking out life insurance policies on low-level employees and not informing anyone. One woman sued a Corp for the proceeds after her husband died.
- bun_at_work 6y agoSomeone tell Wal-Mart! https://news.wfsu.org/wfsu-local-news/2010-05-07/walmart-sued-for-collecting-life-insurance-on-employees https://news.wfsu.org/wfsu-local-news/2010-05-07/walmart-sue... Not sure how that panned out in the long run...
- xapata 6y agoFinally some acknowledgement that facial recognition is not solely a tool of oppressors. I've been arguing for years that the best option for these kinds of surveillance tools is not regulation but widespread public use.
- javajosh 6y agoWe don't know what affect this technology will have on our society, so I for one think caution is called for. So much of the fabric of our society is built on the expectation of anonymity in public places - this loss has both good and bad aspects, but its a huge change, no matter what.
- xapata 6y agoSure, but the cat's out of the bag. We have nearly ubiquitous cameras, and huge databases of images. I think it's essentially impossible to regulate that back to old expectations of anonymity. Back in the old days, you could just go to the next town, take on a new name, and build a new life. Or, you could sexually assault a woman while in high school, then become a Supreme Court Justice. We may need to adjust our sense of what things are forgivable, since in the future none of us will be able to simply leave the past behind. Edit: If it wasn't obvious, that was sarcasm about the Supreme Court Justice. I think it's a tragedy he was appointed, and was alluding to the idea that if that house party had cameras streaming to the public internet, it wouldn't have happened.
- nojokes 6y agoHow naive. Police officers will put on a face covering helmets but general public would be labeled as terrorist when they put a similar helmet on.
- RickJWagner 6y agoGee, I wonder what will happen. If I were to bet, I'd say secret squads are more likely than cops just giving up and not enforcing the law any longer. Seems like a very poor idea. Would you want somebody doxxing you for your work? How much more so it is if you're a cop. I don't see any good at all in this.
- coffeemaniac 6y agoWell, in the course of my daily work I don't do anything depraved or antisocial, my work simply doesn't require it. If it did I would quit. If your job entails tear-gassing entire neighborhoods, I think the correct response is to stop doing that job, not whine about citizens trying to find out who is doing it.