3 ms·
No, you're not the only one. It's ironic to see on this same HN front page a story about police & face recognition. We should oppose all forms of social credit
by Cupertino95014 4y ago
No, you're not the only one.
It's ironic to see on this same HN front page a story about police & face recognition. We should oppose all forms of social credit / new world order / cashless / corporate fascism.
It shouldn't just be "the police are bad, so let's deny them this tool," it's "the police will just enlist private companies to do their dirty work for them, so let's deny everyone this tool."
- colechristensen 4y agoYou can deny the police the tool even though third parties. Example: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/09/us/politics/trump-twitter-first-amendment.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/09/us/politics/trump-twitter... Twitter is a third party but a court ruled that Trump blocking critics violated their first amendment rights. It is simple enough to ban the government from using AI in the process of law enforcement and that ban would extend to whomever they enlisted to help them. If you worded the statute correctly.
- Cupertino95014 4y agoYou're right about facial recognition, but I was extending that same concept to other domains. For example, the police can go to the solar company and get them to make your panels stop working. Or something.