3 ms·
I'd be such a person, and I'd absolutely argue the tech even though admitting that it's fallible and makes mistakes. It's the gooey, grey, and fallible humans a
by zo1 4y ago
I'd be such a person, and I'd absolutely argue the tech even though admitting that it's fallible and makes mistakes. It's the gooey, grey, and fallible humans and justice system around the tech that needs improving. The sum of all the parts together (facial recognition tech and other things + human review + decent human beings) can be most certainly leaps and bounds more useful than those things in isolation and certainly better than if we didn't have such tech at our disposal.
- janalsncm 4y agoIt’s a respectable position. From my time in China, many people felt this way. The streets feel and are extremely safe. Surveillance makes low-level crime hard to get away with. It genuinely raised serious questions for me. What good is privacy if I’m getting stabbed in private? What I can’t get my head around is the second-order effects that this has. With more surveillance, it shifts power from the watched to the watchers. The squishy parts, who may have their own personal motivations. I’m not entirely sure democracy can survive such a severe imbalance. Maybe the answer is to replace democracy with a computer.