It’s also an extremely weak argument to say that FR is inaccurate. It’s contingent on an engineering problem that will be solved. Algorithms will get better, HD

It’s also an extremely weak argument to say that FR is inaccurate. It’s contingent on an engineering problem that will be solved. Algorithms will get better, HD cameras will become cheaper and more ubiquitous. We are rushing head first into a future where every public and semi-public interaction is recorded and analyzed by functionally omniscient systems, and the temporary inaccuracy of that analysis does nothing to argue against that future. And then I ask myself, is that really a bad thing? I am far more likely to be the victim of a crime than the perpetrator of one or the victim of inaccurate accusation. The places I’ve lived with pervasive surveillance were also some of the safest, and those who argue against this “oppressive” surveillance rarely are forced to balance that with the actual oppression of crime, or the second-order consequence of the lack of security cameras (that low level crimes will probably go unpunished). I should also add that going back to a time where surveillance doesn’t exist is not an option. Everyone is walking around with a security camera in their pocket. Very soon those videos will be able to be run through facial recognition tech as well.