2 ms·
> Was always wrong and still is wrong. I don’t understand this comment. The police sometimes have to arrest people based on descriptions and other fallible dat
by foldr 2y ago
> Was always wrong and still is wrong.
I don’t understand this comment. The police sometimes have to arrest people based on descriptions and other fallible data points. It’s unfortunate when the wrong person is arrested (and false arrests should obviously be minimized), but it’s not reasonable to expect police to get this right absolutely 100% of the time. If someone is a fugitive then they are very unlikely to reveal any information that identifies them with certainty.
Also, police in the US use the same technology: https://www.nyc.gov/assets/nypd/downloads/pdf/public_information/post-final/facial-recognition-nypd-impact-and-use-policy_10.26.23.pdf https://www.nyc.gov/assets/nypd/downloads/pdf/public_informa...
- johnnyanmac 2y agoIt's not reasonable to be 100% correct, no. But given current police conduct in the US I trust them less than ever to try and resolve wrongdoings when it comes up. It's not even "oops" level anymore. It's always been wrong and still is wrong, but the reasons changed over the years. Americans have traditionally been adverse to mass surveillance and I don't think that changes much today. The government just does it in sneaker ways nowadays.