4 ms·

Facial recognition systems like this are used everywhere in china. Its common for gates in apartment buildings. Its just how things work there. It feel more ma

by mu53 2y ago

Facial recognition systems like this are used everywhere in china. Its common for gates in apartment buildings. Its just how things work there. It feel more malicious to pretend its not happening

casenmgreen 2y ago
The problem is that by this it becomes ever more difficult to get rid of an oppressive, dictatorial, unelected and violent Government.
- bayindirh 2y ago
  For an insider's perspective about "The Social Credit System", and the biometrics which underpin it, you can watch https://media.ccc.de/v/35c3-9904-the_social_credit_system https://media.ccc.de/v/35c3-9904-the_social_credit_system It's a long, but interesting talk.
  - aspenmayer 2y ago
    Also available on the media.ccc.de YouTube page: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7UKYUTke58 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7UKYUTke58
- tehjoker 2y ago
  tbqh, first if the insinuation is that China is not democratic, that is only true in the sense it is not a liberal democracy with a conservative wing represented (a good thing), but it is still a democracy with elections. secondly, if people surviving a literal genocide in Palestine can resist the most technologically sophisticated, surveilled, and completely enclosed death camp ever constructed by the U.S. and Israel, you can figure out how to deal with cameras.
  - southernplaces7 2y ago
    It's sometimes hard to credit that there are people who think in such a contorted way as you apparently do. China isn't a democracy. The word doesn't apply when your choices for candidates can only come from one political party that pre-approved them. Don't be absurd. It's a one-party state in which variations of style among different senior figures are still forced together under the rubric of a general monolithic dogma that's only marginally beholden to public opinion, and very much subject to the whims of dominant figures. Also, many elements of the Chinese state are at least as conservative as the worst you could see in the U.S, just without the religious overtones. Truly, go study the subject and it's history a bit better. What's happening in Palestine, or more specifically in the Gaza Strip, is not a genocide. It's a tragedy of destructive military strategies by Israel, but calling it a genocide is demeaning to the definition of real genocides, which you should also study a bit better. >the most technologically sophisticated, surveilled, and completely enclosed death camp ever constructed by the U.S. and Israel Death camp, really? Also, if you're disgusted by technologically sophisticated, heavily surveilled, enclosed camps, then you really might want to find out what the Chinese "democracy" is doing in the Xinjiang Uyghur Region...
    - throw3828374 2y ago
      OP brings up a good point. The news likes to allude to China's "genocide" in Xinjiang, but no one is dying. At most they can stretch it to a "cultural genocide" but even that's not true as the native culture is not being repressed, only religious extremism. However it is true that thousands of Palestinian civilians are being killed and those same media are afraid to call it out.
      - southernplaces7 2y ago
        Your point is a good one actually, and it's why I didn't mention anything about genocide in Xinjiang. It's a grotesque political atrocity of social repression and culture eradication, but as far as any sources I've looked at go, the Chinese state isn't literally killing the Uyghers en masse as an ethnic or religious group. Nonetheless, the deaths of civilians in the Gaza Strip also aren't a genocide. They could be defined as a war crime, or if you want to be really generous to Israel, as unfair collateral damage (a phrase I mostly detest in this context) but the Israeli state isn't deliberately targeting the Strip's ethnic Palestinian population for eradication.
  - BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
    China is a one party state is it not? > you can deal with cameras Still rather not.
    - tehjoker 2y ago
      Is it more democratic to let the majority be oppressed by a tiny property holding parasitic class or is it more democratic to repress them and express the interests of the majority? Bear in mind when you answer that scientific surveys show American "democracy" is an oligarchy with popular opinion being almost entirely disconnected from policy.
      - BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
        I wouldn’t argue that China is a representation of the latter, the CCP fails to represent the interests of the majority. Furthermore, I think the ideology of herding and repressing the confused masses is a despicable and blatantly invalid one, which is why I despise its use in America. Yes, the US is an oligarchy of rich people with enormous influence over our sham system. That’s why I don’t want the system pointing cameras at me; I know the person behind the screen doesn’t represent my interests.
  - kelnos 2y ago
    Insinuation? It's a fact that China is not a democracy.
- godelski 2y ago
  For people unfamiliar with this topic, it is commonly referred to as "Turnkey Tyranny". It is about the belief that you "don't give Mr Rogers any power you wouldn't give to Hitler." Basically no matter how great you think your current leader is, you recognize that they will not be in power forever (or that they may not be good forever). Democracy, autocracy, oligarchy, whatever your system of government, there is a singular truth: all men die. All things change. Obviously this policy can go too far, but personally I think it is worth considering not just how good a policy or power can be, but how much harm it can do if abused or misused. It is easy to ignore this part because we want to believe people are good and have good intentions. Because we see the advantages and get excited about them. Because it is harder to think about abstract scenarios. But it is an important thing to think. You need not think your government is evil or nefarious to still be concerned with turnkey tyranny. In fact, the more faith you have in your government, the more you should be concerned. Because it is at that time that people are less likely to keep their guards up, and it is that same time that hostile actors look to take over. There is no absolute defense against malicious leaders, so it takes constant care.
  - rightbyte 2y ago
    > "Turnkey Tyranny" Thanks this is a really great concept. I'm going to use this for the slippery slope fallacy fallacy.
  - namaria 2y ago
    I am pretty sure this is the loophole Gödel found with the American constitution. It is pretty easy to turn the US government authoritarian, if you elect an authoritarian president.
  - refurb 2y ago
    This is basically the intent of the structure of the US government. High degree of separation of powers (unlike most other democracies, the executive is separate from the legislative and there are two independent legislative bodies). High level of agreement across multiple bodies before a law can be passed (House, Senate and President). I thought Scalia's explanation was a good one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ggz_gd--UO0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ggz_gd--UO0
thisisnotauser 2y ago
There's a famous saying about Mussolini making the trains run on time. The joke was that anyone who complained about the trains running late, which was an endemic issue emblematic of the financial failures of fascism (his government system), was killed. But if you didn't complain about the trains, maybe because you didn't take them, you didn't get killed. It was fine. Maybe things are actually kinda bad, but you're just not willing to admit it to yourself because you aren't complaining about the trains. In the US, we complain about the trains. And if the gov't is spying on us with facial recognition, we're going to stop them.
- LtWorf 2y ago
  > And if the gov't is spying on us with facial recognition, we're going to stop them. I wish I still had this childish optimism.
- redserk 2y ago
  No, in the US we just stick fingers in our ears while we let the private sector do it while screaming “la-la-la” and closing our eyes.

by mu53 2y ago

Facial recognition systems like this are used everywhere in china. Its common for gates in apartment buildings. Its just how things work there. It feel more malicious to pretend its not happening

casenmgreen 2y ago

The problem is that by this it becomes ever more difficult to get rid of an oppressive, dictatorial, unelected and violent Government.

bayindirh 2y ago
For an insider's perspective about "The Social Credit System", and the biometrics which underpin it, you can watch https://media.ccc.de/v/35c3-9904-the_social_credit_system https://media.ccc.de/v/35c3-9904-the_social_credit_system It's a long, but interesting talk.
- aspenmayer 2y ago
  Also available on the media.ccc.de YouTube page: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7UKYUTke58 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7UKYUTke58
tehjoker 2y ago
tbqh, first if the insinuation is that China is not democratic, that is only true in the sense it is not a liberal democracy with a conservative wing represented (a good thing), but it is still a democracy with elections. secondly, if people surviving a literal genocide in Palestine can resist the most technologically sophisticated, surveilled, and completely enclosed death camp ever constructed by the U.S. and Israel, you can figure out how to deal with cameras.
- southernplaces7 2y ago
  It's sometimes hard to credit that there are people who think in such a contorted way as you apparently do. China isn't a democracy. The word doesn't apply when your choices for candidates can only come from one political party that pre-approved them. Don't be absurd. It's a one-party state in which variations of style among different senior figures are still forced together under the rubric of a general monolithic dogma that's only marginally beholden to public opinion, and very much subject to the whims of dominant figures. Also, many elements of the Chinese state are at least as conservative as the worst you could see in the U.S, just without the religious overtones. Truly, go study the subject and it's history a bit better. What's happening in Palestine, or more specifically in the Gaza Strip, is not a genocide. It's a tragedy of destructive military strategies by Israel, but calling it a genocide is demeaning to the definition of real genocides, which you should also study a bit better. >the most technologically sophisticated, surveilled, and completely enclosed death camp ever constructed by the U.S. and Israel Death camp, really? Also, if you're disgusted by technologically sophisticated, heavily surveilled, enclosed camps, then you really might want to find out what the Chinese "democracy" is doing in the Xinjiang Uyghur Region...
  - throw3828374 2y ago
    OP brings up a good point. The news likes to allude to China's "genocide" in Xinjiang, but no one is dying. At most they can stretch it to a "cultural genocide" but even that's not true as the native culture is not being repressed, only religious extremism. However it is true that thousands of Palestinian civilians are being killed and those same media are afraid to call it out.
    - southernplaces7 2y ago
      Your point is a good one actually, and it's why I didn't mention anything about genocide in Xinjiang. It's a grotesque political atrocity of social repression and culture eradication, but as far as any sources I've looked at go, the Chinese state isn't literally killing the Uyghers en masse as an ethnic or religious group. Nonetheless, the deaths of civilians in the Gaza Strip also aren't a genocide. They could be defined as a war crime, or if you want to be really generous to Israel, as unfair collateral damage (a phrase I mostly detest in this context) but the Israeli state isn't deliberately targeting the Strip's ethnic Palestinian population for eradication.
- BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
  China is a one party state is it not? > you can deal with cameras Still rather not.
  - tehjoker 2y ago
    Is it more democratic to let the majority be oppressed by a tiny property holding parasitic class or is it more democratic to repress them and express the interests of the majority? Bear in mind when you answer that scientific surveys show American "democracy" is an oligarchy with popular opinion being almost entirely disconnected from policy.
    - BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
      I wouldn’t argue that China is a representation of the latter, the CCP fails to represent the interests of the majority. Furthermore, I think the ideology of herding and repressing the confused masses is a despicable and blatantly invalid one, which is why I despise its use in America. Yes, the US is an oligarchy of rich people with enormous influence over our sham system. That’s why I don’t want the system pointing cameras at me; I know the person behind the screen doesn’t represent my interests.
- kelnos 2y ago
  Insinuation? It's a fact that China is not a democracy.
godelski 2y ago
For people unfamiliar with this topic, it is commonly referred to as "Turnkey Tyranny". It is about the belief that you "don't give Mr Rogers any power you wouldn't give to Hitler." Basically no matter how great you think your current leader is, you recognize that they will not be in power forever (or that they may not be good forever). Democracy, autocracy, oligarchy, whatever your system of government, there is a singular truth: all men die. All things change. Obviously this policy can go too far, but personally I think it is worth considering not just how good a policy or power can be, but how much harm it can do if abused or misused. It is easy to ignore this part because we want to believe people are good and have good intentions. Because we see the advantages and get excited about them. Because it is harder to think about abstract scenarios. But it is an important thing to think. You need not think your government is evil or nefarious to still be concerned with turnkey tyranny. In fact, the more faith you have in your government, the more you should be concerned. Because it is at that time that people are less likely to keep their guards up, and it is that same time that hostile actors look to take over. There is no absolute defense against malicious leaders, so it takes constant care.
- rightbyte 2y ago
  > "Turnkey Tyranny" Thanks this is a really great concept. I'm going to use this for the slippery slope fallacy fallacy.
- namaria 2y ago
  I am pretty sure this is the loophole Gödel found with the American constitution. It is pretty easy to turn the US government authoritarian, if you elect an authoritarian president.
- refurb 2y ago
  This is basically the intent of the structure of the US government. High degree of separation of powers (unlike most other democracies, the executive is separate from the legislative and there are two independent legislative bodies). High level of agreement across multiple bodies before a law can be passed (House, Senate and President). I thought Scalia's explanation was a good one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ggz_gd--UO0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ggz_gd--UO0

thisisnotauser 2y ago

There's a famous saying about Mussolini making the trains run on time. The joke was that anyone who complained about the trains running late, which was an endemic issue emblematic of the financial failures of fascism (his government system), was killed. But if you didn't complain about the trains, maybe because you didn't take them, you didn't get killed. It was fine. Maybe things are actually kinda bad, but you're just not willing to admit it to yourself because you aren't complaining about the trains. In the US, we complain about the trains. And if the gov't is spying on us with facial recognition, we're going to stop them.

LtWorf 2y ago
> And if the gov't is spying on us with facial recognition, we're going to stop them. I wish I still had this childish optimism.
redserk 2y ago
No, in the US we just stick fingers in our ears while we let the private sector do it while screaming “la-la-la” and closing our eyes.