What are your opinions on mass facial recognition in towns?
Posted by TheDev42@reddit | AskUK | View on Reddit | 1574 comments
[removed]
Posted by TheDev42@reddit | AskUK | View on Reddit | 1574 comments
[removed]
Upset-Elderberry3723@reddit
At some point, the level of surveillance could surely match the feeling that paranoid puritans used to have about being constantly monitored by God. I don't really think that's healthy for anyone. When it was just CCTV cameras, most of the footage was never being watched and was deleted shortly afterwards, but the introduction of AI systems will stitch peoples' lives together like old magnetic film tape.
We have the right to be forgotten, so does such software procedurally forget? I think that's an important part of the ethics of it.
repfsm67@reddit
Very dystopian, I think a lot of people feel they have nothing to hide which is fine but I just donât feel comfortable with my movements being put together by the AI aspect as well. Itâs massively different to CCTV aw you said.
jingleballs088@reddit
People that say nothing to hide nothing fear, will still want free speech even though they have fuck all to say.
elmo298@reddit
No one has anything to hide until the wrong government comes in
crochetprozac@reddit
Another variation I like to use:
Everybody is a good person, until they're not anymore.
AspiringPirate64@reddit
Good citizen
PropertyNo5002@reddit
Yeah important distinction to make that. Many ârebelsâ are acting on being a good person but are being a bad citizen to the countries regime.
Namiweso@reddit
âRegimeâ. This isnât a 3rd world country. Youâre speaking in fairytales
soy_boy_69@reddit
Regime just means the centre of power in a given nation. Every nation with a functioning government therefore has a regime.
Namiweso@reddit
I know every nations has a âregimeâ, but the context suggests weâre being oppressed. From a privacy point of view itâs loose but itâs not exactly causing us any real harm.
Antique_Buy4384@reddit
regime is a normal word to describe governments. Itâs nothing to do with oppression or third world. Youâve just been consuming too much propaganda. Go outside more
Useful_Address8230@reddit
There is always people who feel oppressed.
Namiweso@reddit
Cheers for that captain obvious comment? Like I said the context suggests we as a country are being oppressed and that is such a sweeping statement that youâd expect the majority to feel that way. That isnât the case.
But yes youâre right - SOME people will feel oppressed. Canât look after everyone
ivysaurs@reddit
America's a great first world example of a regime, happening right now.
Namiweso@reddit
Elaborate please - I couldnât give two shits about American news for the most part
Woolleyyyy@reddit
Google is free to use
abzmeuk@reddit
If you donât give a shit then why ask for elaboration? You also have to be under a rock to not know a thing about whatâs happening over there. Or is news only available in our âfairytalesâ.
PropertyNo5002@reddit
A regime is just a strict set of rules often used to describe government or management. We are talking about a government, our government who is putting mass facial recognition systems in place and using AI to track every persons movements. All of which is imposed not requested. That seems like itâs a measure to me. You best start believing in fairytales miss swan, cause youâre on one.
FaultInternational91@reddit
Good comrade
AspiringPirate64@reddit
Or off to the gulag you go
GdanskinOnTheCeiling@reddit
"I have nothing to hide."
"It's not up to you whether or not you do."
random_name3938472@reddit
Maybe everyone is a good person because they have never been caught by anyone/thing
Poes-Lawyer@reddit
My favourite version comes from Andor:
"If you're doing nothing wrong, what have you got to fear?"
"I fear your definition of 'wrong'."
BrokeThread@reddit
in the Netherlands, they have a famously open and high trust society - a government census was sent out to all citizens asking all sorts of questions - what are your political opinions, who do you share these with, who are your friends, how often do you travel, where do you go to..? etc etc
and people answered those questions and sent them back to the government, because of course, the Dutch have a famously open and high trust society
unfortunately, one day the Nazis invaded, the Gestapo got their hands on those census records, and then they went door to door arresting everyone, tortured them and sent them off to the gas chambers
âif youâve done nothing wrong you have nothing to hideâ is a great way of saying âi have never once thought about the past or the futureâ
plus all that stuff about âwhy do you draw the curtains at night?â, and âwhy do you close your bedroom door when youâre having sex?â, along with âwhy does your doctor close the door when discussing medical matters?â - surely if you do that you must be guilty of a crimeâŚ
PontiusThe-AV8Tor@reddit
Whereas now all those records would be de-identified, randomised, anonymised and encrypted. Plus highly unlikely to be held on the premises. And if stored correctly then segregation of duties would ensure that even if forced one single entity or people could not just reveal give up that info.
People also once allegedly fell for a Wooden Horse being left as a fake gift from the Gods in Troy.
The world has moved on the sodding Nazis are not invading ever again, we will never again go willing into boxcars because of history. In the same way that we will now not let a few passengers hold us hostage on a plane now the majority of passengers would try and do something as they know that doing nothing often ends badly! Now in that scenario everyone rushes the hijackers.
And for the record we don't close the bedroom door unless the children are around! Hell why even make it to the bedroom!
BrokeThread@reddit
if you think data is de-anonymized you are genuinely misinformed to an extent that requires a profound revelation of reality
also, you appear to have missed the point
PontiusThe-AV8Tor@reddit
I not only know it is and how I have studied, overseen and taught it in government and listed organisations.
I suspect we at cross purposes. I am not for a moment saying in THIS scenario that makes sense as the idea IS to aggregate information and the idea is to build and use profiles.
I was replying to the poster above who comment that in The Netherlands such info was gathered and then weaponised and THAT was what i was saying would not happen now.
In this context i think mass facial recognition is an excellent tool and should be used everywhere. I have zero issue with the authorities having access to everything about everyone one, all the time. I believe in the state not the individual and your desire for privacy or secrecy is irrelevant to society at large if you have no malintent then you have nothing to worry about.
Can that be abused, yes, could it be, yes, however the system or ideal is not the issue the policing and practical application of it are so as a hypothetical argument mass surveillance is a welcome addition to policing nation. So if brought in with sufficient checks and balances of such robustness that we can be certain that the use of these system cannot be abused (ie plod A looking up his ex or the new bf/gf or swatting and doxxing and other false flag scenarios) then I have no issue with mass surveillance and also think that digital ID should be mandatory for everyone over 16 and must be carried at all times as well as advocating a cashless society and I understand the tech and the peril more than the vast understand of the readers and posters here from roles I understand held.
PerkeNdencen@reddit
That escalated quickly. Absolutely wild take. Terrifying that you actually work with this stuff, too.
Particular-Island709@reddit
Iâm sure after Athens deal with the Melians, people said the world had moved on and that wasnât going to happen ever again.
PontiusThe-AV8Tor@reddit
Quite the reverse the Melian dialogue established Realpolitik the take away was simple those without power cannot expect to negotiate. They must accept their lot.
However here is the juxtaposition. In this case 'the system' is The state ie the UK Government and its apparatus and as such to take the Melian dialogue as it appears then we are saying and UK state can do whatever it chooses as they have strength weak WE are the the weak i.e. we the citizens are The Melians.
I do not believe that interpretation. I believe that the police are crown servants and the apparatus are civil servants and they serve US at our pleasure and they only have power because we allow it, hence policing by consent. As such they are and MUST be accountable to external and independent oversight by US who are The Athenians and that they employ this tech solely to keep us safe with correct checks and balances and oversight available to us the real holders of power as the electorate.
Now will it work that way that is very different from SHOULD it and that is my point.
Karlash08@reddit
There is a difference between having sex, talking about personal medical things and walking around a public space.
When you leave the safety of you property you have made the choice to be in a public space and the risks thag come with it. Being ay home with the curtains drawn is you not wanting you personal space being intruded on.
Sorry I appreciated your argument and some what agree with giving out personal information and how it could be used against you, but after that you argument just doesnt make sense, but also oh a daily basis I unknowingly give out so much information that just from how you talk on your phone or where to typing shit on reddit.
Your statement about not thinking about the past and future is also frankly a dumb statement. Being ok being actively tracked by a camera because you have nothing to hide doesnt mean jack about not thinking about the past or future. Hell if I really think about the past I would never lewve my house, and just becaue Hilter used census information to track down ppl doesnt mean every person will do the same. Its actually such a dumb take I am struggling to finding a starting point to because there are so many holes in that argument.
Snoo63@reddit
"You don't need a bathroom door if you aren't secretly shooting up drugs in it!"
Silhouette@reddit
The only data that is truly secure is the data that isn't collected and stored in the first place.
For everything else there is always some degree of risk because both humans and technology are probably involved and both are fallible. The data collected and the use it's put to and who has access to it and how long it's kept for should all be proportionate to that risk.
This is supposed to be how our data protection laws do work but naturally governments (both UK and the EU whose GDPR we have inherited) carved out huge exceptions for themselves. Restricting what governments can do with personal data is actually the most important application of these principles because governments have more power to harm their people than anyone else.
TroublesomeFox@reddit
This is exactly my worry.Â
I don't really tend to break the law and I would say my life in general is pretty clean. Im soft as shit and don't hurt anyone, don't steal, do drugs, kind to animals and strangers. I'm not very private either and wouldn't break a sweat if the police looked at my phone etc.Â
But I'm also very outspoken about things that matter to me like being pro trans, gay, mental health, pro choice etc etc. if the wrong government came in I doubt I'd change that behaviour. If we ended up in a situation like China I'd be fucked.Â
Ill-Intention-306@reddit
Its not just about having anything to hide. Imagine when advertising agencies can buy an entire psychometric profile on you, where you go, what you do, what shops you frequent, how much money you typically spend, even what kind of moods youre in when you do spend money etc. Then every time you leave the house can bombard you with hyper specific targeted advertising scientifically designed to influence your decision-making to extract the most amount of money out of you possible.
Odd_Sir4792@reddit
I've recently realised that I'm not actually that bothered about this. Why do I give a crap if Sainsbury's know what kind of yoghurt I buy and advertise the underpants I'm most likely to buy as a result?
We live in an advertising funded world. If you don't want to fall victim to it, just don't buy stuff that's advertised to you.
Ill-Intention-306@reddit
Sure thereâs targeted advertising when you already have a need youâre looking to solve. Youâre looking to buy new underwear > you get targeted ads for underwear that youâd probably like. Problem solved.
However, whereâs the line between serving you ads to solve a problem vs manipulating your behaviour to influence you into buying something? One day your pet gets sick, you google a load of symptoms and by various means youâre tracked visiting the vet the next day. Imagine shortly after you start getting served ads pet insurance "buy this pet insurance so youâre not paying out of pocket in case they need medical care. Be a good owner, ensure your pets live long healthy lives", then shortly after they change to slightly suspect pet food/supplement ads "buy these pills or this food so your pet never gets sick again, clinically proven (not really) to improve their health and extend their lives". Are those still ads trying to solve a problem or are they targeting someone who is probably in an emotional state more susceptible to being sold shit they donât need.
Odd_Sir4792@reddit
For sure, I totally get that. I just don't care about it, largely because I'm well aware that I'm being advertised too and I very rarely buy anything I see on an advert.
kpblvekgxd@reddit
If everyone was as experienced and cynical as me, the only "emotional state" they'd be in would be to put those advertisers on a permanent blacklist.
GoldenBhoys@reddit
Genuinely make me happy, I can see the advertising executives. We are paying how much for this guys information? But he keeps buying the same shoes, trousers and beer he always buys! We forgot to tick the age box sir!
Kaijuburger@reddit
Currently in the process of figuring out browsers vpns etc to try and minimise data capture by isps, Google, corporate scumbags and anyone else. The internet started life as good for humanity and has been turned into something to milk humanity. Terrible shame.
kpblvekgxd@reddit
I wouldn't want to go back to the pre-internet days, though. Advertisers can presume and pester all they want, but as long as there's competition, we can always boycott them.
Ok_Dependent9976@reddit
I'd love to have targeted advertising that actually works.
Currently all it seems to suggest is things I have or things id never want!
Distinct-Tour-5654@reddit
Exactly...fed up of being told theirs hot single moms near me, show me BBQ ads đ¤Ł
kpblvekgxd@reddit
đđđ
Juiced_Up_On_Royds@reddit
You're your own boss. You're in control. Stop being a pussy.
The_HDR_Sn1per@reddit
Bonkers take, please advise how facial recognition the police use will allow adversing agencies of oneâs location, spending habits or what mood they were in ? đ
Ill-Intention-306@reddit
Do you think the police develop this tech themselves in-house or something? Theyre just clients.
Also facial tracking and emotion monitoring used to influence sales is already a thing its not even a dystopian "what if?". https://scanwatch.tech/how-emotion-detection-improves-customer-experience-retail/
horseradish_smoothie@reddit
What do you mean by "when"? You've literally just described Google and all their search, maps, wallet offerings.
FlowRoko@reddit
Yeah this is just the nature of digital life. Since it's all done by computers it's all tracked and catalogued. It's how AI became a thing, it was trained on the vast quantities of data that is produced by the internet. Mass participation in the internet and social media was the Rubicon, and now it's too late to go back.
Without CCTV, GPS, Fingerprint/DNA databases etc, you'd be more 'free' if you interpret it that way but life would also be worse, travel more difficult, crime would be even higher, and solving those crimes would be orders of magnitude harder.
The Gov of any developed country also already has your face on file, via passports, driver's licenses etc. If they don't, and you don't have these or other IDs, the absence of those things alone is enough to raise suspicion since it's anomalous, and implies special and prolonged effort taken to avoid things that are basically required to participate in society. Merely finding employment usually requires at least one form of photographic government-issued ID.
The data exists, would provide an objective benefit for next to no downsides, gets more effective the more it's used since the dataset grows, and you expect any government to not use it?
ScottOld@reddit
Your phone does that already
Silhouette@reddit
Advertising is the easy part. It's annoying but basically ignorable. The scary thing is when it's someone who actually can affect your life. The cost of your insurance went up because you fell into the wrong box. The cost of your holiday went up because they profiled you and dynamically priced at a level their system thought you would still pay. Sorry we can't proceed with your job application but you were seen within half a mile of a controversial event and we can't admit this is our reason but we don't want to risk being associated with it. Best of luck getting elected when we tell the voters you go to AA meetings/had an abortion/socialised with an old friend who now belongs to a different political party. Unfortunately your home improvement loan has been denied because your kids have expensive hobbies and the computer thinks you're too high risk so no cost-saving solar power for you.
fernuffin@reddit
We give this away with our phones already!
Familiar-Woodpecker5@reddit
They already do this
discoveredunknown@reddit
âFirst they came for the terrorists and paedophiles, but said nothing because I was not a terrorist or paedophileâ
hairlikebrianmay@reddit
Then they came for Eamon Holmes and I said "he's over there"
V65Pilot@reddit
and then they came for the unknown...and this being Reddit, someone ratted him out.
Weewoes@reddit
Oh no, whats he done?
BINGGBONGGBINGGBONGG@reddit
i heard he ate a sofa and Lorraine Kelly was furious.
hairlikebrianmay@reddit
Because she was sat on it.
callisstaa@reddit
Ooohh, me growler.
Kaijuburger@reddit
Underrated bo selecta reference. Bravo
KopiteForever@reddit
Hasn't everyone at this point?
Middle-Mirror2017@reddit
Had a stroke and is now recoveringâŚ
Turbulent_Ad_880@reddit
And they were only using them as an excuse anyway...
...soon you'll have cameras in your home, monitored by the government...because over two thirds of child abuse happens in the home. It's to keep the children safe!
Giant_Ant_Eater@reddit
Except we know governments have protected both...
Fr13ndlyT0rt0153@reddit
âThen they came for the protestors and called them terroristsâŚâ
Frznrrfan6@reddit
Many of them are.....
dikicker@reddit
Mmmmmmm isn't there that v for vendetta anniversary coming up
I can hear the music already
How funny would that be
Allegedly of course
lonehorizons@reddit
I know what you mean but it doesnât work as well as when the examples are gay people and trade union members etc đ
ShotofHotsauce@reddit
It's not about hiring, it's about respecting privacy.
lonehorizons@reddit
Your urinal example is actually happening already for people who accidentally leave their Rayban Metas shooting. All the footage is watched by low paid Meta contractors in African countries.
PontiusThe-AV8Tor@reddit
Oh no someone saw my body part that I share with 4 billion other people on the planet! How mortifying!
Why does anyone care! we all have one or the other set of bits! Get over it!
Silhouette@reddit
I don't know whether that is actually true. The trouble is - it doesn't really matter whether that specific claim is true or not. It easily could be and none of us would have any way to know. That in itself is a good enough reason to overhaul our privacy laws and challenge the assumption that "no reasonable expectation of privacy in public" that might have been a reasonable attitude 50 years ago is still a reasonable rule in a world with cameras and microphones everywhere and many of them phoning home to a mothership that does who-knows-what with the footage afterwards.
lonehorizons@reddit
Yeah definitely.
Much_Leader3369@reddit
Should any government have access to this kind of thing?
_Grevane_@reddit
Exactly.
When people like Oracle chairman Larry Ellison are telling us we're going to have global surveillance, people should be very concerned. Same with AI. There's a reason these people are constantly trying to push AI, Digital ID's and normalise things like facial recognition and surveillance. This will not end well for regular people. Think East Germany but in a Digital era.
âWeâre going to have supervision,â Ellison said. âEvery police officer is going to be supervised at all times, and if thereâs a problem, AI will report that problem and report it to the appropriate person. Citizens will be on their best behavior because we are constantly recording and reporting everything thatâs going on.â
https://fortune.com/2025/09/28/larry-ellison-ai-surveillance-oracle-tiktok-deal-social-media/
ScottOld@reddit
I would expect the police to have final recognition regardless of vans
Celestial_Twenty@reddit
Whoâs watch the watchers?
crowort@reddit
The Guarding Dark
ssjg2k02@reddit
I guess Iâll have to do it.
an0mn0mn0m@reddit
CoffeeZilla
Zero_Overload@reddit
Well you do seem reasonable. ohh you put a uniform on.
Dazz316@reddit
marcusrizaulait@reddit
Should I do it myself? Make up my own mind Like anyone else?
Large_Leader_9864@reddit
Everyone has their private life to hide, even if itâs not illegal. I hate that term.
hdhddf@reddit
feels like they're setting up all the tools ready for an extremist government
an0mn0mn0m@reddit
Palantir is taking over
arfur-sixpence@reddit
You talking about "our Nigel" there?
MathematicianOnly688@reddit
If you wouldnât be comfortable with your worst enemy having a particular power then itâs not one any government should have.Â
anotherMrLizard@reddit
That basically leaves out virtually all government powers though, lol.
badgerkingtattoo@reddit
Exactly, I would fucking hate it if my worst enemy taxed everyone a fair proportion of their income in order to give all citizens free healthcare.
anotherMrLizard@reddit
I mean, the "power" in this example is the power to tax and spend. Whether your worst enemy would use it to redistribute wealth and provide people with free services is another matter.
callisstaa@reddit
If it does what itâs supposed to then itâs worth it.
Full disclaimer, I live in China but Iâve never lived anywhere safer. Chances are though in the UK you will all of the negatives (data harvesting) and 0 positives (less crime)
UKAOKyay@reddit
And that government will just bring it anyway, I'd rather we had the initial stages with a half responsible one.
coomzee@reddit
Or when you have to prove why it's wrong with your own data.
orlandofredhart@reddit
I have nothing to hide, but also don't like the idea of ai facial rec everywhere constantly
acidisgreat@reddit
If anybody tells me they have nothing to hide I tell them to send me all their messages and pictures
KamakaziDemiGod@reddit
I have that discussion, especially with older generations, a fair amount. I have absolutely nothing to hide, but that doesn't mean I'm okay with living in a glass box, but they don't seem to understand it and I wonder if it's because they don't realise how powerful these systems are
I especially dislike it because data is the most valuable commodity right now, and I don't like the idea of being used for profit against my will, especially when it doesn't benefit me
CazT91@reddit
Here's hoping you're never unlucky enough to go missing. Only to realise just before your captor kills you â having been tortured for days â why this would have been really useful đđ¤ˇđźââď¸
465 people go missing in the UK, every day!
repfsm67@reddit
To have the perfect world, we should give up all our freedoms?
I see where youâre coming from, but this is rarely going to stop that type of crime. We would also be assuming that is in the interest of future governments and thus police forces.
CazT91@reddit
No won't stop the crime. But my extreme and gory example aside, what about the mothers and fathers who just vanish; or heaven forbid children.
This tech could be the difference between finding someone within hours, saving a life; or searching for weeks and months, only to find a corpse.
Besides which, for the most part who's really watching. There is no conscious person tracking out movements 24/7. In order for that to work, half the population would have to be employed just to watch the other half on screens.
In reality it won't be much different to standard CCTV. Its just more "intelligent". It just has some extra useful features which mean people can be tracked better when required.
wigl301@reddit
When you are seen on CCTV your recording is saved for usually 30 days, but potentially much longer. When you are seen by a van like this, your image is saved for less than a second and then deleted. Does that change your perspective?
repfsm67@reddit
My issue is facial recognition as a wider issue, in supermarkets etc. Do you have a source that it is saved for less than a second? Even so this data is not local, it will be processed by other companies and likely cloud based so at daracenters.
Additional-Ad-3148@reddit
What was once dystopian becomes the norm.
repfsm67@reddit
People are definitely already normalising this lol
dauty@reddit
is it *that different* to CCTV though? You were already being recorded many times a day without being asked for your consent. I suppose we consent by virtue of living here and participating in society, and really i don't know if the spectre of a 'Big Brother' police state looking in your business all the time is any more real now than it has been for the last 20 years, even if the technology makes it more possible now. What I mean is there has always been a malign authoritarian element to the state, particularly here in the UK, why should it be worse just because they have better gadgets?
repfsm67@reddit
The AI and centralisation of where this is all stored makes the difference. Supermarkets all have facial recognition now where your biometrics are used to compare against known criminals in stores, with AI this makes it faster to build your identity from posts online etc. CCTV is mostly private and locally run with little exposure to the internet, this will be wiped in a certain timeframe to save storage and will be viewed by a person when needed. This compared to cloud based databases is substantially different.
Bottled_Void@reddit
Even if you've got nothing to hide;
Let's say there was a stabbing a block away from where you were walking one day. The police see you in their system and you mistakenly say you weren't in the area. Never having walked past the place they name could make you think you'd never been close to it, no matter how geographically close it is.
Now you're prime suspect in a murder investigation, caught lying about your whereabouts during the crime.
Upset-Lemon5152@reddit
Such a far fetched scenario.
Bottled_Void@reddit
It's actually happened a few times, or at least something similar. It's one of the reasons they always advise you to not say anything to the police.
ScottOld@reddit
But they already do that with CCTV. The vans probably only use information inside a police database, I would see it more like an ANPR for people's faces
StubbornKindness@reddit
It's insane, honestly. Haven't there already been 2 cases of people being wrongly arrested and taken to court due to mistakes from the surveillance systems?
BillWilberforce@reddit
It should really be for offences where they have a name, age, DoB etc. and preferably prints. So that you can prove at the roadside in a few seconds, whether you're the person they're looking for or not. Although if/when the software becomes ultra reliable and only flummoxed because say the person used to have a beard and glasses but is now clean shaven and has had laser surgery..... Then I'd be more willing to accept it.
In China you can pay for goods in shops just by letting the "till" scan your face. Then AI matches it to your account based solely on facial recognition.
Kaijuburger@reddit
Once upon a time you'd have to be arrested for them to take your fingerprints and DNA, now we're all criminals and there's no checks and balances. The 'law' and our 'representatives' in parliament can and do whatever they like. Generally with a view to a cushy job as payment with whatever company they're really representing when they lose their seat in parliament.
BillWilberforce@reddit
One of the people that they picked up in Croydon a couple of months ago. Had been charged with ABH or something back in the late '90s but then never turned up to the police station or the court. So they'd been arrested, identified, photographed, prints taken..... And of course their appearance over 25+ years would have changed somewhat. But a 30 second fingerprint scan could have positively ID'd them yes or no.
brntuk@reddit
They have this in Beijing airport. The snack machines use facial recognition in lieu of cash or card.
Crimsoneer@reddit
Not in the UK, and it's not really possible because of how the system is designed - it only looks for named identified people who are already wanted by police. So if you're ever stopped due to a mistake, all it takes is showing them your driving license or whatever id you have (or at worst getting your fingerprints taken) to confirm you're not person X. You can't really end up in court.
repfsm67@reddit
I may be wrong but I think the Essex police force stopped using it as they found this was the case.
Upset-Elderberry3723@reddit
'Surveillance has been deployed to the region. Do not assume it is there for your safety'.
I think people, increasingly, are becoming exhausted of the permanence and digital accessibility of the modern world. It's why younger people are turning away from phone calls and expect messages instead - because it kills-off part of the hyper-connectivity; nobody is permitted immediate access to you, and you are allowed to respond when you please.
And, I think older people are longing for a time where you could just leave for the day and not be connected to anything else in your life until you returned. The implementation of facial recognition feels like a violation of that because it's essentially a system designed to keep checking where you are.
Humans aren't really made for that, evolutionarily. When we went off hunting for food, we weren't being followed by an omnipresent presence that recorded everything we did.
And it's the permanence aspect, as well. An important part of human exploration and silliness is that the past will, eventually, be forgotten, or dampened with time. In a world where the present can be easily captured in high-definition video and stored forever (and you don't even know where, physically, it's being stored), human behaviour itself has taken a hit.
Content-Yogurt-4859@reddit
I wanted to make a flippant point about the horrors of a reform government turning AI power mass surveillance on immigrants and eventually benefit claimants but I'd rather just say you are ** so ** right that an inexorable part human experimentation and simple tomfoolery is the core concept that it will fade from memory and very occasionally be retold with suitable embellishments and minimisations. There's a theory that young people don't go out and get wasted like young people of old did because someone will film it and post it online.
corcyra@reddit
Isn't that the reason? Seems obvious, at least to me.
Expensive-Draw-6897@reddit
It's the age old reason of trying to do the opposite thing of what your parents do.
Mysterious_Silver_27@reddit
So, doing the exact thing your grandparents did
Expensive-Draw-6897@reddit
Something like that. The theory just applies to certain things.
Nuggety-Nipples@reddit
Same reason pub culture is dead.
Jaded_Library_8540@reddit
Money is a much better reason.
Namiweso@reddit
Iâd say the main reason is cost of living and having to save more money. The younger generation are more aware of the financials needed these days and are acting accordingly.
Nuggety-Nipples@reddit
Very well put; as an acid house veteran, the effect this scenario has had on clubs and people letting loose is shocking.
BilboDankins@reddit
There are clubs now that play techno/dnb/house music that have strict no photos policies, they'll make you put a sticker on your phone, and I've seen security kick people out for taking photos inside.
One time I saw a guy snorting ket out of a freezer bag with a straw on the dancefloor, and security tapped his shoulder and asked him not to, but then another guy filmed the dj for a few seconds, and security kicked him no questions asked.
ExecutiveChimp@reddit
Bit harsh. They could have just ejected him from the premises
PrinceFan72@reddit
Agree. And the seeming inevitability of it all. "Oh, more shit that we don't want and would object to if it would make any difference is coming? Sigh"
Besmirching_Badger@reddit
Making mistakes or fucking up is a fundamental part of human development.
We seem to have forgotten that. In all sorts of ways.
IMO a lot of minor 'crime' would be solved by a basic slap on the wrist. A police officer turns up, has a word, tells you to wise up. Instead we demand anything and everything have a lengthy trial, investigation and the masses crying out for everyone to be thrown in a cell.
Dazz316@reddit
The funny thing is, messages are worse than calls half the time. A message from a business might be better than a call from them. But people will take 15 minutes to text a 5 minutes conversation with each other, interrupting whatever they're doing several times over and over instead of just the once.
I got annoyed and turned back on my ringer, and then sat through my phone and decided if there really was anything that needed to be loud. Everything like social media, whastapp, games everything has been set to a silent ringtone. An email that is only used for certain things is allowed to ring, work teams CALLS is allowed but not notifications (nobody calls after work hours) and then normal calling. I don't think anything else is. It means I can know there's nothing important happening and can ignore my phone when I need to without having to actually get rid of things.
Upset-Elderberry3723@reddit
That's simply because of current tech design, though. In future developments, you could have users be able to toggle alert noises for some channels but not others, and could even select different alert noises for different channels (which is superior to a phone).
And I would argue that, while messages might take longer to compose, they typically present the information in a more organised and complete manner. Before sending a message, you have to consider whether you have included all of the relevant information.
Dazz316@reddit
You can do that on android and a quick google says you can do that on iOS too.On Android if there's a notification, hold your finger on it and you get options.to silence them. That apps notifications are now silent and will show up on the banner at the top but won't ping you. Alternatively you will have the usually in app settings to assign notifications per this or that.
It really depends. For a full blown back and forth conversation. Calls are just wwaayy more efficient.
Messages are better for quick messages, a few back and forths. Send a few meme's, update that you'll be late to a thing etc.
Emails are best for large longer amounts of information that could contain lots of lings, attachments etc. More for business, but sometimes used social if organising big events maybe.
And you can follow up with one thing with another. Have a call and discuss through a plan of action for something, then say "OK, cool text me which way you wanna go and I'll do it"
But man, when i'm trying to cook or do chores and evertime I start doing something my phone pings, I read, write a reply, send, pick up my chore, ping, stop doing my chore, read a message, write a reply, send, pick up my chore, ping......It's really annoying.
Which-World-6533@reddit
It's not that we "left for a day". It's that for most of history, not be contacted 24/7 was not possible. Not being contactable was normal.
I didn't get a mobile phone until I was around 28. For most of Uni I didn't have a phone in my accommodation. Most of Halls of Residence in the UK had one pay-phone per floor at most.
Before then, when I left my house until I got to work I could not be contacted. If I wanted a quiet lunch hour I went to the pub. After work I could not be easily contacted after I left the office.
What we have now is not normal in the slightest.
corcyra@reddit
Yes, for sure. That's why I often leave my phone at home (or turn it off) on weekends, or when I'm out walking or gardening or whatever. I do love the connectivity of the internet, and that information is so easily available to answer any question one might have, but not having been brought up with being contactable 24/7, I've no problem turning the damned phone off for a day or two.
callisstaa@reddit
Yo I live in China and even here they donât have facial recognition. There is heavy surveillance to be sure but since they implemented it in the interests of preventing crime it is actually very safe. If theyâre implementing it in the interests of providing data to Palantir then itâs not going to have any benefit to the public.
repfsm67@reddit
Palantir genuinely scare me, they have their claws in a lot here. Do you guys really not have facial recognition?
callisstaa@reddit
We absolutely do but only with consent.
Deviant-Killer@reddit
Why don't you feel comfortable? What aspect of it does that?
repfsm67@reddit
I wouldnât want someone following me to tesco and then the rest of my visits in town. I think people have a right to exist without being monitored everywhere.
Deviant-Killer@reddit
Who following you?
repfsm67@reddit
I think you have missed my point
Deviant-Killer@reddit
I think you might think you're more relevant than you think, unless you are referring to data getting in the hands of organised crime rings ..
Honestly, who do you think is going to follow you and 57 million other people without a reason?
levimuddy@reddit
Itâs a shift from being innocent until proven guilty to guilty until proven innocent. Thatâs the nothing to hide argument, agree dystopian.
DoktaZaius@reddit
Most CCTV is privately owned for premises security too - more a reflection of crime, than of surveillance
Lil_Spore@reddit
just cause i have nothing to hide doesnt mean i want to be watched all the time
IDKBear25@reddit
Absolutely.
blob8543@reddit
It's massively different but the reason we have AI surveillance now is probably the fact that we have been a CCTV obsessed nation for decades. The government knows AI will be equally tolerated by most of the population.
Coraxxx@reddit
Then they should pay more attention to history.
repfsm67@reddit
It is good to see there are more people concerned though, but there is still a majority of people that fo have this attitude.
stoneharry@reddit
If you use Google maps on your phone, it's already recording everywhere you go at every moment of your life. I don't agree with it, but it's been this way for many years.
repfsm67@reddit
You donât even need to use Google Maps for this to be the case.Iâm very picky in what apps I let have my data and information, but to be constantly matched against some database everywhere I walk is mental.
floodtracks@reddit
I'm going to be honest here. I have a panic disorder and OCD. One of my big themes is around having done something wrong and being found out. Or not having done something wrong but ending up in some Kafkaesque situation. These vans send me absolutely spiralling. Now I know the world doesn't need to change to accommodate me but I genuinely don't understand how normal, healthy people can just live with it because "they have nothing to hide".
Besmirching_Badger@reddit
They can't. It fundamentally coerces the masses even if they're doing nothing wrong. Everyone will change their behaviour as a result.
The same way people start panicking when a police car pulls in behind them as they're driving along.
'nothing to hide, nothing to fear' is the most ignorant, moronic slogan imaginable. The sooner we actually re-establish and respect basic freedoms and privacy the better.
cybertonto72@reddit
This can already be done without llm's being involved. Dave Gorman did a show about this around 25 years ago
Dazz316@reddit
Especially when the majority of the CCTV wasn't owned by the government and was privately owned by People or Business's.
monkeysnipe@reddit
Works very well for the safety in places like Singapore đ¤ˇââď¸
Commercial_Half_2170@reddit
Yay episode of black mirror they did where the police have this tech that can piece together exactly what happened is the future
scotiaboy10@reddit
Wanker
TakutoLee@reddit
Safer, so what. Utopia no. Paradise no. Do crime do more time.
mazty@reddit
Congratulations you don't understand how this works because that's literally how facial recognition works - if you are not detected as being a wanted individual, your data is removed immediately.
Upset-Elderberry3723@reddit
Because it isn't like we've several instances of data analysis and collection schemes go mysteriously wrong by major companies and 'accidentally' harvest user data.
Regardless of stated procedure, scepticism towards tech of such large potential implications is not silly.
mazty@reddit
It couldn't be a simple mistake to record the data. It would be extremely obvious immediately. Being paranoid and ignorant aren't virtuous traits so let's not pretend they are.
Llewellynt@reddit
My biggest issue with them is that you would never find them in a place like Highgate High Street. Almost always in areas considered lower class.
random_name3938472@reddit
How would the ordinary person ever know if the software erases after 12/24 hrs or even a week
random_name3938472@reddit
Of course they could give us a login name and password to see where we got recorded and the option to delete, but still
Snoo_67993@reddit
I had delusional disorder for 15 years thinking everyone was spying on me using cameras everywhere in and outside my house.
Last year it got to the point where I thought they were using eye tracking and AI to pretty much read my thoughts, I couldn't even use my eyes in an automatic way.
It was absolute hell and ended up sectioned last year.
I feel bad for everyone else with what's coming but I've had years of practice.
liarstraits@reddit
1984
prussian_princess@reddit
Thanks for the concern, but I think we'll manage better than you did. Just look out for yourself and don't worry about others.
chickenmoomoo@reddit
What a weird thing to say. What makes you think thatâs an acceptable thing to say?
Despondent-Kitten@reddit
What a fucking shitty comment.
The_Growl@reddit
Performative cruelty is in vogue, and I can't stand it.
lonehorizons@reddit
Wow how did you break free from that, was it through medication when sectioned? Glad you got through it, I watched a documentary about gang stalking and it was quite upsetting how people end up ruining their own lives because of it.
Weewoes@reddit
Damn, that sounds rough. Hope youre doing well now and this kind of thing doesnt cause you any more anguish.
snootbob@reddit
The live facial recognition systems used by police have a lot of misconceptions about them. For one they donât use AI.
They donât recognise and store every face that walks past them. They are preloaded each deployment with a specific databases of faces they are looking for, typically this will be wanted people (either locally or nationally) or sex offenders. Anyone not on that database will not be registered by the cameras, all images and footage is deleted immediately unless it is a match to the database.
In theory they are actually a lot less intrusive than your standard CCTV cameras which will store footage.
Tony_Chu@reddit
Agreed and to go further there are questions of enforceability and verifiability of data deletion. We can make whatever laws we want about the lifecycles of this data, but 100% of the time when we shine a bright light on a hidden process in our byzantine government, we find that they do what they want with data regardless of the laws.
In my opinion, there is a zero percent chance that national security loopholes will not be exploited in order to preserve such a wildly valuable data source while telling us publicly that they definitely are not.
BillWilberforce@reddit
It's deleted within seconds, as long as it doesn't get a match.
islaisla@reddit
The problem is, they are arresting people for supporting Palestine, and now they have arrested people on suspicion of supporting Palestine, which they've clearly stated as well. They call it terrorism when a line of pensioners sit peacefully with a sign. They pick them up from wheelchairs and drag blind old men into their vans. So the match isn't based on a reasonable law anymore. And it is going to continue in that direction.
Kindly-Blueberry8583@reddit
Woops the deletion routine has been left off for the best 20 years woops
DisastrousRecord1802@reddit
My local facebook group managed to track a group of children who were playing chappy/ding-dong-ditch back to their own respective homes using ring door bell footage. It was crazy to watch them piece it together in real time in the comment section. I couldnât believe it, shows really how may people would actually support mass surveillance
DareDemon666@reddit
Yeah exactly. CCTV is like the ability to peer back a day or two in time. If something happens, then the police or whoever can look back and maybe see something important. But it's only that short window, and most of the time even if it is being watched actively, it's deleted and written over shortly afterwards. It's of no real difference to the people in the footage.
Compare that to these AI cameras and who knows what they're being used for. You could easily set them up to track the movements and habits of all the people they see, or to build some sort of database of people based purely on their location or fashion decisions or whatever else. And you could use it to profile people. What exactly they are doing with it I don't know, but it's the capability that's the problem.
CCTV is like having a local bobby stood on the corner. It sees what it sees, it doesn't have the ability to do more really. AI cameras could be that local bobby, or they could be a stalker, or they could be an ICE Agent, or they could be a prosecution team.
StrangelyBrown@reddit
But there you're just comparing what you know about CCTV with what you don't know about these cameras.
The CCTV at your local tesco could be all being stored up for years and years, with teams of people in a 3rd world country scouring them to find when the same shopper goes in, exactly what they do, etc. We just happen to know that people don't use CCTV like that, mostly because of the cost of storing the footage and boring it is to process manually. But you're still just trusting that they don't do that.
If these cameras say they're not building up a database of your habits and are only looking for criminals, I'm not sure why people don't extend them the same hesitant trust.
DareDemon666@reddit
I think you've answered your own question there really
"mostly because of the cost of storing the footage and boring it is to process manually"
Whatever gains that could be made from doing this, don't even come close to the costs of doing it with traditional tech. The issues is how feasible it becomes with AI.
I don't fear gunmen running into the shop I'm in and sticking the place up, because here in the UK, guns are prohibitively difficult to obtain. If I lived in the US, certainly in some places, I'd probably be scared enough to feel the need to carry my own pistol just in-case!
The problem is not exactly what the cameras could be used for, but rather how easily they could be used for that purpose without any way to know. People have this notion that AI is all cloud-based computing running out of huge datacentres and thus leaving a fairly noticeable 'paper trail'. But that's just not true. Anyone with a half decent computer - a mid-range gaming pc worth ÂŁ1,000 maybe - can download and locally run the software necessary to do things like deepfake images! It can be done entirely offline, basically untraceable. Without seizing the machine used itself, nobody would ever know it had happened.
So what's to say these cameras aren't being used for some underhanded purpose that most would object to if they knew about it? With CCTV we trust that it's far too expensive and complex a task for anyone to bother with, but with AI, it's just a case of a few thousand pounds and the will to set it up. The money has already been spent as evidenced by the hardware, which only leaves the willingness - and as for that, we're all far too aware of the number of ill-intentioned police staff. I'm sure I don't need to quote any headlines for that
StrangelyBrown@reddit
If you're worried someone is going to deepfake you, we have to ban everyone taking photos in public with their phones.
MrWardrobexX@reddit
i have said this in another comment but you should really research the law around facial recognition before going on about how invasive it is.
The camera is not actively monitored by humans, deletes your image permanently within 0.1 seconds if negative, and you are pre warned you are entering the zone so you have opportunity to move away from it.
Even if itâs positive the image remains for a less amount of time than CCTV.
CCTV is a private resource. Meaning that usually footage is deleted every 30 days, and is not always monitored. However this isnât always the case. The owner, short of sharing it unnecessarily, can do what they please with it. Why does that not make you uncomfortable but a photo existing for a split second does?
of course i donât entirely defend this system for the sake of it. False positives are ultimately a problem and i donât know how they can prevent that. But i suppose thatâs why itâs being trialed in a few areas at a time.
DareDemon666@reddit
And police always follow the law don't they...
Many people don't even trust the police not to assault them, or worse, and with good reason. A serious breach of GDPR or data laws seems a drop in the bucket compared to some headlines we've had in the past few years. Literal murders and rapes at the hands of those supposed to be upholding the law.
The photo existing isn't the problem, it's the ability to process it. CCTV could be run through AI too and that is it's own issue, but as standard it is not. 0.1s or 1,000s is not the problem, because it only takes the AI a tiny fraction of a second to process my image in whatever way it's been tasked, and that tasking could well be nefarious, even criminal, and we just wouldn't know about it.
I have a right not to be unlawfully surveilled by police, and I'm sure the state already bends the rules here at every opportunity, but this is a dangerous next step in that direction. The advent of AI tech allows for things previously too cumbersome or work intensive to do. These cameras could effectively stalk thousands upon thousands of people, recording tiny details such as their clothing, tattoos, piercings, etc with absolutely 0 human effort. That is worrying, because it means there is basically no longer a technological impediment to doing so.
Just think about ICE in America. Cameras like this could easily be used to track and profile every single person in a given area, predict their movements and habits, uncover their private business, and then be used to bring charges against them and deport them, or worse. Luckily no such agency exists in the UK...yet...
thejadedfalcon@reddit
Yeah, that's great, except the shit I need is in the zone and I have no way to go around it as they've yet to invent the teleporter. Bonus points, depending on where it's set up, as people with mobility issues may have to go ages out of their way to avoid it even if they just want to travel through the area and not actually access something inside of it.
I've heard enough stories of "we don't keep your data" to have zero faith in anything promised about your data being deleted here. And I'm tired of public areas facing more and more restrictions on movement in the name of mass surveillance. Because if the trials are a success, what do you think is going to happen next? They'll just never expand it and keep it to a couple of vans?
spider__@reddit
There was a funny one yesterday in the counterstrike game subreddit where a company posted a graph showing average user age when banned and they admitted they got the age data from scanned IDs used for verification despite previously stating they didn't retain any data and the company doing the ID check only gave them a pass/fail result.
sobrique@reddit
I am at least fairly sure that data protection and surveillance rules means that stuff can be collected but not inspected without a warrant.
This also means that systems that can positively identify 'naughty people' can run autonomously, whilst discarding anything that isn't.
AI simplifies this process of course. I would very much expect that records of you will - much like CCTV cameras - be retained temporarily for processing but then discarded if there's no such match.
tcpukl@reddit
George Orwell would be shocked at the world we now live in.
I never thought as a kid it would actually happen. 1984 was my favourite book at school but now it's just tainted with our governments are doing.
The internet is going to be unstable in a couple of years thanks to the gov trying to protect children.
Just like for porn we are going to need to give our ID to companies just to prove we are over 16. Those companies don't give a shit about GDPR.
This gov are clueless.
Namiweso@reddit
What are the government âdoingâ? Honest question but you seem to know more than me
tcpukl@reddit
The government have added agree verification to lots of the internet in the UK. Lots of websites are using American companies that don't give a toss about GDPR.
Google persona age verification.
Namiweso@reddit
All Iâm seeing is theyâve used it for more than they should have. Whether that is persona or the government. In the end what benefit does it really give them?
As an end user, Iâm struggling to see how it affects me in any meaningful way
tcpukl@reddit
You don't care about GDPR being ignored then on your personal data?
Namiweso@reddit
Nope - Iâm on all kinds of social media. My personal data isnât exactly a secret.
Unless I start getting spam emails or post, I couldnât give two fucks.
Herrad@reddit
What if the company that holds your data goes bankrupt? No one is getting paid to store the data securely anymore so it's trivial for criminals to get their hands on it. From that data you can be implicated in any sort of crime these people want. It might be a troll who's just decided to mess with you, it's easy for them and a nightmare for you.
We're not talking about spam, we're talking about the police thinking you've committed a crime. This costs you money directly, it's not free to defend yourself you know?
This can all happen. The data they have on you by definition is not anonymous. It's not the Equifax breach which just exposed your public financial profile. It's your biometrics, your actual full on private identity.
Sure it's fine now but there aren't any controls in place for if these companies go bankrupt. It's a too big to fail mentality which is categorically a false premise. The US government isn't going to prop up Mr Dingus's Funtime Age Verification Service (which is basically who the fucking UK have contracted the service to) if it collapses and the UK government sure as shit isn't either. There's no provision in the agreement for what will happen to the data. It is fucked mate.
GlastoKhole@reddit
Humans have the right to privacy imo itâs a human thing, I donât like being on CCTV because what if I shit myself or something and someone recorded the cctv and placed it in some fucked up subreddit, you see it happen from time to time, someone will be going about their day have some sort of issue or mental breakdown and theyâre suddenly plastered all over the internet. Thereâs more to it than if youâve got nothing to hide youâve got nothing to fear. I donât like that people are constantly watching me or have the ability to constantly watch me whenever they feel like it and Iâm not informed what theyâre doing with the footage
DefinitelyNotEmu@reddit
The law says you have no expectation of privacy when in public
Darth-__-Maul@reddit
Which isnât particularly fair seeing as going into public isnât a choice, is it?
GlastoKhole@reddit
Which I think should apply to people walking past you, not for you to permanently be recorded without consent. You should have a reasonable expectation of privacy when not on private property, I get for loss and theft prevention cameras in Tesco. But I donât expect to be recorded from my front door to the shop and back, canât scratch your arse without it being in 4k nowadays. People literally develop mental health conditions based around that people are always following them and spying on them and I suppose constant surveillance has a lot weight on those people.
StinkyBird64@reddit
I had a psychotic episode during the pandemic, full on âtheyâre in the wallsâ type delusions, and it was such a horrible feeling, and every time I see these vans or the stickers on shop doors about their ânew facial ID systemsâ it makes the back of my mind crawl. Because at least when I had that episode, those thoughts werenât entirely true, but now with every single corner of the earth being monitored and mapped, I canât imagine how terrifying it must be for people experiencing the same delusions, made 1000x worse because theyâre now true
MythicMango@reddit
watch the movie AnonÂ
lethargic8ball@reddit
I've had times where I haven't googled or looked up a specific video incase "the man" is watching. I'm usually able to get past it but I can see it getting harder.
Acceptable_Ad1685@reddit
No, thatâs why they are building massive data centers and the cost for memory has sky rocketed.
They want to keep all of it.
That being said I recently attended a conference and the irony wasnât lost on me that corporations want their own proprietary data deleted every 30 days with certificates but want to hold onto customer and employee data indefinitely
dr_wtf@reddit
The general term for this is chilling effects, and more specifically, the Hawthorne Effect.
Benn Jordan made a really good video that puts it into terms that the "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" crowd might understand. The whole video is worth watching (about 11 minutes), but the most relevant part on this topic starts at 3m, 33s.
Thai-Girl69@reddit
It's okay I've found a personal privacy solution that will make you look totally inconspicuous.
Lack668@reddit
But every day people let tech companies use their personal data/images as a commodity⌠and they agree to it without bothering to read the small print
mb271828@reddit
Sure, and you've got to be at least aware of what they're going to do with your data, but at least that's in return for a service. I will happily hand over my details to my bank/doctors/online shopping/etc, because they need it to fulfil a service, and crucially, don't have the power to restrict my freedoms. What am I giving my details to the police for? So they can decide whether to detain/search/arrest/charge me, or allow me to keep the freedoms i have by right anyway. Sod that, if they want to build a case against me, especially if I know for a fact I'm innocent, then they're going to have to work for it.
Lack668@reddit
But it will scan you for a millisecond and move on if youâre not wanted. Just like a Police officer will, walking past you down the street. The camera is faster, more accurate (and most likely not misogynist or racist). Itâs no different to an ANPR camera. Itâs not judge, jury and executioner. Itâs a tool (yes, like me)
mb271828@reddit
That is exactly the issue, humans always have doubt and have a limited ability to identify you, so I retain at least some of the anonymity that I have by right. This is lost with facial recognition. Even ANPR can only identify my car, and I already give up the right to anonymity and freedom from being detained without suspicion (thanks to s.163 of the Road Traffic Act) in return for the service of driving a car, but I can simply avoid that by walking.
For now I would just cover my face when walking past a facial recognition van and happily argue the toss with them if they (wilfully) wrongly claim that that amounts to reasonable suspicion, but its important to challenge these things when they're at the top of the slippery slope before they add the capability to every CCTV camera (which they will do unless we take a stand now) and all practical anonymity is lost.
Lack668@reddit
But the camera is basically playing a game of snap with two images. It still needs a human to act, or not act on that information. Youâre clearly an intelligent person⌠what is your biggest realistic fear from these cameras?
mb271828@reddit
That's the theory, the reality is that humans nearly always side with a computer over their own judgement. If the computer says its a match, the usual human doubts and checks will be given less weight, whether consciously or unconsciously.
Restricting the State's ability to track me is a fundamental check and balance on its power. These things are always fine when in the hands of good people, but its never guaranteed that that will always be the case, even ignoring 'rogue' police officers (look up how many cases there are of police misusing their databases). I have a fundamental right to privacy enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights because the world saw what could be done by rogue regimes in WW2 when no such right exists. We are only ever a few steps removed from a populist sweeping to power and abusing the powers and rights that we incrementally gave away in better times, so it is essential that those checks and balances are maintained, as a matter of principle.
Curious_Sosig@reddit
Thatâs their own choice though, if you choose not to read the Tâs & Câs then thatâs your own personal choice. This is thrust upon you by the state with no choice given, not exactly democratic is it? This is just one more step towards becoming a surveillance state where everyone is treated with suspicion
Lack668@reddit
That sounds very paranoid. Not everyone is treated with suspicion by being on camera. Itâs merely using a tool to find criminals by comparing data that people have already willingly given up on say a driving license or passport.
Curious_Sosig@reddit
Itâs not paranoia at all, people in this country seem to be very happy to give up more and more of their rights/privacy in the name of âcatching the baddiesâ without realising how these things could be utilised against them in the future.
This is essentially just the modern version of âpapers pleaseâ - but instead of walking up and stopping you in the street theyâve got cameras to do it for them.
Lack668@reddit
Sounds like paranoia. âCould be used against them in the futureâ⌠so could the Police, Military, the current data the government already holds on you. Should we abolish all that? So if a criminal is walking down the street and so is a Police officer, they are scanning everyoneâs face until they find a match (which isnât as accurate as facial ID) the officer scanning your face is non intrusive, just like a camera. âPapers pleaseâ is stopping someone and inconveniencing them and infringing upon their freedom of movement. Totally different.
Meat2480@reddit
Doesn't help when the really important bit,is on a microdot hidden in the dot of theI I in supercalifragilistic ,on the 3rd page of the 54th chapter,3 sentences in .
LambonaHam@reddit
Reading for eight hours a day, every day, it would take decades to read the common user agreements (Apple / Google, Instagram, etc).
Lack668@reddit
I donât disagree. Canât. Itâs a fact, but I know and Iâm sure you know what they do with personal data without us reading it all. They rely on peopleâs need for a luxury mixed with apathy. Iâm just saying this cctv is no worse that what we already allow. If it catches criminals. Great.
Upset-Elderberry3723@reddit
Because tech companies exploit human psychology. They know that you don't have the time to read all of that, and they know that, even if you do, they can bombard you with several equivalents for several different systems to overwhelm you, or they can rephrase agreements in legalese that make you less likely to truly understand.
These are things that should have been prevented by governmental power, but weren't. Now, we live in a world where US tech companies own the pipes and wires of digital life, and the price of social conformity is the sale of your information.
Lack668@reddit
I donât disagree with you, Iâm just pointing out that people will complain about Police vans with cameras whilst simultaneously allowing tech companies to use all their data.
Ok_Advantage_8153@reddit
Tech companies cant generally arrest you if they misidentify you. You also consented to what the tech companies do (thats a debate in its own right).
Lack668@reddit
People have always been wrongly arrested before cctv and facial recognition was used. Itâs more accurate than humans
SnooCats3987@reddit
True, but tech companies don't have the power to imprison or fine you. Or even kill you as some other governments do.
Muffinlessandangry@reddit
That should be addressed too then. Using technology isn't really optional in society anymore, so you can't say people are choosing it. It's a requirement of functioning. You also can't make the argument that people are making an informed choice as expecting people to read and more importantly understand the small print isn't realistic. Imagine having to actually read all the small print for every app, and again after every single update.
So essentially we've given companies free reign with our data in a way we can't realistically choose to abstain from, and that should be stopped.
LozzB1999@reddit
The paranoia of being watched at all times and heightening mental health issues is spot on to what I thought when I first heard about this. There really has to be a leeway to peopleâs privacy and thatâs closing in by the years. Also the fact the technology has shown multiple instances of being unreliable yet being treated like imminent proof for identity.
TangoJavaTJ@reddit
Just because AI can monitor people in detail, that doesn't mean it will. There's what, 80,000,000 people in the UK? It just isn't computationally feasible to call a neural network on every CCTV shot of everyone.
GBParragon@reddit
It scans the face, compares against a database of wanted people which was uploaded to it that day, alerts officers if it hits a wanted person and then deletes any data that is not for a wanted person.
You canât track a person with this like you can with ANPR, their phone, bank card transactions etc⌠itâs just for IDing wanted people
fighting14@reddit
I have a question.
Under GDPR I have the right to request body worn footage taken by the police of me.
Do I have the same right to facial recognition footage taken off me?
LambonaHam@reddit
It does, in theory.
Storing footage is expensive. However, if they can identify you (even by just generating a tag for you), they can store text data basically indefinitely (e.g. Upset-Elderberry witnessed on camera #3723 at 14:01...).
That allows authorities to form patterns, and predictions.
julemeister@reddit
How did you know my name? đ¤
LambonaHam@reddit
See that pigeon outside your window? That's actually one of my drones.
wintermute023@reddit
I agree with all you say, and I prefer to think of it as a right to privacy. If AI is actively monitoring, stitching your life together, saving all your data, there is no longer any privacy. Just because I âhave nothing to hideâ as the saying goes, doesnât mean everything in my life should be public.
Crimsoneer@reddit
This only scratches for matches against people who are already wanted by police, it doesn't store or record anything.
togtogtog@reddit
That applies to so many things: records of your spending on your Tesco Clubcard, records of your internet use at work, records of your life on your friend's social media, on cameras, on reddit, wherever to record anything digitally.
Tiny things don't mean anything on their own, but people can add together little details over time to build up a picture, and AI can do it far more quickly.
Also, there is no flexibility about things done digitally. In the past, if a person dealt with you, they could take into account many different things, from the situation, your body language etc. When it is machines doing it, it is YES or NO, with no leeway.
CaptainHindsight92@reddit
Generally the video costs a lot to be stored so I would say it probably wonât be kept forever. Certainly it shouldnât be kept. I am in favour of tools that will make cctv more useful, quicker to search through and could help solve certain crimes where we just donât have the time to sift through cctv for days for. But it should be under incredibly strict guidelines, deleted periodically and I donât want it being sold on to private companies for marketing or anything like that.
spikewilliams2@reddit
The police are supposed to delete DNA data when for example they ask for all men to come forward in a rape investigation or when they find you are not a match for a crime scene, but they don't last time I heard.
MrWardrobexX@reddit
the facial recognition cameras run your photo across a pre decided database. If it is negative your photo is deleted before you even release it was taken. The photos are not monitored by a human.
even if itâs positive itâs deleted within a month unless it has captured something evidential, which would be rare. I would say that it is less invasive than cctv which can stay on a system for as long as the owner likes, and can view it as much as they want.
Photo recognition cannot be covert at its current stage. It is a liveries van and there must be a warning you are entering the facial recognition zone which allows you to move out of its way. They also post on social media the day before doing it.
This COULD be very dystopian, but at its current stage i donât think so.
jfp1992@reddit
Print out an image of a knife or gun, that would be humiliating for the police when they arrest you because the ai told them to
Jeester@reddit
I thought they had to delete this as well
NeverendingStory3339@reddit
The right to be forgotten is specifically related to search engines
Mdann52@reddit
It's a lot wider than that under the UK DPA 2018, but specifically excludes data collected and processed for law enforcement purposes
jingleballs088@reddit
They should be lit on fire.
Substantial_Curve_92@reddit
Who gives a fuck just carry on with ur day
BuiltStraightStupid@reddit
Nobody wants that. All it takes is one error and the prosecution have supposedly "irrefutable evidence" that somebody committed a crime, and if it's proven false then it's exactly the same as a lie detector; completely inadmissible.
ANPR makes sense because symbols such as letters and numbers are simple. A facial recognition camera cannot accurately recognise somebody's face from a distance because of issues like complexity of facial structure and image resolution.
Getting vans outfitted with cameras capable of this would be insanely expensive and a massive talking point politically.
Agreeable_Truck6939@reddit
If youâve got nothing to hide, why worry đ¤
impamiizgraa@reddit
I am definitely in the minority. I donât really care, I feel like all my data is compromised anyway, whatâs my face lol
lead_comet@reddit
Didn't they turn it off tho as it was constantly flagging black people who were wanted for crimes they committed lmfao. Im not a fan of it i would rather have actual law enforcement doing there fucking jobs
Ok_Yam_4023@reddit
I think it could be helpful in safe hands but imagine if it got into criminal hands (I'm thinking right wing/authoritarian) and used to track people they wanted to dispose of ie any opposition. It may sound far fetched but there's scary stuff going on in America with personal data, military contracts and drones
Otherwise-Bike-2356@reddit
Ummm no not good
ThisIs_She@reddit
All of these cameras in London and the police still can't identify who the Putney Pusher is.
Facial recognition is just another reminder that Big Brother is watching you.
EasilyExiledDinosaur@reddit
Do it. Law abiding citizens have nothing to fear. And we need a bit of china style authoritarianism in the UK.
snowepthree@reddit
All for it but as soon as another Essex situation pops up where itâs pattern recognition can be considered racist it will be switched off
tobynotsowise@reddit
Personally don't see the issue. In my town they had them in for a week I believe and on the first day they arrested a paedophile who was walking around the town centre(where many kids hang out)
Substantial_Shake256@reddit
Big brother is watching YOU!
EagleZealousideal443@reddit
Only criminals get to be worried; they should be on every highstreet and side roads to catch wanted criminals.
Silverbawls@reddit
Complex_Net_3692@reddit
As a law abiding citizen I do not approve
Ordinary-Condition92@reddit
I hate it. It's as invasive as forcing everyone to provide a DNA swab in my opinion. Actually it's worse, because most people don't realise it's happening.
LifeOfTy94@reddit
What's scary is I could say the wrong thing on here, walk past one of those and the Gustavo, sorry police will arrest me...
SplatNode@reddit
Unless I'm doing something wrong, I rly don't care
DogDrools@reddit
Gives too much power to the state. We are already watched enough.
Alert_Damage4237@reddit
BANNED BANNED AND BANNED if it starts happening where I am I swear to god that you won't catch me outside without wearing a COVID mask and sunglasses and a hood, this is straight BS
Low-Republic-4145@reddit
Itâs a bit late for such concerns now. The UK has been a surveillance state for 30 years.
Academic-Cat-5264@reddit
This is why Iâm saving up to leave this godforsaken country. Growing up I really loved living here, felt like a friendly place with a future and lots of interesting things going on. Now it feels like only one of those things is true.
TheGuyWhoSaysHiBye@reddit
I understand the benefits of it. And all forces using it are claiming to delete any info on people who have no active investiagtions or prior dangerous crimes, but its a slippery slope nonetheless.
What's next? These vans become operational while moving and start driving around on patrol all over?
Then when the new electric full self driving vans become a thing, which is looking like a reality in the near future, will they just drive around, as driverless surveillance vans collecting information on everyones routines, removing the whole idea of living private lives?
I understand it sounds like I'm stretching, but honestly would it surprise us, with how the country's been going?
The best way I can sum up my opinion is: IF theyre being used in limited, high risk areas to genuinely try and improve public safety, and they are being dilligent to ensure the only information stored is truly vital to public safety, then they may help identify dangerous situations forming before they become incidents which is good. But it's borderline dystopian, and very little extra needs to be done in order for it to be too far.
Karlash08@reddit
Personally I dont give a shit. I have nothing to hide.
OneTurnover246@reddit
If you canât do the time, donât do the crime.
v45-KEZ@reddit
I think they're dystopian and horrible, thanks for asking
f08g@reddit
should be illegal
Caprica777@reddit
Something like this will always end up being abused. And it will always be mysteriously under maintenence or turned off when itâs actually needed
RepsUpMoneyDown@reddit
From what I understand theyâre kinda sorta effective? But dystopian nonethe less. Iâd like if they published their stats more. If you post up on a bridge and scan 15,000 faces in a day and get 1 guy who has a warrant for shoplifting then whatâs the point
PatchcordAdams@reddit
My neighbour got burgled. We had Blink camera footage. Police recognised him. They picked him up on facial recognition and knew exactly where he was and went and arrested him.
This story sounds like bullshit but it genuinely went down like that. I was shook.
Cardiff is anyoneâs interested. Weâve had facial recognition in the city centre for a while.
kodiakfilm@reddit
I had no idea they have this in Cardiff! I'm from there but haven't lived there in about 9 years so I haven't seen this. What's it like? Do you see/notice it around? Personally I'm very against it lol
RepsUpMoneyDown@reddit
I would imagine a big part of this is "Police knew him" (people like that tend to be career criminals, so them being on the police radar, means yeah even the slightest hit will work as they're already in the system heavily"
PatchcordAdams@reddit
Yeah definitely. It was just impressive they literally knew where he was to go nick him.
g0_west@reddit
Like they knew his address and went to pick him up at home, or they knew he was out and about walking down the high street cause he was picked up on FR and they picked him up outside Boots?
PatchcordAdams@reddit
Their exact words were - âwe picking him up on facial recognition in the city centre this morning and heâs now in custodyâ
Radioactivocalypse@reddit
Yes! I was watching a programme the other day (24 hours in police custody) and they had a child who had been stabbed. They had no suspect, only a photo of the victims face.
Ordinarily you would have had a team of people sifting through hours of grainy footage to find the victims last movements to see if they could see who he was with before he was murdered.
Within seconds it had picked out from all the accumulated CCTV and doorbell footage, found and pieces together his last movements.
Incredible use of facial recognition. Meant the police could arrest suspects days earlier than if they have to manually sift footage
TurnUpThe4D3D3D3@reddit
Itâs funny hearing âburglaryâ used as a verb, you donât see that very often
namegame62@reddit
Yep. Now imagine the story without that last part. Would be yet another narrative about how the police didn't do anything despite having good high quality camera footage of the perpetrator because they're useless / can't catch criminals / don't care at all about ordinary people who suffer at criminals' hands because they're too busy questioning people who got reported by their neighbour for posting on Facebook yadda yadda yadda...
People want crime solved; they're willing to engage in privacy-invading sousveillance themselves; but they're also intensely resistant to the panopticon being turned on them. Can't have it both ways.Â
Remote-Ad5853@reddit
police use to solve more crime without privacy invading surveillance. False narrative that itâs always been this bad. Itâs cut backs and understaffing, as per usualÂ
Namiweso@reddit
âUsed to solve more crimeâ got a source for that lad?
Letâs just do away with a more efficient technology just because Steve the scaffolder doesnât want the government to know he eats McDonalds 5 times a week
sadboy2k03@reddit
There's no dedicated legislation defining how these systems will be used which means no robust safeguards are in place. This leaves a system that's ripe for abuse collecting millions of data points across the UK.
Just because people commit crime, that means the rest of us have to be tracked by these systems? That's completely backwards.
Remote-Ad5853@reddit
sure.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/mar/27/police-too-overworked-to-investigate-crimes-properly-england-wales-northern-ireland
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/crime-outcomes-in-england-and-wales-2024-to-2025/crime-outcomes-in-england-and-wales-2024-to-2025#section2
shows a reduction in good outcomes.
well is it effective, when we are solving less crime than ever?
Effective by what metric, I welcome your comment asking for sources for my claim so would you be willing to do the same?
You have a right to privacy, likewise you have a right to a fair trial, expression, life, just because you never plan to use or care about any, it doesnât mean your rights go away. People are perfectly within reason to not want to be surveilled.Â
shytster@reddit
Just to be that guy, the whole point of a panopticon is that it doesn't need turning.
FerretPale7661@reddit
Because that 1 could be a missing person, a suspect in a murder or a rape. Sure theyâll most likely get small fish but they will get big ones which will make it all worth it.
Doanimalsplanthings@reddit
What if that 1 person is a rapist, peadophile or murderer? Would it be worth it then? Because thatâs happened
thecxsmonaut@reddit
They aren't, they are constantly misidentifying peope. Miscarriages of justice are already happening.
Crimsoneer@reddit
Worth knowing they've published loads of excellent stats!
https://science.police.uk/site/assets/files/3396/frt-equitability-study_mar2023.pdf
https://www.essex.police.uk/SysSiteAssets/media/downloads/essex/about-us/live-facial-recognition/2026-03-12-lfr-accuracy-watchlists-deterrence-cambs-uni.pdf
Betweentheminds@reddit
Look up SuperRecogniser research from Josh Davis at Greenwich, heâs done some great (and fascinating) work.
towerridge@reddit
Agree with this. Can they show any evidence it reduces crime or increases clearance rates? Is it enough to justify the expense and privacy loss?
iffyClyro@reddit
What privacy loss are you referring to?
In what was is your private life affected by this?
Itâs basically ANPR for faces.
Winston_Carbuncle@reddit
Because one should be able to move around this country anonymously.
Im sure you don't think I have the right to access your name and address just because I walked past you. Many people feel the same towards government agencies.
iffyClyro@reddit
Okay, it appears you maybe donât understand the technology. What is it about facial recognition thatâs stopping you from moving around anonymously?
Winston_Carbuncle@reddit
The fact that your information comes up on a screen for the police to see?
iffyClyro@reddit
It doesnât. Where are you getting your information from, fiction?
Mahoosi@reddit
Facial reconigsetion, it can detect the movement of individuals. So in theory can be used for ill gains. Just like phone call tapping, email hacking and the such. There has been nothing any government worldwide has done to be trusted with tech like this. Anything you argue on this thread will not appease most of the population to trust any world leaders with this. Let alone corrupt police forces the country wide, who prove over and over again they are inept and incapable of policing communities.
ackbladder_@reddit
Only if your face is already on their system. I assume youâre not a criminal? If so ypu should be fine.
LambonaHam@reddit
You clearly don't understand the technology.
The whole purpose of this tech is that you can be snapped in Manchester, then a month later in London, and the police can see that it's you both times.
Redditisfuckincrap@reddit
People all high and mighty about this yet use Facebook/Google/apple/x/Amazon it genuinely makes me lolÂ
Remarkable-Ad155@reddit
Isn't the legal position on cctv etc that you have no reasonable expectation of privacy in public? Pretty sure this is how those creepy Manchester nightlife vids and "auditors" get round this issue (see also those annoying "poverty porn" youtubers who Riley people up in public for content).
The real issue here is data. I don't really have a problem with police using a database of faces of known criminals to find a needle in a haystack if there's a genuine public safety need for it. What I don't want to happen is all my movements (as a non-criminal) being tracked and sold on and, say, my private health insurer putting my premiums up because I went to the kebab shop on Friday.
Governance and regulation on this has got to be strict as fuck.
EhDinnaeEvenKen@reddit
You expect this from the puritanical overreaching government that's forcing us give our biometrics to billion dollar American tech conglomerates (who've been repeatedly proven to be unable to keep this data safe) if we want to have a wank to internet porn?
Good luck.
LambonaHam@reddit
Legal is different to moral.
Where we draw the line matters, it's why GDPR states that footage has to have a valid reason for being stored. You can't just keep footage because you're nosey.
Remarkable-Ad155@reddit
I mean, yes; that's literally the point I made.
Lack668@reddit
Itâs not like itâs open to the public. And the government know where you live anyway. If you have a driving licence or passport they already have your picture too. There are cameras everywhere, in the streets, shops, laptops and phones. Under data protection itâs safer for the police to have a pic of your face as opposed to the tech companies that will sell your personal data (that you agree to) to other companies.
OnRoadRadio@reddit
> one should be able to move around this country anonymously.
Can we actually do that today? Can you get on public transport without some kind of payment that comes back to your name? Or walk through a town without being on camera? If you use a phone you're constantly being tracked, which is also more than likely linked back to you or your bank account.
Not to say facial recognition is the best way forward, it's an elevation to what we're used to in terms of day to day policing and monitoring.
But it is effective.
EnvironmentalCard813@reddit
Well I believe they've been proven to overly target minorities?
My concern is once you allow them the ability, its much harder to take back. yes our current goverment may not miss use this technology, but can you trust all future goverments won't? And its usually a stepping stone, got nothing to hide, then you shouldn't have a problem, is a very dangerous mind set. I find its akin to saying you don't care about freedom of speech, because you have nothing to say right now.
iffyClyro@reddit
The technology had a high rate of false positives with non-white people, the technology was taken out of operation in England at the beginning of the year in order to address the issue.
GradeAffectionate157@reddit
This is incorrect.
bluegrm@reddit
I think this sounds a bit boot lickerish. The consequences of 24/7 monitoring of our lives will never be good. Youâre suggesting we just allow government and I assume mass corporate surveillance. Have you seen what the CEOs of the tech companies think about the general population? Itâs not good. What a horrible society that will create.
iffyClyro@reddit
What on earth are you going on about.
It recognises the faces of people that are wanted.
Itâs not 24/7 itâs a van that pitches up on the odd high street here and there itâs not monitoring your life or anyoneâs life for that matter.
LambonaHam@reddit
No. You're either lying, or you don't know what you're talking about.
It recognises the faces of everyone. That's how it determines which ones are wanted.
For now. Unless you can absolutely and evidentially prove that there will never be any creep on how this tech is used, you should keep your thoughts to yourself.
Gow87@reddit
Clarification - it processes everyone, it doesn't recognise. It's not going oh no, that's not our man, that's bob from 26 windview crescent, Padstow.
It's going "nope, that's not him, that's not him, that's not him...". A needle in a haystack, not a needle in a bucket of needles
Born-Statistician817@reddit
How will you identify a face that is wanted without scanning ALL the faces?
bluegrm@reddit
Are you doing paid PR for the police here? Seems like it.
bright_sorbet1@reddit
It's not 24/7 though is it?
They use it in crime hot spots. It's not in your house. It's not in your street. It's not in schools or offices.
It's not even being used in most public places.
Couple that with the irony that most of you will happily accept cookies and tell Facebook what you had for dinner, it all sounds a little tin-foil-hat-esque.
bluegrm@reddit
Itâs not 24/7 yet. I donât use Facebook. Meta doesnât have copies of my ID. But they want all that.
This is all a slippery slope to complete corporate and government surveillance.
LambonaHam@reddit
If you're being monitored, by definition your privacy is reduced.
vonsnape@reddit
say that last sentence out loud. several times.
Mahoosi@reddit
Preach
Mahoosi@reddit
Communisn 101
Heavy_Practice_6597@reddit
The effectiveness is the issue. If they didnt work, I wouldnt care.
gretchyface@reddit
They make more mistakes recognising racial minorities, so it's yet another tool of casual systemic oppression at the Police's disposal. Fits right in with their already ingrained racial bias.
Ok-Chest-7932@reddit
Its also a case where the police's fear of being perceived as racist has actually been beneficial - implementations of facial recognition have been scrapped specifically for having a higher black false positive rate. The same thing caused the Southport attack too though, so there are pros and cons.
Ok-Chest-7932@reddit
Tbf it has to be effective to be dystopian. If it doesn't work it's going to feel like a clown world parody, not a spooky speculative drama.
I don't see a lot of dystopian movies about a guy who gets picked up for a police interview and then it's really obvious he's not the one they're looking for and the court rejects the case because a history of bad false positives has created a high bar for prosecution and the guy goes home inconvenienced but not ultimately in danger.
It's only scary if the detection is good enough that the officers and legal system feel fully confident they've got the right guy.
Remote-Ad5853@reddit
youâre presuming a 100% precision then?
Nobody claims to have that: You canât just ignore false positives in your proposition, thatâs entirely fictionalÂ
FitSolution2882@reddit
I think the over reliance on "stats" in the first place was insane. Most people don't give a shit about stats if they don't feel safe in their environment. Police need to be forced into walking the beat again and engaging with the community rather than sat in bloody vans like this (yes, I realise many of the system operators may be civilians but that's still part of the budget gone).
BeersAndGym@reddit
Yeah but thatâs not entirely the way to look at it. If youâre a criminal wanted for a crime more serious than shop lifting and youâre aware of a facial recognition camera in an area, youâll avoid that area. Thus, making the area safer
plates_and_tapes@reddit
What happened if it's a child racist? Or a suspected terrorist? In your opinion at what point does the crime become too low to warrant it?
Legal_Alternative258@reddit
You're telling me the police are so shit they need to park a van in a town centre with cameras on it in the hope of spotting a suspected terrorist or "child racist"?
Lmao. The funny thing with extreme arguments like these is they completely ignore the fact that if there's a terrorist wondering about it's already well past man with a van.
LambonaHam@reddit
The police are famous for their incompetence.
bright_sorbet1@reddit
Huh?
You expect two police people to know the face of every single wanted criminal in the country? đ
Legal_Alternative258@reddit
How do you think they got on the database in the first place, bud? Come on, think about it.
If someone is on a facial database as a terrorist, it's pretty shoddy work from the police and intelligence agencies if they need a man with a van to help find them.
AussieManc@reddit
Child racists are the worst
Jimny977@reddit
They often grow up to be adult racists Iâve heard, unconfirmed of course.
YchYFi@reddit
I hear you're a racist now father.
LambonaHam@reddit
Do I have to be racist? Only I'm a bit busy with the farm right now.
LambonaHam@reddit
Would that be children who are racist, or people who are racist against children?
untakenu@reddit
Yeah, but how often do we hear about a terrible crime happening (terrorism, rape, paedophilia) and the police say "this person was known to us" after the fact.
I don't trust they would do anything if Bin Laden walked past.
That doesn't necessarily make them a bad idea, I just think the police are woefully ineffective already, and this is just a bit of theatre.
YchYFi@reddit
A child racist. I laughed.
Mr_Blott@reddit
The child racist get a good talking to about acceptance and tolerance
LambonaHam@reddit
Especially if they're not actually going to arrest the shop lifter.
budgiebirdman@reddit
Depends how you define effective - if you ignore false positives resulting in people being stopped or even arrested despite not having done anything then yeah for the next six months before criminals wise up and don't go near them so that the only people being stopped are innocent then yeah, they kinda sorta are.
irissun23@reddit
Completely dystopian
Worth_Ad8675@reddit
Invasion of privacy to the law abiding citizens, The criminals are wearing face covering and balaclava so it defeats the point. Unless you ban all face covering including balaclava and religious wear, these face recognition should not be legally allowed.
Clean-Slice9228@reddit
If youâve done nothing wrong aka you arenât wanted, then why on earth would it bother you. Youâre an idiot if you think theyâre scanning your face and somehow then linking it to a secret database theyâre building on you. That is not how police systems work. If you have a problem with this then you are an utter moron
MrNightmare23@reddit
Literally 1984
fraser1010@reddit
Complete government overreach. Who the fuck are they to know where i . am 24/7 ? All in the name of safety? More like they want complete control of the population.
rod-my-dog@reddit
Ahh yes. Government overreach yet I clicked your profile and youre on government assistance.......
bright_sorbet1@reddit
24/7 đđ.
You think there's a facial recognition van in your home babe?
EfficientTitle9779@reddit
No but theyâre fine with the private companies collecting all their data in the home though lol always the same with these people.
repfsm67@reddit
Biometrics and Data are different, when these are combined which they can he using AI then it gets worrying.
bright_sorbet1@reddit
Your phone unlock is often stored biometrics, your passport, going through airport security, the government has lots of details about the way you look, age height, birthday etc.
Not a single murderous regime has needed facial recognition and biometrics to control a population and commit mass genocide.
It's just such a stretch from security to ultimate population control. Especially in the UK where we have very strong human rights.
repfsm67@reddit
Phone unlock is optional some people only use passcodes, even then it has been proved(im pretty sure) your facial recognition is only stored on the phone. Having a passport is voluntary, travelling internationally is absolutely fair enough though.
You are confusing tools that can be potentially be used to occasionally surveil you to constant surveillance on the streets. I am not worried about the UK government currently committing genocide with aid of facial recognition right now, that is a stretch.
Also, there isnât much laws/regulations on facial recognition as it stands.
Privacy is at your own discretion, some may go as far as staying off the internet etc. This should be up to person.
sideshowrob2@reddit
If you live in a city you can't leave home without being on cctv. How long before "plugging it all into palanteer's AI" is "cheaper and more effective" than having humans watch it. It used to be conspiracy theory, now it's the flick of switch away.
bright_sorbet1@reddit
And? Why would I care if AI has data on me walking down a pavement?
I take it you don't have a smart phone then? Or any social media accounts? Or a credit card or Google account or netflix? Or a passport or driver's license? ...oh, you do?
repfsm67@reddit
arenât just on vans though??
ramakitty@reddit
They already know this from your phone.
Which-World-6533@reddit
You know you can turn your phone off, or leave it at home.
It's not illegal. Yet.
Ok-Chest-7932@reddit
And exactly what proportion of people who don't like the idea of facial recognition are actually doing that?
Yeah, you can, but nobody does except when they're specifically planning to go break the law.
Which-World-6533@reddit
I leave my phone at home plenty of times.
Doesn't mean I'm off to rob or murder someone.
How society has fallen.
ramakitty@reddit
One day this'll be seen as evidence of premeditation.
sobrique@reddit
Pretty sure it already is. Almost anything you do that is 'anomalous' prior to a crime can be used to claim it was premeditated.
lambdaburst@reddit
They still need a court order to obtain that information, and they need a valid reason to apply for a court order.
This is different.
Mediocre_Painting263@reddit
They don't?
They'll know where you are for maybe 30 seconds when you're walking about in town. In which, there'll be about 10 council-owned CCTV cameras which've been watching you for about 2 hours.
Moreover, this scans a known database of wanted criminals. It is not logging data for anyone else (partly because it can't - you think they got a data centre hidden in that van?). So more accurately "Computer scanned my face once, didn't match me with a criminal, and binned it".
daneview@reddit
Technically the vans dont record any of that info, any face not on the "wanted" system is immediately deleted.
That said, the issue is that its only a moral switch to alter that
sobrique@reddit
Honestly that's less the problem, than who decides who's on the 'wanted' system in the first place?
I mean, someone with an active warrant? Sure. What about people who may have been in the area of a crime, that the police would like to talk to?
What about people from overseas that may have links to terrorism, but haven't actually done anything yet?
etc.
Whether or not it's recording and storing is IMO broadly irrelevant, as long as there's someone ethical in charge, and .... if there isn't, it's also irrelevant for a completely different reason.
Crazy_Bake_6841@reddit
Itâs only in busy areas by the looks of it and who knows how effective it is , if they push too far you can guarantee on pushback
I_ALWAYS_UPVOTE_CATS@reddit
I mean, it's hardly 24/7 is it. Unless of course they tracked your phone, which they can already do regardless of this van.
repfsm67@reddit
It will be 24/7 though more or less when it is implemented in all cameras everywhere.
bluegrm@reddit
Not quite 24/7 now.
Final_Tree8386@reddit
It's already made errors in recognition. Absolute disaster of a thing.
pho-tog@reddit
Why does our opinion matter?
Live-Independent-416@reddit
Its difficult because we dont want to be watched but then its really efficient at identifying targets which im not against because i dont want those people in my community. Cant expect a police officer to remember every face of criminals on the run from each corner of the country.
But again.. i dont like the idea of being watched
JCBlairWrites@reddit
Set aside any feelings I have about the police or current government, agreeing to or accepting this also means agreeing to or accepting the collection, collation or storing of that data (your face, your movements and behaviours).
That will no doubt be housed by a private, third party company.
One day, under circumstances we can't guess at right now, they'll have money worries and someone will offer them a wedge for that data (your data). We will lose control of it and it could be used for any purpose. Ask anyone who agreed to give their DNA profiles to the Genealogy sites that are now selling that data off for god knows what.
Disagreeing with this kind of data collection isn't protecting criminals, it's protecting ourselves from security lapses in future.
Emilyx33x@reddit
I understand the issues people have with it and fundamentally donât agree with it. But personally, with the mental capacity I have left after work and home life⌠knowing Iâve done nothing bad the government can use my details against me for⌠I donât care.
If it comes to light the data is passed to private companies, that is different
Vinegarinmyeye@reddit
As someone who has worked in tech for the civil service, the government is REALLY bad at doing tech things.
So they outsource it to third party companies.
Who invariably fuck up, and VERY rarely face any consequences for the fuckups.
I think the surveillance state thing is a move in the wrong direction, but to be honest I'm kinda less concerned about the government oversight rather than corporate arseholes making a fick up of it while walking off with ÂŁmillions of taxpayer's money.
I suppose it has always the case.
How the fuck Capita and G4S continue to be awarded contracts, and the senior leadership not be in prison, is beyond me...
"Oh hey. We gave you this project and you nicked all the money AND fucked it up so badly that people died... Have some more money and fuck up these projects too...".
Minority-KY@reddit
UK in a nutshell...
People: Crime is high, we want the police to do something about it.
Police: Does something about it.
People: Not that.
DariusStarkey@reddit
Disgusting. Great for catching the dangerous criminals, not so great for the 99.999% of people who want to go on a walk around their local area without the police state automating personalised surveillance and constantly watching them. It's nice to feel unobserved when it's on your terms.
ThatBlockyPenguin@reddit
BOOOOOOO! Same with stupid id checks online
NeverCadburys@reddit
"You are being watched. The government has a secret machine that spies on you, every minute of every hour of everyday." It is dystopian, and it's exactly what the great sci fi novelists were warning about.
Here's my issue with it - mistakes happen all the time, and deliberate manipulation of data happens all the time, and bias happens all the time. And that's before we get to this reliance on AI.
We've seen what happens with racial profiling and racists police officers even in the UK, and we know how common police brutality is. Apologies and acknowledgement and "lessons to be learnt" mean nothing if you've had your head cracked open, arm broken or killed because the police basically beat up someone they thought was a suspect, and worse, you've not even done anything wrong. Just because you may look similar to someone else, or the computer has given the wrong information. The next stage will be completely AI dependent, no review, no personal involvement, but it can't even spell raspberry correctly.
Now arguably, I know saying we're heading into a Minority Report situation seems like an over reaction, a hysterical and delusional response to what is essentially right now a few cameras around the place and police ready to swoop in when they find a criminal or see a crime take place, but we're frogs in boiling water. This IS a possibility, and whilst it might not actually happen, once it does, it'll be too late to stop it. Because we've let boundaries of privacy be erased. If we go around letting the default be, treat us all as criminals you're waiting to catch, we can't be too surprised when 5 people all of similar build, facial features and attire get arrested and harmed. And I really feel like the people who think Facial Recognition software is absolutely fine think the mistakes that happen to other people, and worse, absolutely can't happen to them.
Besmirching_Badger@reddit
Not really. Pre crimes have been becoming more and more of a thing. We've also started more and more criminalising things that are potentially used in crimes. Consistently pushing back the point at which criminality occurs and expanding the scope of the law. The government seems to think they can just ban crime, because they're a bunch of morons.
NeverCadburys@reddit
I refer to you the above comment that has replied to my comment in just the way I knew some people would.
Ok-Chest-7932@reddit
Just carrying a knife is a crime now, that's definitionally pre-crime. Treat everyone as if they're imminently about to murder someone, even when the knife is blunt and Legend of Zelda themed.
adsm_inamorta@reddit
Calm down, this isn't the US. The police aren't going to jump out the facial recognition van and shoot you just because.
Authorities have been making mistakes and abusing their powers way before technological advances. Racists will be racist regardless of what's at their disposal.
BugAdministrative683@reddit
Imagine if we had a government like the current US government..
koyliMeld9003@reddit
Person of Interest - first aired in 2011, but never more relevant than right now. đŤĄ
Squidgepants@reddit
I feel somewhat uncomfortable and feel as if I am being observed to a degree that I find perverted, because our country now has a ever increasing surplus of people raised to hate our way of life and therefore choose to kill us
PinkSheeparkour@reddit
1984 shit
Tiny_Garlic5966@reddit
What are we looking at here?
Rombelteis@reddit
You know what! Let them do! I'll do whatever as I please anyway, who's gonna stop me? I'll be the one fighting the system and win! /s
The_Chef_Queen@reddit
That it should be banned and whomever invented it and whoever decided to implement it, along with everybody involved in implementation, should be in jail for life
Connect-Hold5855@reddit
I remember when all western news outlets would talk abt was how much surveillance china had and that we'd never become like that and here we are
Awkward_Squad@reddit
My opinion? One word - Palantir.
appletinicyclone@reddit
It's Bad. If we want Chinese style ai surveillance we better have 5g internet, cheap houses and guaranteed jobs with stipends enhanced by the profits of AI and delivery drone businesses
AbjectBug759@reddit
What is it actually being used for? Most of the absolute plebs doing stupid shit are doing it out in the open.
I don't think the problem is recognising criminals, its giving people a reason not to act like absolute animals.
buttersismantequilla@reddit
Hate it, even criminals who are simply walking to their motherâs houses have a right to privacy. We will become the 2nd most surveilled country after China instead of the current 5th. Where will it end?
AdvancedAnimal7539@reddit
we're acting like they can't already do this. facial recognition on CCTV has exist for a long while now.
semorebunz@reddit
i dont trust it not to be abused somehow
if theres so many wanted crims wandering the streets then i would ask why are they wandering free in the first place
Swift_Rz@reddit
And when caught, soft punishments or not enough room to process. So what's the point.
iffyClyro@reddit
Say your son or daughter gets sexually assaulted in a supermarket toilet, perpetrator is captured on CCTV but otherwise unidentified, nobody recognises them and they arenât known.
The CCTV images can be fed into this technology and it can pick them up even weeks or months later.
AdMaleficent6813@reddit
Yes and that's the perfect use for it.
You've picked a very specific scenario with very specific characters that nobody would argue with. Pedo? Check, sexual assault? Check, victims are the readers kids? Check.
But what if the crime is political? What if it's poverty related?
I think a lot of people just don't trust the people who use it to use it morally.....and that's just in 2026. Who knows who will be in power in 2036 and this sort of monitoring will be the norm as we just let it happen 10 years prior when the world was a different place.
I always think this when people say they want to go cashless. All fun and games when there's rules to force banks to protect your money. What happens in 10 years when a government might be in power that might abuse that? You can't go back to cash.... because it doesn't exist anymore.
MaleFeministActuary@reddit
Exactly correct. These draconian measures are not there to protect innocent people from sexual assault.
MaleFeministActuary@reddit
People simply don't believe that arresting rapists is a priority for the police forces of either Britain or America, as we can see from various topical news stories.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
Or it might flag someone completely innocent as the technology has done many times in America and make someoneâs life a living hell. Just depends if you subscribe to blackstones ratio.
GradeAffectionate157@reddit
Happens very rarely, this technology has advanced a lot in the last few years.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
What a great unsubstantiated claim. Plenty of evidence of it failing spectacularly in America so maybe letâs not introduce it to the criminal justice system.
GradeAffectionate157@reddit
Itâs already in the UK, and just because it happens often in America, doesnât make it the same here. South wales police have had zero false positives since about 2018 I believe
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
Yes they have had zero false positives because the CofA struck down that facial recognition trial as a breach of Article 8 ECHR. They have since implemented a much smaller scale system with very robust checks and have declined to say what % false positives have been flagged.
GopnikOIi@reddit
This has happened here too.
Pick_Up_Autist@reddit
It's happened innumerous times before this technology ever existed, this doesn't solve the problem but it's not creating it either.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
It makes the problem more likely to occur. Itâs been proven time and time again that the police, prosecutors and even jury think âscientificâ evidence is virtually infallible.
JamesW14@reddit
Name one time.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
Iâll give you more than one. Birmingham 6 on the basis of a dodgy test for nitroglycerin. Equally Judith Ward was convicted of the M62 bombing on the same basis.
Sally Clark was a successful city solicitor before she was convicted of murdering her two infant children based on the junk science of SIDs and dodgy statistics. She never recovered mentally and drank herself to death.
Basically everything before the CCRC nowadays is junk science. It only gets worse when you move across the pond to America.
JamesW14@reddit
The birmingham six sounds to me like corruption within the Police caused the convictions through forced confessions and faked evidence. These are things the Police simply cant get away with nowadays.
The Sally Clark case is very interesting and im genuinely shocked to hear that she was convicted based pretty much on statistics alone. Albeit still some error forensically not to identify the real cause of death for one of the children.
Alas, these were both some time ago. We now have as you said the CCRC, video evidence of pretty much everything, as well as the IOPC and PSD. Along with AI evidence which would likely provide even more accountability hopefully preventing further cases such as these.
Is there any more recent cases, specifically to do with identification, as is the general concensus that AI will mostly be used for this?
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
You are arguing in bad faith. Look at Lucy Letby currently, many eminent figures in their respective fields have voiced concern over her conviction. I havenât read up nearly enough about it, nor can I begin to understand the scientific basis of the evidence but I think itâs clear the conviction is unsafe and a new trial is needed.
Glad-Advantage8254@reddit
đ¤Śââď¸
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
Very insightful and useful. Do you have any substance to add?
Glad-Advantage8254@reddit
Why would I bother? You've made up your mind based on what other people think of a case you haven't read about. You're not worth offering any substance to.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
I have read about the case extensively. I am a lawyer however not a scientist nor statistician so I canât ever hope to understand the nuances in the evidence offered. I can however say that I believe the conviction is unsafe and the case should be sent back to the crown court as the prosecutionâs evidence has been so undermined that there is reasonable doubt surrounding Lucy Letbys guilt.
Glad-Advantage8254@reddit
First you haven't read nearly enough, now you have read extensively. Cool story bro. đ Told you, not worth offering substance to. Have a good one.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
Oh I get it, you just donât have any substance to add and are too dense to understand anything. Russian troll farms working overtime today.
Pick_Up_Autist@reddit
You were arguing that AI software would make mistaken convictions more likely and keep giving examples that had zero AI involvement, bad faith is rich. God knows AI can suck but we need to wait and see before judging this single use case.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
No I wasnât. I was arguing that supposedly âscientificâ evidence is treated as infallible when it very much isnât. The commenter I responded to is blindly defending this facial recognition when they have clearly no experience with the justice system.
Pick_Up_Autist@reddit
Well it's weird you're calling AI recognition scientific evidence then, that's just not terminology I would associate with it.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
I quite frankly donât care what terminology you associate with it thatâs how it will be viewed by the court.
JamesW14@reddit
It definately isnt scientific evidence at all. So this argument doesnt really have anything to do with AI and the posts actual question.
Still its a separate interesting debate hence why ive involved myself.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
It is scientific evidence. You canât have a Turnbull facial recognition identification.
Pick_Up_Autist@reddit
Forensic might be the word you're searching for.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
Thatâs great but not how the courts refer to it.
JamesW14@reddit
Ah yes very famous case that ive never looked into before.
It pretty much relied on scientific and circumstantial evidence for a conviction that based on my limited knowledge im unsure in my opinion if its proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Still I imagine the decision was swayed massively by the harm that had been done, in this case many babies deaths.
I think this could suggest an over reliance on scientific evidence which could have wrongfully convicted a woman, or on the other hand could have been the crux to put a woman away who had the potential to cause the deaths of many more babies.
I guess it depends on what you value more in this case.
A conviction made on a "better safe than sorry" philosophy.
Pick_Up_Autist@reddit
I don't think that's necessarily true, I also don't think AI cameras are the scientific evidence they're speaking of, more like DNA etc.
JamesW14@reddit
The courts surely would be able to view the footage. In the end itd be up to them to decide not AI.
This is a basic human right to a fair trial.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
Are you aware how long it takes to get before a judge? Are you aware of the damage to your reputation and livelihood from a criminal charge?
JamesW14@reddit
Yes I am well aware of that.
This is a scenario that could still occur without AI ao hold no weight in an argument against it.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
Mashing an underfunded justice system with dodgy facial recognition is not a great combination. The fact that a miscarriage of justice could happen anyway isnât a great argument in favour of introducing a famously error prone system to the criminal justice process.
JamesW14@reddit
Is it famously error prone? Anything ive ever used with facial recognition has never made an error.
Maybe im out of the loop a bit but ive no reason to think that a government backed facial recognition system would be dodgy in any way.
If there are famous examples of AI recognition systems getting it wrong please let me know Id like to learn about this.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
Just Google it. Itâs all over the news in America.
JamesW14@reddit
So its led to some wrongful arrests. The same as misidentifying through a witness or through CCTV footage (obviously less likely).
Maybe its not quite there yet but if they can improve it which im sure will be done at the rate were going I still hold the opinion that AI has its place in Policing.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
I agree but currently itâs a recipe for disaster. I donât doubt that AI could make phenomenal efforts to draw links in cases the police wonât see, aid with document management ect but until its error rate is functionally 0 it shouldnât go anywhere near a courtroom
JamesW14@reddit
I think youre missing the point and I agree wholeheartedly about the courtroom.
I honestly couldnt think of what AI use could be had in a courtroom.
If its for ID it can be verified by a human as there should be footage saved.
No courtroom is ever gonna entertain the fact that AI has IDd somebody without any evidence to back it up i.e video.
Its not a witness it is a tool. The same as CCTV footage.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
And your experience of the criminal justice system is?
JamesW14@reddit
Trust me, I have plenty experience with the criminal justice system.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
Iâm sure you do, probably inside the dock. What experience do you have?
JamesW14@reddit
I work at ALDI
Maximusjacksamuss@reddit
I mean, that is why we have due process. A person can be misidentified by ai or people. The important part is to then investigate, not just use the identification to press charges.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
I agree but with two caveats. Humans are accountable, this system isnât and your statement carries the presupposition that due process itself is not a living hell. The police can hold you without charge for 96h, longer for suspected terror offences. Even if you are brought before the magistrates they may be persuaded that the technology is enough to remand you into custody before trial.
Maximusjacksamuss@reddit
Very good points. To use facial recognition we need a level of competency within law endorcement and the judicial system that I simply don't believe is there.
It could be used effectively, but we're seeing time and again that ai is being used as a decision maker, rather than an often incorrect efficiency system.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
I agree. Whatâs to stop some overworked officer believing the system is infallible and recommending a charge to the CPS? Whatâs to stop that same CPS caseworker charging you? Whatâs to stop a magistrates court on a busy schedule recommending you be remanded into custody before trial as the facial ID has flagged you as a notorious criminal?
PeppercornWizard@reddit
The police officer and prosecutor and magistrates will all look at the actual evidence and take its reliability into account before making an actual decision, presumably.
The same as when any member of the public makes an identification.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
âPresumablyâ. If that system worked perfectly we would never have a miscarriage of justice. Iâm sure the Guildford four, Maguire seven and Birmingham six will love to hear how well the system works.
JamesW14@reddit
No system will ever work perfectly. Youd think after thousands of years of human history, society and government people would realise this.
Humans are not perfect, so if AI isnt perfect either then atleast its already at the baseline.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
Better ten innocent people are imprisoned than one guilty person walks free? That seems to be your mantra.
JamesW14@reddit
Never said anything even remotely close to that and never even voiced my opinion there.
I was merely stating a fact thank you.
Born-Statistician817@reddit
Hahah you are funny. Literally smth simular happened in US very recently. Facial flaged a wrong guy. Took them like 2 weeks to figure out that the guy in their custary looks completely different
PeppercornWizard@reddit
What happens in the USA is completely irrelevant to law enforcement in the UK, completely different system with woefully inadequate training and backstops compared to English & Welsh law.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
I must tell that to my client who reported her husband for domestic abuse in 2023. She recently got a trial date for September.
September 2028.
PeppercornWizard@reddit
I think you can blame years of underfunding and cuts to the courts and adjacent public services rather than the legislation behind it, but I am unsure how that particular case relates to the use of facial recognition or American vs UK law enforcement practice.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
Exactly the system is underfunded. It makes mistakes and takes a long time to correct them. Facial recognition technology has a known propensity to make mistakes. Mashing dodgy technology with a system on its knees is a poor combination.
Born-Statistician817@reddit
I am sorry but UK legal is even worse and even slower
LambonaHam@reddit
Not to mention having your name and picture plastered all over the media (print and social).
vinyljunkie1245@reddit
The problem is that if someone is falsely identified and arrested they have that arrest on their record which could affect job prospects, housing prospects and more. Not to mention being locked up until your identity is confirmed which could take hours.
iffyClyro@reddit
No. Being arrested is not held on your record and it will not affect anything you do in future.
Tattycakes@reddit
Is there not a type of arrest that isnât on record? As in âwe were told it was a 6â5 person in a polkadot hat and you fit that description so we arrested you to check it out, but then it turned out that it wasnât you so youâre completely innocent and off you goâ?
PeppercornWizard@reddit
An arrest that doesnât result in any charges is unlikely to influence anything⌠itâs not a âcriminal recordâ, though obviously the police have to keep a record that itâs actually happened.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
But you could lose your job from being detained so long. It will damage your reputation in the community ect
PeppercornWizard@reddit
Thatâs the same for any arrest though? People have to be detained sometimes, itâs inevitable. Thereâs quite a robust necessity test for authorising detention under the police and criminal evidence act and I can see any custody sergeant authorising a detention based on a âfacial recognition IDâ alone.
Itâs very rare for anything other than the most serious offences to have extensions to 36hrs, let alone beyond. The extension is not automatic and requires an application by the investigator (first to inspector, superintendent, and eventually magistrate) where it has to be justified and weighed up precisely because of the potential to impact on a personâs life.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
Robust? The criteria for detention is to preserve evidence or obtain it via questioning. That could apply to anyone.
I appreciate the bad whistle stop tour of PACE Code C but I am already intimately aware. Ask anyone involved in criminal justice would they have faith in the system to catch a false identification like this. I doubt anyone would answer in the affirmative.
TachiH@reddit
So the fact the government are getting rid of jury trials for just the Judge should be more worrying. One lazy cop who doesn't double check and you could be locked up.
iffyClyro@reddit
Facial recognition is not sufficient in its own right to making someoneâs life âa living hellâ.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
Tell that to people sitting for months in ICE detention camps solely on the basis of a mistaken facial recognition match.
iffyClyro@reddit
I donât think ICE have any Jurisdiction in England, do correct me if Iâm wrong.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
Poor argument.
bright_sorbet1@reddit
We aren't the US though. We have far superior human rights, better trained police and our most unhinged politicians are still more measured than a lot of republicans.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
But unlike in the US those human rights can be solely taken away by parliament. We have no constitutional court to protect them.
Mdann52@reddit
In the US, many are being taken away by the judiciary reinterpreting decades-old case law.
A constitution stops being accurate the moment its written or amended.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
Congress could write a new constitution and the US courts arenât infallible but those are a far stronger system of checks and balances than we have in the UK. A simple majority in the commons can undo centuries of rights and the best bulwark we have is the lords delaying it for a year (maybe) and the courts wagging their finger strongly at it.
viridianvantage@reddit
People can be sat for literal years under investigation without charge which takes a massive mental toll, just due to false or mistaken allegations. Facial recognition is fucking absurd and dystopian
TachiH@reddit
They nearly shot a collage age kid because the red packet of crisps he was eating was misidentified as a gun.
If it can't identify the difference between a square and a gun you expect it to identify people well? đ
bright_sorbet1@reddit
This is no different to police or victims misidentifying someone.
We have. Robust legal system and human rights to ensure every person gets a fair trial.
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
The legal system is certainly robust but that doesnât mean itâs just nor efficient.
JamesW14@reddit
Exactly this.
semorebunz@reddit
all the wrong uns wear a face covering anyway and if they dont already this will encourage it
Ok_Toe_3124@reddit
Yeah. Black hoodie and a ski mask is all it takes!
CTC42@reddit
Are we really once again at the point in our culture where "won't somebody think of the children" is considered a knockdown argument for any policy or practice of the public sector?
Unrestricted, comprehensive surveillance of all people in all contexts at all moments of their lives would pretty much guarantee any of these hypothetical predators could be identified, so should this be the target? Or are there other things that matter and are worth considering?
IndividualCurious322@reddit
CPS can, will, and has refused to press a prosecution in regards to sexual assault even when clear CCTV is available and the culprit is known and identified.
Also, toilets are not allowed to have CCTV inside the stalls.
MapSufficient6677@reddit
Say you were a nuclear bomb and perhaps you were about to explode, but me (an abusive murderer) stopped you from explodingâŚ.wouldnât that kind of justify me being a murderer?
Do you see how little that made sense? Youâve pulled out a complete anecdotal scenario to justify a flawed system that somebodyâs rightly highlighted could be abused. Address his actual point instead of side stepping it to an unrelated scenario. We have the facilities and venues to investigate murders and abuse, theyâre actually being utilised as we speak. Youâre posing your scenario through layers and layers of subjectivity to justify your opinion
2Nothraki2Ded@reddit
I agree. I assume you'll be happy submitting a specimen of semen to the police so you can be ruled out of all future sexual assault cases?
TachiH@reddit
They cut police numbers by dramatic amounts and instead of hiring more officers they hire Ai companies from the US to watch us all.
I remember as a kid seeing officers walking the streets, now your house can be robbed and they just pop round once its all over to take a statement.
jaffster123@reddit
The police are too busy knocking on people's doors for posting hurty words on the internet.
Your house is burgled? Two officers will come and take a statement then give you a reference number and some smart water or something.
You hurt the feelings of someone on the interweb? 6 officers in a van turn up to arrest you, they ask questions later in an interview/interrogation.
MaleFeministActuary@reddit
The hurty words meme sounds like a right wing talking point, but there are three important reasons why people across the political spectrum should be concerned
Once it is normalised, there is no reason why a right-wing extremist won't arrest people for left-wing speech
It proves that the police are more concerned with enforcing social order, which is what internet rabble-rousing could do, rather than protecting individuals from crime.
It demonstrates that the police are in many cases unwilling to tackle violent offenders, the average edgy right-wing poster is a middle class, White fat guy who is probably not, on an individual level a threat to anyone.
mcmanus2099@reddit
With rising population, increasing national debt, budget cuts to public services this sort of thing is only going to have one outcome. It will replace policing.
AI cameras everywhere, scanning everyone and everything. An algorithm hooked into this and ppls phones, social media data. AI directing what doors to knock and who to arrest with police doing less investigation and more carrying out decisions of AI. Assumption that courts will work out when AI gets it wrong as the safety net.
This isnt to help police, it's to take over essentially. AI minority report.
MaleFeministActuary@reddit
The problem most people have with this is the trust in the intent of its use. If it was done to more efficiently detect and arrest paedophiles and terrorists and to prevent offending before it occurs, a lot of people would be accepting of it.
Increasingly it is apparent that the police do not exist to protect the safety of innocent members of the public, but to uphold an unjust and oppressive status quo by acting as thuggish enforcers of an increasingly authoritarian state.
JamesW14@reddit
I disagree and believe that this could only help Police.
Specifically with finding people (be that criminals or missing people) and finding evidence. Once someone is found or an offence is identified it should then be up to the Police to confirm that the AI was correct, rather than blindly following it.
For example, if AI spots a crime on CCTV, it can be reviewed by an actual human to verify.
Nikuhiru@reddit
In theory itâs a great idea but letâs be honest. It will become a case of just accepting whatever output the AI gives rather than using any form of oversight.
There have already been cases of AI misidentifying people accused of shoplifting in the US.
Chances are this will also affect minorities more than white people. Darker complexions will be harder for AI to identify especially in darker environments. Look back to Microslopâs original Kinect. It struggled so badly to detect anyone darker than a rich tea biscuit.
mcmanus2099@reddit
Right, so needs a human to verify. What does that look like in practice?
A police officer at a centralised desk in a sort of VAR room in Milton Keynes viewing footage from other parts of the country and double checking AI decisions? What do you think the rate of rejection of AI decisions is likely to be?
You can throw in theoretical checks by humans all you want but ultimately it will be AI driving the decision making.
JamesW14@reddit
Currently without AI, we have CCTV with CCTV operators employed by the local councils.
For a current day example, CCTV sees some fighting in the high street and Police are deployed. Everyone involved is now control and the Police now have time to gather details and obtain the circumstance of the fighting.
The CCTV operator who initially saw the fight rewinds the footage to see who was the instigator and who was the victim (if any).
The operator identifies the instigator (now suspect) and Police make an arrest whilst dealing with the other person as a victim.
Change "CCTV sees people fighting" to "AI sees people fighting" and you have the exact same scenario but AI has identified the need for an initial Police response.
This means that cameras not being used by CCTV operators can still be monitored by AI thus identifying more incidents or suspects and the subsequent need for a Police response.
mcmanus2099@reddit
What you are describing is not at all how CCTV is being used in the majority of cases.
CCTV is a retrospective tool in 99% of cases it's used.
It captures footage all day from multiple angles, far too much for humans to monitor. There is no logging of faces, no tracking of movements live. Most CCTV footage never gets looked at.
A crime is committed and reported. A police officer visits the locations that hold CCTV, decides the time range that needs reviewing. They, retrospectively, look at this footage for evidence of the crime or perpetrators and bag as evidence any they find. They will use multiple CCTV and other sources of information to identify perps, track their movements around the crime and identify them.
This is retrospective, human led investigation. There is not the number of ppl available to monitor cameras in the way you are suggesting happens.
But AI can, and through face recognition it can. And with AI we could move to the sort of live decisions of camera footage you are referencing. This cannot be human led, it's just not possible. AI can flag for review but when presented by AI with facts and suggestions most police will agree and go with the AI. It doesn't matter what checks you put in if AI is presenting the decisions, it's a bit like sending a ref to review a VAR monitor, in most cases they'll defer to the algorithm.
JamesW14@reddit
You've proven my point perfectly. AI can monitor more cameras meaning that more incidents can be caught so that we agree on, good.
There are currently camera operators who work 24hrs a day monitoring CCTV. As weve already established, theres not enough to check every camera at every hour, but there is enough to check footage which AI has picked up on to verify if the AI was correct.
Thus creating an effective system for identifying crime, which allows for a more effective Police response, whilst not solely relying on the judgement of AI itself.
mcmanus2099@reddit
You can talk about verifying AI is correct but that just won't be a decision point. Most things AI flag will get waved through and agreed with. As implementing technology is Sport and AI in other areas have shown, humans just defer to the technology. It's actually brave to reject what it thinks and act on initiative. Especially as humans will face manpower losses through budget cuts and be responsible for more and more prompts from AI.
You have to stop with the, "it's for a human to review/decide" because that's not the direction of travel. What AI decides will be agreed with 99% of cases. So effectively you are handing policing to AI.
We know AI makes mistakes. We know it doubles down on mistakes. We know it racially profiles. AI isn't simple automation, that's the point. It's not looking at something binary and identify yes/no. It's using a data model of terrabytes of data farmed from various sources - crime stats, news articles, social media, and making a decision based on its thought process sifting through that elusive dataset that no one in government or police has a clue what's inside.
It will tell the police to stop and search more young black men when a knife crime happens, it will prejudice against those with criminal records already. It will get things wrong and in doing so seriously erode principles of innocent until proven guilty.
JamesW14@reddit
This is entirely speculation, and an unlikely outcome at best. At worst its pure disregard for any pre existing laws, policies, and foundations of what policing already is.
This is not an argument, its fiction and made up ideas that would belong in a film.
AI cannot tell Police to stop search, it has nothing to do with racial profiling and nothing to do with prejudice or opinion.
Policing and law has nothing to do with sport (though id like to see any examples of ai making decisions within sport and being "waved through" as you say).
It is not simply something that would be waved through it would have to be verified and have supporting evidence. Evidence which is to be heard at court as is one of your basic human rights to a fair trial.
The scenario ive suggested is a perfectly useful scenario involving AIs use to help with Policing and thus protect society and the general public.
What you are suggesting is completely besides any argument and only makes it clear that you have no basis to your argument and just want to whine about things on social media.
mcmanus2099@reddit
Well this is pretty telling isn't it. You can't argue the facts, there is nothing I outlined here that is different to what I said in early comments that you replied to saying the AI dystopia 'sounded like a great system'.
But without any room left to go you resort to just ignoring what I wrote and calling it fantasy. The fact you are hard at this despite running out of reasoning means you're a shill, either indoctrinated or paid social media pro AI lackie.
Either way, there's no point engaging with someone who once he's run out of argument just makes accusations up.
JamesW14@reddit
Thats a very contradictory comment. I said youve no basis for your argument, youve resorted to accusations and insults.
And still made no real points...
bright_sorbet1@reddit
It really won't.
mcmanus2099@reddit
Ofc it will. With more crimes being spotted and perps captured from facial recognition, fewer by cops walking round streets when the government ask the Police Force to cut ÂŁ10m and reduce numbers guess where the cuts will be.
This is how AI is going in all jobs, to think police would be different is deluded. This isn't some great conspiracy but when you introduce technology to do something humans are doing, prevent crime, identify criminals then under financial pressures (which police are under) it's natural to cut the least efficient (humans). Which when occurs cumulative over a decade or two will transform society into a camera monitoring and AI policed state where police feed information in and get conclusions out that they follow. Effectively AI policing and officers carrying out it's orders.
JamesW14@reddit
This sounds genuinely like a great system. Cops are still needed to get hands on and carry out arrests etc so thered still be a great need for them.
Meanwhile AI takes some of the workload putting less strain on the cops themselves.
I dont see any downside. AI cant tell cops to make arrests, they make arrests based on evidence. If some of that evidence is footage obtained by AI then great thats a massive help.
4444444vr@reddit
I believe UK has a contract with Palantir. which is a Peter Thiel company used by the US govt. zero chance it isn't abused at some point.
alstroemeriaXopuntia@reddit
People who get bailed and don't show for court. Grainy CCTV. Literally hundreds of reasons.
LuckySmudge@reddit
The first role of any citizen is to not trust those in power. Always hold them accountable. This will be abused.
As Orwell wrote: âPower is maintained by controlling the past, manipulating language (Newspeak), constant surveillance, and breaking the human mind.â Constant Surveillance.
Kaiisim@reddit
This is the issue.
In a perfect world it's great! You identify the baddies quickly.
The issue is - who decides on who baddies are?
The answer is - probably the actual bad people who are ruining society will control it.
PhantomPilgrim@reddit
Same people that stopped jews in the" Aldwych area of London and threatened with arrest on 13 April.
Mr Falter was told by police his presence was causing a "breach of peace". "
He was wearing the jewish hat... Same thing happened dozens of times during the recent drama about people publicly arguing about wars happening on the other side of the world that they had zero power to influence except getting brownie points on social media. And that was only reported cases. And that was only about one single issue completly irrelevant to the vast majority of British citizenship
sarsaparilla-sodapop@reddit
also live facial recognition has higher incidents of failure with non-white parties
Armodeen@reddit
We have seen how easy it is for a malevolent government to take root from what is happening in the US. This sort of stuff makes it super easy for them to oppress the populace.
sobrique@reddit
If the police are doing this now, you can be sure the intelligence services were doing it a decade ago.
ExcitementKooky418@reddit
Peter Sauron Thiel with his Palantir
flow_yracs_gib_a@reddit
People need to remember that we are always 1 bad vote away from having the worst people ever in control. All law should be voted with the idea that should target bad people but that bad people canât use these law. Itâs the same thing with Id requirement on website, on paper itâs a great idea to protect people, but on principle itâs horrible and higly dangerous and should never have been put in place... all these freedoms we lost in the last few years to fix a non existent problem that was not fixed is crazy... Cctv is mostly fine if they are just sitting in a secured server until someone need to check something, but now with introductions of AI tools and face recognition we are so close to being daily tracked everywhere we go and whatever we do and itâs not like we can leave our phones at home and thatâs fine and all for the majority of people, until the governement is rotten and people need to protest but the liberty we lost are too far and we get round up before even leaving our houses because they could follow our websearch and messages .... very scary time we're living in...
repfsm67@reddit
The mission creep is definitely what Iâm worried about.
cozywit@reddit
Police have DNA and biometric databases? Has that been abused?
Police have Bulk communications data / phone & internet records? Has that been abused?
Police have access to standard CCTV footage? Has that been abused?
Police have access to IMSI catchers? Has that been abused?
Police have access to Predictive policing / data analytics? Has that been abused?
Police have access to Stop and search powers? Has that been abused?
Police have access to Social media and digital surveillance? Has that been abused?
I think the answer is, they have access to a wealth of incredible tools, yet we're seeing less and less prosecution and community justice.
Shops getting robbed. Harrassment. Drugs. Everything feels worse and worse. My own little village, we'll be lucky to get a police car after hooligans ride round all night on motorbikes with no plates. Feels like all these tools and they're doing a worse and worse job.
Then those they do catch, get slap on the wrists. ÂŁ20 victim surcharge ... for glassing some in the pub.
TheNinjaPixie@reddit
I wonder if something targeted is going on in the case OP posted, when did you ever see 20 policemen except at a sporting or music event?
JamesW14@reddit
Tbf the vast majority of wanted criminals wandering the streets are wanted for prison recall or fail to appear. So theyve been released on probation or on bail and have broken that probation or bail by not showing up for court.
They are never usually wanted for long...
I also dont know how a system like this could really be abused. The cost of tracking everyones movements for the sake of selling your information for example would surely outway the profits.
Therefore id assume the system would be used for tracking certain people e.g. those with criminal convictions.
EpicEpicnessTheEpic@reddit
Our court system is in a shambles that's why.
darybrain@reddit
Almost 180 were released from jail by accident in the past year. They didn't escape, they were let out.
spikewilliams2@reddit
Where do they get this list of wanted crims when they refuse to investigate so many things?
chrisxxviv@reddit
We've seen the "justice" system fail so many times now, that I can't help thinking it's intentional, in order to push for more and more surveillance "for our own safety".
Salty9876@reddit
Because fuck all cops to chase them down, also the police forces are not great at talking so you can cross borders between uk forces and it will take a while for you to be found
odysseusnz@reddit
Dystopian barely starts to describe it. Not to mention it being racist as hell. Yet here we go sleep-walking into it.
The-Truth777@reddit
I didn't know this existed, I don't like that at all
Square-Patience8357@reddit
I have no issue with facial recognition at all. In any capacity.
Own_Eye_9396@reddit
Given thereâs zero policing of shoplifting, theft or petty crime generally, itâs just state voyeurism at this point.
1zeewarburton@reddit
Donât think itâs good even if it to reduce crime. Should not give our privacy away so freely. Might as well be china
Wonderful-Medium7777@reddit
This is capturing everyoneâŚitâs a âmoveâ so the people will get used to surveillance under the guise of âcriminalityâ âŚjust like the banning of social media for the âsafety of childrenââŚsmall steps leading us into more dystopia.
Saw_Boss@reddit
I'd argue that the way social media has been abused, the way advertisers are everywhere, the way you can't even be sure who's posting is real or whether they're an actor with an agenda, it's already dystopian.
Every single post, every comment, you have to question if it's legitimate or an attempt to manipulate. Which means they're all effectively illegitimate.
I'm not sure attempts to limit exposure can be classed as more dystopian.
Wonderful-Medium7777@reddit
I agree except for your last sentence⌠the limiting of social media for the âsafety of childrenâ is not for the children, itâs âcomplianceâ for everyone to give their birth dateâŚitâs on the way for the digital ID Government want to force upon us.. I wonder how many people are aware of the consultation on Gov.uk open for the people to have their say on national Digital IDâŚit ends on the 5th May. Were we notified, was it advertised, did we receive a letter informing us? If we donât stand up and oppose this, then we will be pushed into more dystopia. Such important matters affecting our lives and Thwt of future generations should be transparent, but I expect no even a million know about the consultation for the people.
dommiichan@reddit
the UK doesn't have the greatest track record when it comes to data security... so what happens when the database gets hacked? or when the private company contracted by the government goes into administration?
I'm all for a safer society, but the organisations in charge of our safety leave a lot to be desired
-captaindiabetes-@reddit
Scanned faces aren't stored
dommiichan@reddit
what are they compared against?
-captaindiabetes-@reddit
A watchlist.
dommiichan@reddit
and you trust a government agency to not store scanned faces ...?
Saw_Boss@reddit
Any one with a passport or driving license has their photo on a government record. That's going to be the majority of the country.
BalthazarBulldozer@reddit
It's fine until you stand for something, or against something
OMGItsCheezWTF@reddit
Or until the law changes.
There have been times in living history where a social norm went rapidly from being legal to being demonized to being oppressed, sometimes violently.
There have been states where the descent from peace into "you once associated with a now banned category of person so you're going to disappear as a reactionary dissident" has been fast paced.
I have no issue with it being used to enforce the laws we have now, I have issues with this data existing in perpetuity where it could be misused against me in future for my currently law abiding activities.
Ok_Bat_686@reddit
Too many people are comfortable in the moment and think all the bad stuff they read in history or on the news is too far away to matter. We were a fairly shitty, arguably evil empire just 50 years ago. It's not exactly far fetched we can change into something just as bad or worse over the next few years.
OMGItsCheezWTF@reddit
Yeah people think the status quo is fixed, unchanging, it can change far more rapidly than they realise.
I actively avoid giving political opinions online, because while they are fairly mundane, I can't predict what might be considered bad in the future.
BalthazarBulldozer@reddit
Well put
Sausage-Chap@reddit
The very same people who think itâs 1984 authoritarian that you canât use racial slurs in public or vandalise immigrant shops are all for this.
deadmazebot@reddit
"mass facial recognition" to help the struggling police force scan so many faces, should be a none issue
my issue is if said data being retained and sent to a central database system for long term monitoring. That I do not like
Bob_Mcshane@reddit
And if you try to avoid one of these expect to get collared. The fuzz will claim thatâs reasonable suspicion. Absolutely disgraceful situation.
VehicleWonderful6586@reddit
Given the vans are parked all day with the engine on I don't think they should be diesels
Juiced_Up_On_Royds@reddit
My take is that if you aren't doing anything wrong, the law shouldn't bother you. Iâm tired of the 'my freedom' argument being used as a shield for antisocial behavior. Whether itâs rampant speeding or general rule breaking, Iâd welcome more oversight if it meant actually holding people accountable. Itâs sad that we need a surveillance state to manage basic common decency, but people have proven they can't regulate themselves. Most people are just cunts!
jeanettem67@reddit
If it worked 100% as it's meant to, I wouldn't mind. However, it doesn't. If you get erroneously matched it takes forever to fix. We've already seen cases where private company facial recognition has mistaken people for others. As it's a private company, you are looking for a civil case against them to get access again after they ban you thinking you are someone else. Sucks TBH.
mrmattyuk@reddit
If you haven't done anything wrong why worry
JMthought@reddit
Absolutely dreadful.
FerretPale7661@reddit
Well Iâm not planning on becoming a wanted criminal any time soon so Iâm fine with it.
V65Pilot@reddit
I have a very large beard, wear dark glasses and keep my ears covered. Those things must love me..... My gait depends on whether I've managed to hurt one or the other of my knees/ ankles/ hips...
AndyLees2002@reddit
I donât care because Iâm not a scrote
anangrywizard@reddit
Remember the Cambridge Analytica stuff that came out in 2016 and that was just with online dataâŚ
Alone_Use9066@reddit
Donât care , to be honest .
sf-keto@reddit
Seems like a lot of time, manpower & expenditure overall to catch at best, what, 1 person?
Significant-Bed375@reddit
Will take a few months and then it will be as normal as being filmed every minute of being in public, sadly.
Dansden181@reddit
These pictures are from the malls in Basingstoke.
m3tr0g33k@reddit
Tech can always be wrong. I've made programming mistakes. So have you. Do you bet your or your family or you neighbours' accusation of a serious offence 100% on a junior programmer's competence? If this puts you in ANY doubt that justice may be done, then oppose the use of computer programming to replace what we have human police for. By far the majority of our police officers are the best in the world and are allowed to use their brains. If the barrier to entry to the justice system is a 'computer says maybe' then it not only ties up decent officers with huge increase in work, but may lead to a significant undermining of 'innocent until proven otherwise'. Seriously, has no-one in politics (not police or civil servants obv) ever read any sci-fi?
j_the_inpaler@reddit
If there are officers to arrest these wanted people fair enough. But a waste of money if the courts donât punish them
Dial-Appreciator@reddit
Well thereâs not enough prison spaces for a start so maybe that would be the first thing to sort out
The_Crow68@reddit
1984
WheissUK@reddit
Awful mass surveillance
Vehicle_Majestic@reddit
Well I ain't black so it's all good.
Direct_Town792@reddit
I read recognition as the last word lol
borbitthe3rd@reddit
Anyone that's says "I'm not doing anything wrong" you aren't doing anything wrong yet. All you need is a the wrong government in
VMS_UK@reddit
Im glad to see thereâs a hell of a lot of people here against it. Surprised me tbh given.. well.. Reddit. Fuck them and their cameras, I do not want to pay to be spied on even more, and itâs a slippery slope to more authoritarian policies and enforcement of said policies.
Eszharen@reddit
I'd recognise Basingstoke Malls anywhere
LewisMileyCyrus@reddit
you should apply to be one of the cameras
VMS_UK@reddit
Theyâd have to be racist to get the job done
Distinct-Lion4658@reddit
Anyone else reminded of Watchdogs? This is like the beginning of ctOS or whatever it was called in-game
kevio17@reddit
This and the (amazing) series Person Of Interest
UselessDood@reddit
I really loved it ngl (though, I haven't quite finished the last season because life been lifeing)
koyliMeld9003@reddit
Oh, you must, itâs a great final series!
kevio17@reddit
It ended perfectly. And yet I feel I was set up for a spinoff that never came
koyliMeld9003@reddit
I think Jonathan Nolan and Lisa Joy were committed to following the AI journey through 'West World' so probably they didn't have time ......I don't know if there was any interest from The TV companies. It sounds like something Netflix might jump at though?
koyliMeld9003@reddit
Yes - my thoughts exactly.
repfsm67@reddit
Person of Interest is so good
Charming-Objective14@reddit
Each episode would start by saying you are being watched every minutes of every day.
LambonaHam@reddit
#TeamSamartian
koyliMeld9003@reddit
Person of Interest is brilliant, and a little bit underrated, as CBS never really marketed it properly.
Equivalent-Muscle446@reddit
1984
D3mentedG0Ose@reddit
Aye, and Iâm convinced the current government are using it as a how-to manual
normanriches@reddit
Yes it was quite a good game, some of the elements like remotely operating traffic lights and bollards were clever.
Distinct-Lion4658@reddit
It was very original for its time, even nowadays. I really enjoyed the game mechanics
melianreality@reddit
Iâm not British and just stumbled upon this sub (Iâm Canadian) but this looks utterly dystopian. It looks like something out of 1984. I pray that your guysâ country will see reason and re-assert privacy rights and that my country wonât go down the same path
PerformanceOk8279@reddit
All be wearing burkas by then
qwerty_basterd@reddit
Terrible for anybody with a massive face
CAN-IDIOTS-GAME@reddit
i literally have nothing to hide so nothing to care about
the police can take my devices and use cameras with facial detection whenever they want to
it's to help prevent crimes and catch criminals, not take away your freedom or anonymity so unless you are a criminal or have been involved in any criminal activities, you havn't really got anything to care about
Nimble_Natu177@reddit
Sleep walking into 1984 and being gaslight into thinking its a good thing, awful and shows such an insane lack of third order effect thinking from the average person.
NoRun6253@reddit
Been going on for decades now.
British being British we just bend over and accept whatever is done to us, itâs such a shame seeing as how free we were in the 90âs.
Nimble_Natu177@reddit
At least we never got ID cards like Blair wanted to implement after 7/7, using a tragedy to sneak authoritarian measures through is particularly toxic.
VMS_UK@reddit
Theyâre still pushing for it, him and a few others have big investments in that area so you can believe it will happen, just a matter of when.
NoRun6253@reddit
Donât need them, weâve got bank cards, phones, social media, driving licenses etc.
Again, been going on for years.
And no Iâm not a tinfoil.
matt_wales86@reddit
Other countries have I.D. cards. You can even fly on some. If you haven't travelled and don't drive, an acceptable form of I.D is difficult to obtain.
Nimble_Natu177@reddit
Not even a tinfoil take, its just basic logic.
I_ALWAYS_UPVOTE_CATS@reddit
Another day, another redditor who clearly either hasn't read or understood 1984 claiming that something resembles it.
Nimble_Natu177@reddit
If you think automated surveillance has absolutely nothing to do with the critique of society presented in 1984 then I really have no idea how I can even have a discussion with you and I question your ability to understand media at a basic level.
I_ALWAYS_UPVOTE_CATS@reddit
So, my ability to understand media at a basic level is being called into question because I didn't explicitly acknowledge one of the most surface-level features of the book - the existence of state surveillance. I thought it went without saying tbh but if that's the level of your takeaway from the book then no worries.
LambonaHam@reddit
It's more that you actively denied it.
I_ALWAYS_UPVOTE_CATS@reddit
Where? I don't see that part of my comment.
LambonaHam@reddit
The entire comment...
I_ALWAYS_UPVOTE_CATS@reddit
Yeah. Every time this comes up there's some redditor fancying themselves as an intellectual for saying that 'more cameras = 1984'. It's so simplistic and on here is just a lazy way to farm karma since it's the one aspect of the world described in that book that most people know. There is more surveillance in the Oceania of 1984, but surveillance by itself is not a sufficient condition to imply a slide towards that world.
In a different comment I outlined the need for safeguards, but pointed out that the technology by itself is not necessarily a bad thing. Obviously safeguards need actively maintaining, but the idea that this technology will instantly and automatically be used for nefarious purposes is just as fallacious as the 'think of the children' argument used in favour of them.
LambonaHam@reddit
The constant surveillance in 1984 is literally what drives the story.
Increased surveillance is absolutely "a sufficient condition to imply a slide towards that world".
TheScarletCravat@reddit
No-one thinks it's going to be instantly used. They're just aware that creating the kind of apparatus for the state is only beneficial if you're confident there's no chance of the state abusing its power.
I_ALWAYS_UPVOTE_CATS@reddit
But then what's to stop some future hypothetical evil government just building the stuff anyway even if we successfully oppose it today?
TheScarletCravat@reddit
I don't subscribe to that kind of nihilism, so that argument doesn't pass muster, sorry.
mordecai14@reddit
It's literally one of the core themes of the book. Mass surveillance of everyone's movement and speech is how they maintain such total control, it's why it's virtually impossible for any sort of revolution or change to actually occur under that system. It's not just a surface level theme, it's pretty much the largest pillar holding the story up.
I_ALWAYS_UPVOTE_CATS@reddit
Yeah, the whole system. We're just talking about some cameras and people are acting like that means we're going to be like Oceania next week. Germany is currently growing their military again, something which they also did in the 1930s. Does this mean we're going to have another war against Germany? No. It doesn't. Because one element that happens to be similar to a different example does not mean that the whole system is going to be replicated. That's what I meant by 'surface level'.
Beeblebroxguy@reddit
You are not as smart as you think you are
MilesGates@reddit
Another redditor pissed off at reddit yet will never leave reddit and will continue to annoy himself and make sure other people know how annoyed he is.
Nobody asked.Â
I_ALWAYS_UPVOTE_CATS@reddit
And nobody asked for your opinion on it either, yet here you are. We should all find hobbies.
Former-Homework-7833@reddit
Third order? Most people cannot even fathom second order..
mybigtweet@reddit
I'm all for it
wordshavenomeanings@reddit
You didnt get 1984
Herrad@reddit
Mass surveillance is a central part of how a society like Big Brother's Britain could come about. Normalising thinking about what the government knows about you in the population allows the next steps towards thought crimes
If you think automated surveillance has absolutely nothing to do with the critique of society presented in 1984 then you either didn't understand the book or haven't paused to consider how that society might come about.
untakenu@reddit
Yeah, what the fuck? That was a pretty core, blatant theme of the book
wordshavenomeanings@reddit
The core theme of the book was a totalitarian system which fed disinformation to control the people.
It is not about cameras.
It is summed up in the most crucial line of the who novel.
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
LambonaHam@reddit
The surveillance is literally the core theme of the book? It's why they have to hide 'seditious' writings, and sneak around to a flat above a shop to have sex.
Nimble_Natu177@reddit
Holy crap, this guy thinks 1984 is a right wing book, holy shit, Reddit leftism is another species.
Living_Board_9169@reddit
And how can the government exert such powers over thought? Constant monitoring
You canât just disregard the tablets in the homes and constant surveillance as if that was just window dressing. That explained the logistics of keeping everyone in line 24/7. The risk or implication that someone was watching your every move
You canât have 1984 without the surveillance
EfficientTitle9779@reddit
Weâve had mass surveillance for years though?
Nimble_Natu177@reddit
Thank you, most Redditors don't even have a GCSE in English Literacy, this really shouldn't need to be explained.
samuel199228@reddit
I don't agree with it just comes across like mass surveillance and state control
horrgakx@reddit
I got nothing to hide. But criminals will avoid marked police patrols.
AssistantDue5817@reddit
Having been wrongly arrested a while ago, spent over 20 hrs in a closerfobic cell , humiliated, embarrassed, then let go without even an apology. Is this where our council tax is going? Still lose sleep over this.....made me very ill!
Winter_Cattle_2478@reddit
Probably looking for domestic/foreign terrorists.Â
You guys have alot of aspiring doctors and astronauts.Â
caesarbagel@reddit
I remember a few years ago the media was scaremongering about China doing this. Now weâre supposed to just accept it?
qiDuck@reddit
Not good. Since there's been arrests in the US that were mistakes and arrested the wrong person because of the ai
Idiotsandwhich1994@reddit
No real issues.
I think it will be used for evil like 10-15% of the time by the rich and powerful, like the Epsteins, Andrews etc.
But the other 85% it'll be used for good, or atleast I hope.
The 15% is inevitable in anything.
snookrcom@reddit
Honestly I wonder what people think the end game is for the people they say are tracking our movements etc? Like, for what? To what end?
CaffeinatedMiqote@reddit
I don't doubt their effectiveness, but we shouldn't be treated as criminals by default in exchange for just a bit more safety.
Alive_Alternative453@reddit
Say all the people happily posting on Facebook and Reddit..... News to you, you've already given them everything they need
dervlen22@reddit
1984
ChampionshipComplex@reddit
GOOD
FFS there's enough people moaning about a lack of police on the streets any longer - In the modern world it's no longer productive to physical hire people to simply stand every few streets on the off chance that they 're needed.
So MORE CAMERAS - I dont see how anyone could possibly give a fuck. It's not like they pick and choose which people to look at, and it's essentially the same as the police looking out a window and watching you.
I was on town recently with my son - and saw a terrorist grabbed off the street by unmarked police. They got a bag over his head, plastic bags over his hands, cable tied him and then dragged him off while other police with machine guns stood watch - and they were gone in the space of a few minutes.
I would much rather that level of overwatch and professionalism than feeling like we've given over the streets to the druggies, thiefs.
I think it should be mandatory to show your face in shops as well if things are going to happen like the recent swarming of shops to steel phones and electronics. Bring down the gate and lock them all in, or only allow unmasked people in the shop in the first place.
Gloomy_Revenue878@reddit
Fascism tbh where does it end are we China now?
lostandfawnd@reddit
Another reason the high street is dead.
What's the fucking point anymore.
FeDUpGraduate87@reddit
Didn't it catch too many black criminals and therefore was called racist? đ¤ˇââď¸đ¤ˇââď¸đ¤ˇââď¸
Vast_Yogurtcloset937@reddit
Wow, why is there no support for this? Surely getting criminals off the streets at a cheaper cost is great. You all already carry your phones with GPS and camera. If someone is determined enough, there is nothing that canât be hacked. If the government doesnât want you for political reasons or anything else, this live recognition camera is the least of your worries. If you are in deep you should be off the grid already.Â
Clean-Noise8197@reddit
I'm so vain, I love it
RandomUser22487@reddit
Iâve got nothing to hide so Iâm fine with it. In my opinion itâd be more likely to make towns safer which can only be a good thing.
mufcroberts@reddit
Can see a balaclava trend happening real soon
duxwontobey@reddit
Even if the current government doesn't use it to be hitler, a future one will.
Background_Promise_3@reddit
It all boils down to the 2030 agenda and totalitarian control of the public, eventually 15 min cities and absolutely no privacy whatsoever
Sea_Huckleberry_7790@reddit
Difficult question.... A lot of wrong'uns cover their faces so maybe if they look at people where there's "no face" found it may be beneficial. The amount of doorbell cameras, private CCTV covering public areas, people talking videos/pictures and public-office CCTV these camera's don't really make much of a difference.... I'd actually prefer being picked up on this than some random person who decided to film the road I'm walking down
Sorry_Bass_6578@reddit
Letâs look at the bigger issue like the rich and powerful committing crimes openly and absolutely nothing being done about it. Why is the grip of the law tightening for the poor but all but useless to the rich? Why arenât we tightening the grip there?
liarstraits@reddit
orwellian. doesn't make anyone safer, implies that civillians are there to be controlled and not there to be protected.
zooko9001@reddit
We truly live in a dystopian hellscape
Kurauk@reddit
What I struggle with is that all of the global surveillance has actually lead to anybody feeling safer or actually solved the terrorism communities across the UK are suffering from. We've literally lost our privacy in exchange for very little.
jlangue@reddit
Chinese are miles ahead, so expect much more.
robjn3@reddit
I understand people's views with issues on AI and facial rec that could flash up somebody's whole life history in seconds, we are at a point where we have forgotten that their is always a right and a wrong and as long as you are not doing something 'wrong' then you should be ok, unfortunately this is very inconsistent within our policing in the UK at the moment.
miller1873@reddit
This just the start of it,soon we will end up like China and have social credit scores
Dmonik-Musik@reddit
The totalitarian tip-toe creeps ever forward.
Longjumping-Try-9356@reddit
Mass surveillance by stealth.
Some people will say if you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear. Personally I take the view that if I have done nothing wrong then the state has no business monitoring me. I apply the same standard to HMRC and their AI powered supercomputer. If they suspect that I am not being entirely honest then they should go to court and get an order to access my banking, they should not have full access to my accounts by default.
Xancrazy@reddit
Oh no, the criminals are going to be caught.
ooSPREEZoo@reddit
Everything you do can be tracked, purchases, phone calls, Reddit posts. To sit here and preach liberty and freedom are at risk is nonsensical at this point as most willingly participate everyday.
If even one violent offender or one child predator is stopped from committing a crime because of these vans it's a win in my book.
ThoughtContagion1994@reddit
Fucking 1984 in this country.
GroundbreakingRing42@reddit
Police can't win.
The forces ask for more money, so they can train to higher standards and employ more people, are told my the public and politicians they don't deserve it because they are "corrupt".
They try and use technology to help surgically identify suspects and its also seen as a negative.Â
Truth is if you truly belive that theft/robberies and shoplifting is at an all time high you should be fully on board with a massive cash injection into all national police forces so they can have more presence.Â
Identifying a suspect with this technology still doesn't put an officer in the right place and right time.
I share the concern of most that I straight up dont trust how this data will be used/stored but I'm not sure what else the police are left to do?
sladecutt@reddit
Against it. Better to fix the problems of why they would need it in the first place.
laughingdoormouse@reddit
I have one thing to say and that is the book 1984 by George Orwell. Well ahead of its time. If youâve never heard of it then I suggest you go and look it up.
Impossible-Corgi4041@reddit
Massive overstep. I do not like where this os going one bit. Chinese style social credit system incoming
Loakie69@reddit
Just watch Minority Report
jlelvidge@reddit
I think if you havenât done anything wrong, then you have nothing to hide or to worry about. We have all been watched for long enough on cctv previous to this
Slight-Strategy-5619@reddit
This is totally unacceptable. Itâs clear we are not free citizens. They want to know everything about us.
Due-Beginning-8388@reddit
People are so paranoid about cameras watching them but they have a camera staring right at them when they are on their phone that listens and tracks you also
chrischarge69@reddit
If you own a Ring doorbell they already share footage with authorities.
RaveyDave666@reddit
I donât care Iâm not a criminal đ
Trash_Panda_1983@reddit
I think it's going to be used for nefarious reasons. Our movements can be mapped, declared unnecessary and then restricted. Ai can then be used to restrict us, give us curfews and control our finances. Well that's their plan anyway. The wombles operating the systems are making a rod for their own back.
KatnyaP@reddit
How do you identify the facial recognition cameras and vans?
TallmanMike@reddit
Arguably no different to an Officer with encyclopedic knowledge of criminal suspects stood out in the open, recognising people.
They'd be fine if the law prohibited Police from saving records of negative scans and compliance were transparently audited so the government doesn't have trace of peoples' movements but I suspect that's not the case.
ANPR already creates national records of vehicle movements so it follows that faces so or shortly will follow suit.
That's when it gets especially Orwellian.
Tope777@reddit
They say it only scans for faces in the criminal database and every other face scanned is deleted shortly after by the system.
YEAH RIGHT
Puzzleheaded-Day4945@reddit
It depends if I've been involved in a Bukkake or not.
13W00dy13@reddit
Why would you care if you had nothing to hide?
R33Dazza@reddit
Personally Iâd say unless you have something to hide then I donât see any problem if it saves some of the attacks that have happened from happening again Iâm all for it if used correctly
Additional-Wrap9814@reddit
In the olden days, the polis would just wander around and if they stopped someone they knew were jumping bail they'd nick them.
This is the same process but allows fewer police.
I struggle to be bothered when Reddit and Google know my inside leg measurement and Amazon can track me through my neighbours ring camera. The Chinese government can already tap into those cheap WiFi cameras used by most businesses on my high street.
Yes state scary etc etc. But do me a favour. They'll never be organised enough for mass repression and if reform get in we're screwed in many many more ways.
Lourrylove@reddit
My opinion is if you have nothing to hide, you wonât care about them.
Fromasha@reddit
Facial recognition and cameras everywhere + complete reliance on AI models (going to happen) = welcome to Kafkaesque Orwellian nightmare
Lord_Andrews@reddit
Didn't they have to stop it in one area because it was catching too many black guys? 𤣠but it was doing it's job sooooo......
JordiLyons1234@reddit
I think itâs a joke when there letting illegals into our country by the masses. Screw them.
babbadeedoo@reddit
No likey, gov consistently lie to us. The same gov wants you to do as your told, by them, whether you like it or not.
Not to mention the greed that runs throughout government. Human nature...đ¤ˇââď¸ im not sure!
StupidGenius91@reddit
Yeah, it's wrong and invasive and against our human rights. They'll make excuses as to why it's not and that we're in a public space etc etc but they're selling the data, holding the data and most worryingly they're misusing the data and making mistakes through using it and I believe it's the start of something worse to come
Ok-Bed-5199@reddit
well if youâve got nothing to hide then I donât see the problem..?
Automatic-Pie-111@reddit
Reminds me of a series "person of interest " doesn't seem so far fetched now.
AzraelBlade@reddit
Absolutely no. The politicians cover their own shit they do for decades. They want this totalitarian state so they can escape the gallows.....
_No_Use_4_A_Name_@reddit
Just do what celebrities do and wear a realistic silicon mask
funnyrunnybabbit@reddit
it makes me worry for women a lot, which iâm not seeing much backlash for. her stalker is a police man? (not to mention DV rates among policemen), sheâs doomed.
Tinga8@reddit
Just wear a mask... Can't spot you then
Mondaycomestoosoon@reddit
I think bukakke should be discrete âŚ
valcech@reddit
I got nothing to hide
DryTower9438@reddit
I donât actually care because Iâm not a shit head up to no good. If the âstateâ want to watch my weekly trip to Aldi, and the odd visit to Greggs, thatâs up to them.
Heavy_Practice_6597@reddit
Fuck off surveillance state. Genuinely we are reaching a point similar to the level of surveillance in Xinjiang, this giving any government (left or right cunts), the ability to use it against us.
BeneficialHippo2826@reddit
It wonât be long until AI is used to stitch up an innocent person.
Darkgreenbirdofprey@reddit
I don't like it. It's authoritarian, and you'd be naive to think that you can trust the boys at the top to just do nothing with the information about where you're going, even if you're innocent.
Steelhorse91@reddit
Itâs a human rights breach. No one going past consented to having their face scanned into their system.
Dd_8630@reddit
They're effective.
They're also dystopian and can be abused.
But there's no escaping the grim fact that there are dangerous criminals and career criminals, and this tool will keep us safer.
IgneousJam@reddit
Loads of surveillance but canât solve any crimes ⌠at some point Iâd like to see the return on investment figures there.
Auris-57@reddit
They're looking for people who complain about the illegal rapists on Facebook
-Absofuckinglutely-@reddit
If you're not a wrong 'un, there's nothing to worry about.
Pretty_Artichoke_137@reddit
If thereâs nothing to hide then thereâs nothing to be afraid of! đ¤ˇđ˝ââď¸
National-Design8134@reddit
No No No Hell No.
I'm gonna wear a mask more often
Dry-Armadillo-507@reddit
Criminals getting caught will never not be a good thing, but it is starting to feel a bit much, I think this is the maximum without crossing the line
cookiesnooper@reddit
Feels shitty to know that they assume that you are a criminal until proven not to be one.
Enough_Telephone@reddit
If you have nothing to hide I donât see a problem
ShAlMoNsHaKeYjAkE@reddit
Convicted criminals 100%
Law abiding folks, no need.
Dry-Abrocoma-7463@reddit
I personally don't care. Imo,the government has everything on you they need to know. We live in a world where our locations are being pinged every second (smartphones), most of us use socials which has our photos, our location, our jobs, our hobbies, our friends and family, our schools, when we go on holiday/to events. We order things from many websites to our home address with our bank details. I completely understand why it pisses people off and how ut does infringe our rights, but I personally think we're way past going back
Helpful_Emergency810@reddit
Don't care. Was a recent victim of crime and it was solved in less than an hour because of cameras being everywhere. 20 years ago I would have had no chance. Makes me feel safer tbh knowing that wronguns will be found if they step outside.
PhantomPilgrim@reddit
It's like having reddit mods outside their mothers basements
YouCantPunchEveryone@reddit
i live in London and always have. I don't mind because ig maybe it means police can see where I am and for the most part, they are not who I am hiding from (my family are who I'm hiding from :))
EccentricDyslexic@reddit
Asap pls.
-DAS-@reddit
If it solves crimes, great; if it undermines our personal liberties, no ways. Where do you draw the line?
Vapordude420@reddit
Seems bad
Strafe_Helix@reddit
You e got nothing too be afraid of if youâve done nothing illegal
1Pawners@reddit
If youâre worried you can always walk around in a balaclava
Ok-Chest-7932@reddit
I thought they banned balaclavas? I've been walking around in baclava cos of it.
CowDontMeow@reddit
Until they perfect gait recognition and you now need to throw stones in your shoes or make one shoe slightly taller
lambdaburst@reddit
Cover your face, walk backwards everywhere, then get stopped for acting suspiciously and get entered into the big surveillance database anyway.
Zsythgrfl@reddit
Sounds like a plan to me. Until...the government creates a ministry to regulate the way we walk. Sounds silly, i know.
Balaquar@reddit
https://policeprofessional.com/news/pedestrian-fined-for-covering-face-during-facial-recognition-trial/.
The_Growl@reddit
Just following orders.
Prince_John@reddit
I share the general disquiet, but that link says he got a fine for disorder after he got aggressive and made threats to the police, not that he was fined for covering his face.
Raunien@reddit
Why was he stopped in the first place? It's not illegal.
lambdaburst@reddit
I mean, he was thoroughly provoked for no reason.
Balaquar@reddit
Apparently got aggressive after he was stopped. But why was he stopped?
Rocky-bar@reddit
That's fucking shocking
ShirtedRhino2@reddit
Or shake your head side-to-side really fast
Ok-Bag3000@reddit
Rubber dinghy rapids bro
cursed_cucumbers@reddit
In case they're taking pictures
sqlsql@reddit
Barry says your face comes out blury
ManInTheDarkSuit@reddit
You'll just look like a bunch of Sufis on speed.
Mccobsta@reddit
There's some stickers that help confuse them
Paranoia_Pizza@reddit
Im fairly sure someone did that (pulled their hood up or something past the vans) and the police pulled him up, made him take his hood down, photographed him and put it through their AI system anyway.
FitSolution2882@reddit
The normal ones or the "safety type" ones that allow one to ride a Surron or stolen moped with impunity?
Fantastic_Recipe2740@reddit
I donât believe it is required according to this anti visual recognition clothing company
TheDev42@reddit (OP)
Lol
mazty@reddit
Desperately needed.
You can only be against it if you have something to hide and/or don't understand how the technology works.
Har1equ1nBob@reddit
What need does it satisfy? Only the neex go control EVERYTHING. Human are not perfect and we need a bit of a grey area to get things done. These technologies are extreme and inhumane.
Nebulousdbc@reddit
Creepy, very creepy. We're already surveilled a lot, now this? Imagine a tyrannical government gets into power in the next decade, those cameras are their wet dream for tracking dissidents who don't like their policies.
Have a look into Flock in the US, they assissted law enforcement with finding a woman who wanted an abortion. Link: https://www.berkeleyside.org/2025/11/24/flock-safety-cameras-berkeley-license-plate-readers Have Flock cameras been used to prosecute people seeking reproductive health care?
Yes, there is evidence of this. Earlier this year, 404 Media reported that Texas law enforcement agencies searched Flockâs license plate data to identify a woman seeking an abortion.
Over a monthlong period, an officer with the Johnson County Sheriffâs Office accessed over 80,000 license plate records from Texas, Washington, and Illinois to try to locate a woman whom authorities said had a âself-administered abortion.â While the sheriff said the womanâs family was concerned about her health and safety, privacy experts expressed concerns that law enforcement in a state where abortion is a crime can access cameras in other states where it is legal.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation later published court records that showed Texas deputies had used Flock surveillance data as part of an abortion investigation.Â
elpablo@reddit
If a tyrannical government gets into power, won't they just deploy these vans themselves anyway? How does not having them now help?
-captaindiabetes-@reddit
That's an excellent point
CryptographerMore944@reddit
It's really not. I'm not leaving a loaded gun on the table for a madman to find just because he can get one later elsewhere. The idea of not having dystopian infrastructure now is so a tyrannical government can't inherit it and start oppressing on day one.
-captaindiabetes-@reddit
If it's not day one, but day, I dunno, 200 instead, what's the difference in the grand scheme?
Nebulousdbc@reddit
200 more days of freedom
Saw_Boss@reddit
But it isn't. You say that as though a population hasn't been oppressed through other means
CryptographerMore944@reddit
One day can change the course of history let alone 200.
-captaindiabetes-@reddit
Ok, well we can agree to disagree. Personally I'm not bothered by these cameras at all.
CryptographerMore944@reddit
We'll have to because they bother me a lot.
elpablo@reddit
What about having a gun available to law enforcement with appropriate safeguards to stop the madman getting to you though?
CryptographerMore944@reddit
The problem is when the mad man is the police man. Who enforces the safeguards.Â
Nebulousdbc@reddit
Less chance of people rebelling against them if they're deployed now vs if they're all of a sudden deployed if a tyrannical gov is in power. People will have been used to them by then,Â
elpablo@reddit
I think the term is "slippery slope fallacy"
demoralising@reddit
100% agree. A tyrannical government would just introduce them once they were in power.
TinhatToyboy@reddit
You are discussing ANPR in Texas US, not facial recognition in Basingstoke UK.
Fanjo_mcclanjo@reddit
It appears you read their comment without reading the first line.
Nebulousdbc@reddit
You've missed the point. The point is that if the tech exists then it has the potential to be used against the population and infringe on their rights. All it takes is one government to decide something is illegal then the people that say I've got nothing to hide suddenly have something to hide.
I'm speaking up against it because even though I do have nothing to hide right now, at some point the law might change and then I'm having to hide.
Otherwise_Public2579@reddit
Itâs only the guilty that should be concerned
quagaawarrior@reddit
That Big Brother is watching me.
Interesting-Scar-998@reddit
Big brother is watching you.
uberwinsauce_@reddit
NOT FUCKING GOOD.
I can see the good of it, but I can also see the bad of it. I'm not a powerful fan of my privacy being violated.
PMacc83@reddit
Nothing to hide catch loads of people with warrants
But will it open floodgates to more serve social obedience methods of control like China have in place already
3p2p@reddit
Unacceptable, we live in literal dystopian future of our nightmares. Weâre one wrong government away from totalitarian regime as this stuff is easily abused for control.
Itâs all well and good when itâs used to protect the people from crime vs paying for police work. Itâs just the flip of a switch to go so wrong. This is why it should be banned.
R4d1c4lp1e@reddit
Literally turning into Watchdogs Legion
theegrimrobe@reddit
bothers me less than the cackhanded internet "safety" stuff
lullubye@reddit
There was an American woman that got blamed for stealing even though it was a town with mass surveillance. The officer wouldn't let her see the records of her until she accepted being arrested. She got lucky because her car had a dash cam showing her just driving by the area and not stopping to steal.
Mass surveillance is only useful to those in charge.
We've had issues in my area and when we asked the housing association for cctv to pass on to the police, they refused. Yet we can't put up a camera of our own as it might catch passers by.
coopatroopa2534@reddit
Itâs nothing new. We sell our information and data for no profit every single day. The authorities know everything about you already. If you have nothing to hide, this has not affected the level of privacy you have in any way.
Wonderful-Yam-9712@reddit
Mass surveillance the ultimate slippery slope.
Dizzy-Chemistry-5146@reddit
Some people miss the times when people and their local police police officers knew each other.... Now we get half of that sort of?Â
Scarboroughwarning@reddit
Not hugely bothered.
HoneyReasonable9316@reddit
Totally for it. That said, Iâm also Clayface, so it doesnât impact me.
Ok-Chest-7932@reddit
Mass surveillance is usually associated in dystopian fiction with forced conformity, but thinking about how false positives have been going, it might actually end up incentivising people to look as different as possible so that the system is unlikely to mistake them for a criminal they're looking for.
Virtual-Target9733@reddit
Iâm moving to Somalia
Dap-aha@reddit
Theres no defensible requirement.
The legal system cannot deal with people abusing it; burglary, assault, getting terrorised in public - all too often nothing happens.
6 cars vandalised on your street? Not interested.
The family in your street why terrorise everyone else? Sorry nothing we can do
So why create the apparatus for dystopia?
BeatMeater67@reddit
George orwell 1984
inee1@reddit
I hate the way the uk's become. I cant stand the thought od my every move being recorded, every time we go to a shop they want a card more than cash, wheres it going to end. The real issue for me is how people have blindly walked themselves into this mess, lets be real tbese days people spend so much time on facebook and other apps that its almost.as if you want to be burgled, as some people.seem to put thier every move online. Years ago i was admin on a biker forum the amount of plod and goverment addresses in the log files was an eye opener, i suspect its the same with football cliub forums, a lot of forums have plod moitering them.
I tend to use this forun and my teams forums but seldom use facetube or twatter.
Asbo_Dave@reddit
Basingstoke?
RandomUser1ab2@reddit
It's fucked up and wrong
RandomUser1ab2@reddit
i am sad
TeckleBiscuits@reddit
More and more people will just go out with face coverings!! Thereâs already loads of folk going about with face coverings, it will just increase! Itâs almost second nature to the youths
FilipsSamvete@reddit
Don't give a fuck
fgnrtzbdbbt@reddit
Anything that would make it easier for a future government to transition into a dictatorship is dangerous and should not be done.
Duffy042016@reddit
I would like it. I have been attacked before and my friend's house has been burgled before. No one was arrested and I doubt the police even tried. I do not commit crime and I'm not afraid of cameras.
Glittering_Habit_161@reddit
I don't want to be on a large screen like in The Hunger Games as that's only ok in ASDA when I self check out.
Grouchy_Comedian_963@reddit
Donât mind it I donât got criminal record or anyone after me
13agman@reddit
It's ridiculous none of this shit happens anywhere else in Europe on this scale
Bonebound@reddit
Entry level dictatorship bullshit.
bettsdude@reddit
Really dont care. Im not doing anything wrong so why does it matter.
DanteLore1@reddit
Two gin-scented tears trickled down the sides of his nose. But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother.
MaxxForeskin@reddit
So is this gonna be used to catch actual dangerous criminals, or just some guy dodging ÂŁ200 worth of tax?
sharpecads@reddit
Good luck recognising me! Iâve grown a beard!
Illustrious_Fly4347@reddit
All the deliveroo drivers wear balaclavas. Gonna be interesting when summer comes
Chris73684@reddit
It's positive on face-value, until it inevitably gets hacked and / or used maliciously. Essentially the same issues with online privacy and age verification. All of these privacy topics tend to start with a good intention but in practice they fall apart and / or are poorly implemented. The cost outweighs the benefit.
ProfessorPeabrain@reddit
I don't mind the occasional facial.
AAVolta@reddit
1984 was not a manual but it's beginning to look like one
StephenG68@reddit
In my humble opinion, it'll be abused just like the anti terrorism act. Data shared with foreign security services and more retired vicars with opinions in prison.
The_Almighty_Duck@reddit
It won't just be used to identify criminals. It will be used to target people who the government simply doesnt like for things like what they say and believe. Totally dystopian and a terrible sign of things to come.
dasSolution@reddit
It's always a bad idea until someone you love is hurt, and this software helps track down who did it.
worthingtoncreamer@reddit
Definitely not a good thing, and has consequences to society that people don't initially consider. So say it works and reduces theft outside a specific shop/train station by 90% then where do the thieves go do you think?
To the next place that has no AI surveillance, then at that shop/train station the theft level rises and Whats the solution there? Oh of course, more AI cameras then it's a slippery slope where not a single square meter of urban public space is un servalled and monitored.
To add, there have been incidents in the US where these AI cameras have made errors which has led to innocent citizens being brutally captured and taken to jail.
timeforknowledge@reddit
Everyone in the UK: we hate this!
Everyone in the UK: buys ring doorbells
ItsDominare@reddit
Doesn't bother me in the slightest as I am aware I have no expectation of privacy when in a public space and I also know my face is not on any list of criminals.
Working-Business-153@reddit
Socially corrosive definitely, if you never have a moment of privacy you never develop a full conscience, after all you don't need to reflect on whether what you did was right or wrong, merely whether the everpresent watchers could construe it as wrong.
Anyone wondering why the kids are so cynical and nihilistic look no further than the open prison in which they were dragged up.
hailterryAdavis@reddit
Gestapo technology
TBD1995--@reddit
Couldn't care less. I have nothing to hide.
ArshadIqbalOfficial@reddit
Mass facial recognition raises important privacy concerns, especially regarding how data is collected and used. It might help in crime prevention, but the potential for misuse and surveillance overreach needs serious consideration.
ukmedbud@reddit
That's why half of pedestrians wear balaclavas
ProgrammerFickle1469@reddit
I absolutely detest it.Â
JosephNootNoot@reddit
"Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say." - Edward Snowden
Jealous-Chicken5439@reddit
Innocent People have been locked up because it doesn't work right
florplegorp@reddit
Very dangerous tool in the wrong hands, cost/benefit will never make this worthwhile imo
FrankTheCrank90@reddit
As someone else said Iâm not bothered by it for the premise of making streets etc safer, but itâs worrying that it could be abused
Minute_Still217@reddit
In America we call that invasion of privacy and infringement my friend
BurningAngel666@reddit
I donât break the law, so I donât careâŚ.
LiveCelebration5237@reddit
Those who trade freedom in the name of safety deserve neither freedom or safety
LibrarySoggy6644@reddit
is every question on this sub reddit a now whats your opinions question?
TheEnlight@reddit
There is nothing more dystopian than creating a database that can be used against you when you become a threat to power.
That's what this facial recognition stuff is. They'll throw every minor infraction against you when you become a threat to the powerful.
Temporary_Low7791@reddit
Generally unbothered . Im not a criminal so it wouldnt worry me
Ok-Fly3080@reddit
Wear a mask
Over_Bend_9839@reddit
Itâs fine as it is. However I work for a major regulator and the appeal for colleagues to extend their powers unilaterally is a constant source of contention. Given that, there is every chance this technology will extend surveillance to a level that is pushing what is lawful.
Rlokan@reddit
It has shown to be extremely biased
Bartellomio@reddit
Facial recognition should be illegal in all circumstances unless a person has given explicit consent. Perhaps more importantly, it should be illegal to store facial data withut consent too,
catzrule1996@reddit
I don't think AI is smart enough to do this correctly. And it shouldn't be
Eukonidor_Of_Arisia@reddit
It will be used for political control.
Gloomy_Pastry@reddit
how? please tell us your reasoning?
Eukonidor_Of_Arisia@reddit
If you need to ask that question, my explanation will be of no use here.
MMH1111@reddit
For the benefit of those of us who are a bit intellectually challenged and would like to be enlightened, please explain.
Eukonidor_Of_Arisia@reddit
Sorry, but if you fail to recognise the recurring patterns in society over the past two decades, a long monologue from me will not remedy that.
You're on your own.
Gloomy_Pastry@reddit
TWO DECADES!!! 20 years, reoccuring patterns? errm, give us a clue. and dont look up too much, the chemtrails will get into your brain via your eyeballs.
MMH1111@reddit
So, if I don't agree with what you're thinking, which you won't even share, I'm a lost cause.
Who was it who said that if you can't explain something to a bright six-year old, you haven't understood it yourself? Einstein rings a bell.
DamnedVirus@reddit
Your social credit score has gone down due to that comment.
lambdaburst@reddit
Your social credit score has gone down due to not reporting that poster to the authorities for that comment.
skronk61@reddit
What are they even wasting the money for? What problem are they trying to solve?
Ok-Vegetable929@reddit
Never seen one so pretty neutral
mattley00@reddit
Since it was uncovered that itâs âracistâ I think itâs really time we abolish themâŚ
Notagelding@reddit
There was a big police event in Milton Keynes, at the shopping centre a few months ago advertising facial recognition. Then at the same shopping centre a couple of months after, a security guard was stabbed and killed by a convicted murderer.
Salty_Button@reddit
With an increase of social media, unemployment, aspects of parenting failing, perhaps parts of schooling failing, rising poverty and to a degree immigration, I think that mass surveillance is here to stay. Not everyone can have everything yet still some seem to cherish what others have. Be it selectively personal, goods, property or plain old bullying. All these factors are not the victims fault by and large, yet it all boils down to the same thing. Each cause and effect may have different remedies yet without apprehending the assailant, nothing can be tackled to get to the truth. Even in the height of Victoriana, crime was a thing yet you still hear tails of freedom with open doors, windows, leaving things on seats and they could be gotten the next day, while those days are over a century old, the advent of social media has increased want and desires, the kind the world has never seen before. There's no short cuts to putting things right but it will take decades, communities and governance to take levels down from red amber and how low it goes, we will all have a role to play.
speechmartyr@reddit
It makes me very uncomfortable. I feel like particularly under this government they're not even trying to hide the erosion of our liberties. We don't live in China, we don't want facial recognition everywhere and we aren't just assets of the state to be managed. Were people, with hopes and dreams and families were not property. Idk about yall but I have never felt so unsafe in the street that I wished we had facial recognition
lloydsmart@reddit
They still don't do anything about crime so what's the point?
We've got people just walking out of supermarkets with trolleys full of booze they didn't pay for, fully visible on CCTV and multiple witnesses. But security guards aren't allowed to stop them and they don't get prosecuted.
We don't need more surveillance. We already have plenty. What we need is more enforcement.
jaybird5194@reddit
Donât like it at all, but the fact is is that most every town with a population of about 5000 in America already has it youâre just not noticing it yet. Got a Walmart or a Home Depot in your town you have it got a major national supermarket chain in your town. Youâve already got it as soon as you walk in the door theyâve scanned your face.
riinkratt@reddit
âSo dystopianâ like you already donât pay for a fucking license to watch TV.
Defiant-Manager-118@reddit
1984!!
Olderbutnotdead619@reddit
That they inherently racist and inaccurate and all law enforcement agencies know this. But they use them as an excuse to conduct sweeps.
Do the research then get back to me and tell me I'm wrong.
kylr01@reddit
It's pointless. They could be doing so much more with their time than sitting in a van monitoring strangers on cameras
Agnes_Wcomb59@reddit
I can see why itâs being used, especially in busy cities where it can help identify serious offenders more quickly.
At the same time, itâs hard not to feel uncomfortable with the idea of mass facial recognition in public spaces. Thereâs a big difference between targeted surveillance and constantly scanning everyone.
My main concern would be how the data is handled. Who has access to it, how long itâs stored, and how accurate the system actually is. Mistakes in something like this can have real consequences.
I think if itâs going to be used, it needs very strict limits, transparency, and oversight. Otherwise itâs easy for it to go too far.
Mediocre_Painting263@reddit
The principle is simple.
Police have faces of wanted criminals. Minor & serious offences alike. Have public crowds scanned for these criminals, find them, arrest them. It's a human version of ANPR - where plates are scanned to find those who shouldn't be driving, or may be driven or linked to criminals or criminal enterprises. In that respect, no issue. Same way I have no concerns with the amount of ANPR cameras. It's scanning for those who have done bad things, and police only care about them.
However there is a not illegitimate concern that it could be used for more dystopian measures. Especially if it starts framing itself as 'Crime Prevention' - by scanning people to find behaviours that indicate potential criminality, or intent to commit. That is where concern of mine is raised, due to an overreliance on an easily fallible system. Or a system that may be developed on flawed data, purposefully or otherwise. Where people of certain ethnic or age groups, or even wearing certain clothes, are monitored by virtue of it.
I, personally, don't like getting worked up over 'What If' scenarios - especially ones which are not guaranteed and can very reasonably not happen. I'm sure there was many dystopian 'What If' scenarios around ANPR cameras. They need to be considered and thought about, but always considered in the 'But what is happening currently, and what is the benefit?'
This is where we need to be honest about whether this policing approach is working. Are criminals genuinely being caught, or are police just getting lucky with the odd one every now and again?
Heavy-Echidna-3473@reddit
I'm not a huge fan, but if it starts actually catching rapist and murderers I'm all for it. I guess as long as you're a law abiding citizen there's not much to worry about, is there?
melon703@reddit
The UK government will not be happy until they have full control over all its citizens..... Just like Ch**a has.
Majestic_Operator@reddit
It is really starting to feel like the V for Vendetta world in the UK.
Doingthis4clout@reddit
I wouldnât mind if they sent a sizeable deposit into my account every time they sell my data
dxnnixprn@reddit
I feel safer walking in a place with lots of cameras and facial recognition everywhere and it seems to have less ocurrence of crimes. There's always the talk about freedom, but government could hypothetically see inside my house with radio signal and phone's front camera, both things that is quite useful on my daily life.
NuggetKing9001@reddit
We are sleep walking into some dystopian nightmare. If you'd said 10 years ago that we'd be getting monitored by AI face scanners just in our day to day life, you'd have thought that sounds like some intangible sci fi future hellscape. Well here we are.
Visionary_87@reddit
Don't care. Genuinely hard to care any less than I do now.
THOMMYMOON@reddit
Amazing⌠indentify and get rid of all the scum
AIX-XON@reddit
I change my face most days so not at all concerned, balaclava sales are up.
CurrentWrong4363@reddit
My own phone barely recognises my own face I think we are OK just yet
dogsandcigars@reddit
I wouldn't mind if it wasn't for all the false positives and the fact that they are working with palantir.
Vanobers@reddit
They are arresting people for holding signs with words they don't like on them
Plantir is in our NHS and other government
And this shit already has led to innocent people being wrongly arrested
Meanwhile pdf files get slap on the wrist
We are not angry enough
grumcus@reddit
Plus the problems wear balaclavas OR are infamous crackheads that donât face consequences for their incessant robbing of the local Greggs so itâs like everyone else has visual handcuffs put on them for no good reason.
wlfinsparroqhawk1969@reddit
Just another freedom weâve lost without being asked or even consulted about
trolliebobs@reddit
Personally, I like the Four Lions Anti-Surveillance technique....
Like This
Organicrot@reddit
I donât think itâll work on people who wear balaclavas, more procedures created and acted on for the wrong
PersiusAlloy@reddit
I mean all you really have to do is where a small IR emitting light attached to your glasses that runs off a small battery and your face will be hidden
Traditional_Half7328@reddit
Itâs catching wanted and know pedos so keep it coming
HenkPoley@reddit
From a foreigners view the whole of London is filled with cameras (as is apparently The Hague, just less obvious in sight). Unsure what this adds.
OddPerspective9833@reddit
It's pretty uncool
Eloisesy@reddit
police state I hate it
wang4e@reddit
The US would be worse off.
MiddleNo5285@reddit
Chatted to the policemen outside one of these vehicles recently in Cardiff:
Faces are recognised and matched up against the database of mugshots in the police national computer. If there is a match and that person needs to be spoken to by the police (ie they have outstayed a prison break, are a suspect in a crime, etc) then the police can apprehend them.
No data persists.
All in all I'm pretty chill about it. Deploying more policemen on the street and informing them with photos of people to look out for would have the same effect and be much more costly.
rdu3y6@reddit
The cops (were they really all men?) just told you rehearsed lines to feed you what you wanted to hear so you'd move on and accept the roll out of facial recognition cameras on every corner. The vehicles in town centres are there to be highly visible as part of the Home Office propaganda campaign to get people to accept being spied on 24/7. They had the same van and loads of cops set up in town near me a few weeks ago as part of the same propaganda campaign. In reality, the cameras will be hidden and the data monitored remotely.
MiddleNo5285@reddit
They were *really* all men!
Thanks for the tip anyway!
rdu3y6@reddit
OK, I just thought it was odd to refer to cops as policemen exclusively, but if they were all male officers then fair enough!
_Dreamer_Deceiver_@reddit
I'm sure the rando police person read all the TOCs, has done for diligence with the ai supplier to make sure that's the case
MiddleNo5285@reddit
To make sure what is the case?
Purple-Breadfruit541@reddit
is bad thing bad? yes, bad thing is bad
GopnikOIi@reddit
Deadset against it. I already think there's too much of a slippery slope into authoritarianism going on and I do not trust this to be used appropriately by the state. There are better ways to police than this.
sobrique@reddit
It's almost certainly the case that 'the state' was doing this well before the police started.
By the time the police are doing it, it's 'public enough' that they're not doing it as a classified project.
I mean, stuff like this can work amazingly well up until the 'bad guys' realise it's possible, and that's a lot of the reason why some things are classified in the first place.
If 'hostiles' like intelligence operative and terrorists don't realise this is possible, then they don't take precautions against it.
EfficientTitle9779@reddit
Surely the slippery slope would be police abusing power with no cameras in sight or complete lack of evidence based punishment? This is just using cameras.
Saddledust@reddit
It's not just using cameras tho, it's an AI powered tracking and recognition system. It'd be able to find anyone and trace their activities and whereabouts. Would you still want that surveillance if some authoritarian government took power? Because the system remains no matter who's in charge or what their motives are. Imagine America's ICE if they had this system there
Ok_Knowledge3640@reddit
if we all lived peacefully then sure but there are real crimes that affect peoples lives and this is only used in shopping towns who cares if the goverment knows you went in to maccies or any street brand they all have cameras anyway. this is just a quicker spotting system to actually stop and name criminals instantly. if we have to always live in fear of another scary group taking power then as british people we arent doing enough. if this stuff is used to stop 1 criminal im all for it. there is no current downsides to have this system and im sure the british public will know what to do when a crazy facist goverment comes in
mordecai14@reddit
You act like evidence is never manipulated or covered up. If systems like this are put into place, the only reason is to be abused by the people that control them. It won't end with "identifying criminals", that's just the excuse they use to put more systems of control into place.
It's mirroring the whole digital id shit too, where they use the excuse of "protecting minors" to put systems into place to explicitly control and regulate how you spend your time online, and keep track of all of it.
The ideology of the government is clear; "You'll have no privacy, we'll take full control of what you do, and you'll be pleased about it." 1984 but a warning for them, it's a guidebook.
Mr_Blott@reddit
You could argue that a lot of the authoritarianism we already have is because it's so difficult to catch criminals nowadays, and something less ke this is exactly what we need to stop us all being treated like we're guilty until proven innocent
plough_the_sea@reddit
This argument only works when thereâs a repeal of the other authoritarian laws that are no longer needed, and yet that is not happening
Mr_Blott@reddit
Yeah it's quite new tech, as mentioned in other comments
plough_the_sea@reddit
Define âquite newâ, itâs been a thing for over 10 years⌠how long do you consider acceptable before the repeal of the authoritarianism?
Born-Statistician817@reddit
Except crime rate is lower than has ever been and criminals are not more difficult to catch than 10, 20, 30 yeara ago.
Whole-Lie-254@reddit
Itâs a balance, and not sure this is the right thing but you hit on a great point.
A very regularly occurring criticism of the police you get is usually along the lines of âI was burgled/mugged/etc and the police did nothingâ.
As if they have some crack Hollywood CSI team that can find a perpetrator based on telepathy or some future science.
They either have evidence they can conduct an investigation on or they donât, and particularly low level offenders are increasingly becoming aware of that.
Surveillance helps, Iâve had very good support from the police, in which they stayed on the line while monitoring the threat on CCTV, and kept me up to date, while squads were on their way.
But of course we need to decide where the line is, and ensure the checks and balances are in place.
Secret-Ad9598@reddit
Let's see the amount of London stabbings, bike thefts and phone snatches magically drop then, shall we?
Imaginary-Friend-228@reddit
Racist and dystopian
Embarrassed_Lie_3686@reddit
Youre all acting like youre not already in their database in some way? This van may capture photos of your face, and that may make you feel uncomfortable, but if they really needed, it wouldn't take much effort for them to pull up in depth information about any citizen of the UK. Youre already on the system, does it really matter that theyre checking your face? Just dont commit crimes and they won't do anything with it.
Popular_View_5411@reddit
think of it this way, even if facial recognition does reduce crime.
you are tagged by the facial recognition camera due to a similar appearance to someone the police want to talk to
Then everytime you go into the town centre. you are stopped , detained and searched because you are flagged on the facial recognition camera After about three times of this happening you are going to be hostile towards the police.
after 50 times of this happening you are going to be afraid of going out
its the same reason why stop and search for pointless shit like cannabis should be stopped . you may take a bit of dope of someone occasionally. but the reality is that you are just pissing someone off who will be less likely to cooperate or provide info about a crime doing actual harm to others in the future
gianlowey@reddit
If you've got nothing to hide whats the problem? If it catches or prevents crimes im all for it. I couldn't care less if the govt knows where i am, im just going about my business.
Admirable-Dark2934@reddit
Every one of us has a smart phone, most of us have an echo/alexa or similar other devices with cameras and microphones in their homes too. There is zero privacy any more.
Money is digitally tracked anyway so if you go into town and buy something, it is recorded. Your phone knows where you went and how many steps it took you to get there. So does a few more cameras actually make any difference? Not really.
I live in a rural place, but to even get to it there are cameras on all roads and I have multiple ring cameras on my driveway.
The only place for privacy is my garden, when without any devices. Other than that who cares. They can feel free to track my Reddit and see me look at the odd pair of Boobs.
Iâm more confused at why I need to log in to access PH online! Do they really need to count those habbits? Itâs fine I donât have a step mom or step daughter :)
The UK is crazy weird for knowing/needing to know what everyone is up to. When so much wrong is done by grooming gangs etc., and people were not caught for it sooner. It doesnât make sense.
Luckily I live a fairly basic life and donât really have much to hide! Iâm very glad I grew up in the 90s before all of this. But god knows what extreme opinions or stupidity I probably said and did on the early internet when I was young and dumb!
needmyeggcracking@reddit
The state must protect itself comrade you dare suggest otherwise?đˇđşđˇđşđˇđşđˇđşđˇđş
iloveboobiesss@reddit
Dystopian my ass. I'm sick of phone snatches roaming the streets and petty crimes everywhere. We need more police presence everywhere
PackageOk4947@reddit
And yet with all these cameras, ÂŻ\_(ă)_/ÂŻ
furfreakmolly@reddit
it's so awesome, i can't wait to be monitored taking a shit in the next few months!! the surveillance is so successful that we still have pedophiles, rapists, and murderers walking around. great job police!! đđ
(i fucking hate it)
masterdufu@reddit
Iâm glad. If it bangs up criminals it does its job. Honestly you guys talk about this stuff as if itâs going to be 1984
UntappdBeer@reddit
China approves of this.
1K-27@reddit
As much as it would help, itâs probably very easily able to be used for the worseâŚ
CCTV was probably the better, and maybe best purely for the fact that was only ever used when needed. But facial recognition and other AI tech is constantly scanning people, and although being in âpublicâ means you donât really have any privacy, I donât particularly think constant surveillance like that is a very nice feeling
bigonebitey99@reddit
I donât really mind either way
Creative_Situation47@reddit
Its the future. Works like adream in parts of China and will enable authorities to track all the little scroats, crackheads and usual suspects when they are up to no good. Don't know why people are so anti this tech if they are law abiding citizens? The great unwashed leftie fascists will not like it but that means it has my backing.
pepperyfries679@reddit
Not arsed, track me all you want; my life isnât very interesting.
If it helps keep our streets safe, identify & convict criminals and protect us from dangerous threats, itâs a trade-off Iâm willing to make.
People act like the government and big tech donât already know absolutely everything about them? Every cookie you ever accepted, video you liked, photo you gooned over, credit card you took out, bill you pay - itâs all profiled.
Itâs impossible to have zero digital footprint, so ignore the inconspicuous van and go about your day.
NervousBug7077@reddit
I just don't see what the issue is. I've never had an issue in life with the Police and I'm sure the government already knows you wareabouts from card purchases and your phones pinging off towers. At the end of the day if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear and it's just more scaremongering from people who are anti anything.
_Dreamer_Deceiver_@reddit
History shows that if you have nothing to hide you definitely have something to fear from the police... Especially if you're not white.... Even moreso if you're black. Eg, stop and search
LovlehKebab@reddit
I've got nothing to hide and don't fear the Police, I've been raised to respect them and now I have my own son, I do the same with him. Just before Christmas last year we went to a Christmas Market. There was a Police presence with two cars parked next to each other with two officers in each car. As we walked past I told my son to wave at the Police, they waved back with a smile. My son loved it.
I'm a white middle-aged male, have never feared the Police and would comply if they suspected anything and needed to stop and search, why? Because I have nothing to hide. People who have nothing to hide and still become awkward with Police are just wasting everyone's time. Let them do their job so you can prove to them you're no longer suspected of anything.
NervousBug7077@reddit
Couldn't have been a truer statement. People fearing the police in these situations comes from guilt of their previous actions. I've been arrested at 13 for building a den in a farmers field. He was desperate to press charges but they could see we were just being kids. They dropped me at the shops with my friends and bought us a 50p Cola each. You have nothing to fear literally.
NervousBug7077@reddit
I don't know what your trying to say here. If I get stopped & searched, they find no drugs or weapon or anything illegal. Then I get let go. What is the issue with that? Now if your saying the Police are racist and doing this just to black people that's a completely different discussion. But I see no examples of people being arrested for stop and search or via these camera and charged with crimes they have not committed. Have you?
_Dreamer_Deceiver_@reddit
Unless you know every single law then any time you are stopped you should be worried
NervousBug7077@reddit
I'm sorry but that is complete nonsense.
NervousBug7077@reddit
Literally. Your just saying everyone should be worried as there's a chance they've broken a law they don't know about. It's almost a laughable statement and based on nothing. Have you seen people arrested by these methods for crimes they didn't understand? Any evidence or fact at all?
_Dreamer_Deceiver_@reddit
Yeh pretty much, laws and change and actually sometimes you don't even have to wait for laws to change. ICE in the US is a good example. So "nothing to hide nothing to fear" is bull
SpinIx2@reddit
Freedom from or freedom to.
Freedom from constant surveillance or freedom to enjoy the city centre without fear of gangs of youths about mug you for your phone.
On balance, in common with a lot of co trinities on this thread I think Iâd rather have freedom from but I guess those who would support these measures would rather give the police the latest tools to protect the population from crime.
tales_of_tomorrow@reddit
Feels kind of dystopian, but Iâve also not committed any crimes so Iâm not bothered. I feel a bit safer knowing there are some police present if anything.
I would be bothered if it was rolled out for advertising.
UnusualActive3912@reddit
A bad idea as it discriminates against non whites.
AccomplishedPaint363@reddit
The cops aren't looking for me so I smile and wave at them.
KayNynYoonit@reddit
Invasion of privacy that unfortunately is just normalised in current times. Just like the stealing and manipulation of our online data.
LoadExpert@reddit
It will curb the youth violence, robbery, and assaults,by making them aware they will be seen from every angle. Eventually,people will forget the camera is even there once they feel safer in their own communities!
Embarrassed_Radio596@reddit
Sabotage is not just a civic right but a duty.
IamFilthyCasual@reddit
I see how it could be a great thing, but in reality its just gonna be a massive pain and is only gonna be used when it suits them (police, government..) not us (regular people). Thereâs cctv everywhere already but whenever you need to see the footage its always âoh yeah it doesnât workâ or âit gets deleted after 12-24 hours so we dont have the footageâ or âyeah here it isâ but itâs the worst possible quality imaginable so its still useless.
In ideal and perfect universe I can see it as a good thing, in our (shitty) universe I canât see it being any good
nrm94@reddit
Looks like im at a minority when I really couldn't give a shit about these. I have nothing to hide and I'm more relaxed in the sense that companies and governments are going to use my data whether I like it or not so I really don't get worked up over something I have no control over. Just get on with my life.
everything_esoteric@reddit
Im all for stopping crime and protecting the people however I also feel its bordering on 1984
SCREAMIN_DEM0N@reddit
Idgaf because I'm not a felon. But I'll hate it when I'm running from the law.
InterestingDivide157@reddit
I donât love the idea of mass facial recognition, and Iâm not exactly comfortable seeing it rolled out in towns.
That said, I think people underestimate how little anonymity we already have in public. Between CCTV, smartphones, and everything being connected, most of us are already pretty trackable just going about daily life.
Facial recognition feels less like a completely new line being crossed, and more like a step further on in recent years.
I guess the real question is where people think the line should be and who gets to decide that.
shunterguy@reddit
They can film you , but if you stand outside a police station and film them its TOTALLY different đ¤Łđ¤Ł
But why worry these days 99% of us carry a tracking device in our pockets ( aka smartphone ), how many of you plaster pictures all over social media, every shop you walk into, everytime you fill up a vehicle more and more garages have ANPR cameras that also check your face for drive offs, every high street, every shopping centre has cameras watching you. I have cameras watching 3 sides of my house, a camera in my garage, a door bell camera and 2 dash cameras in my pickup and a helmet camera for my motorbike and how many others are the same with home security.
There's millions of cameras are EVERYWHERE now get used to it.
Unless you lived in a field all your life eaten dirt and worms there's a picture of you on 1000s of data bases, dash cams, doorbell cams etc etc
Onyx-Serenitatem@reddit
I donât have anything to hide. However, I find it profane to make the masses conform due to the misdoings of a few
Classic_Anything_414@reddit
I'm sure it's unrelated to digital ID
NewtSoupsReddit@reddit
It would depend entirely on how it's used. Something which we can never be sure of.
However when it's used used the ideal use case would be -
Person A commits a crime and is now Wanted for something serious
The FR system can then be set to flag Person A and ONLY Person A if detected. A person can only be flagged if there's a crime ref that can be applied for them. IE the search is for a specific person for a specific reason.
What the system should NOT be doing is continuously scanning and recording the movements of everyone as a matter of course and should not be capable of being used to provide an historic record of any individual the authorities care to follow for any reason at all. This would be blanket surveillance and should not be allowed.
It should only be used as a tool to support an active investigation and all use of it should be logged and tied to said investigation so that usage can be monitored by an oversight committee.
For better or for worse FR is here to stay and the best way to deal with it is to ensure as best we can that it's used appropriately.
CaveteCanem@reddit
Mass surveillance breeds Mass distrust
I get the naive argument of "I haven't done anything so there I don't mind it" - but that's to miss the fundermental issue of the state watching everyone, of which 99% are innocent. That's an invasion of privacy (you can argue it's in a public area..)
It's a slow drip affect - if we accept this, do we accept them getting access to all ring door cams say? Or ability to go through anyone's phone with weak reasoning? How about spontaneous home inspects?
After all - "I haven't done anything wrong, so I don't mind it"
T140V@reddit
Personally, I couldn't give a flying fuck. But then I grew up in a small rural village where everyone knew everyone and the idea of personal privacy was pretty much an alien concept.
Immediate_Still_4440@reddit
I love it wtf
cherryxgrenade@reddit
It's a bad idea. The technology is falsely identifying people as criminals when they aren't.
Also mass surveillance is a terrible idea.
WasThatInappropriate@reddit
Its functionally no different to a cop with exceptional memory just having a look around for people they want - or someone going around with a photofit or description looking at their surroundings.
I feel like the police just cant win with this one. We all whine they dont catch anyone, then also whine when they get the tools to do it.
A facial recognition camera looking at me as I walk past is no different to a cop looking at me as I walk past - its just more likely to recognise me if I've been known to do something wrong.
Due-Analysis5740@reddit
Honestly couldnât care less how many places want my picture, take my picture or is watching me lol Iâm just going about my business
Odd-Wrangler3589@reddit
If it actually helped stop/catch criminals then I don't care. I'm not doing anything wrong so scan me if it helps. But I suspect that the technology, just like the 10000s of CCTV cameras will do absolutely bugger all to stop crime
_matthewa@reddit
donât want to give away too many spoilers but have a watch of the first series of the capture on bbc and itâll really make you realise just how possible what they do in there is now and all it takes is corrupt government/law enforcement
TheFinalPieceOfPie@reddit
All it takes is 1 government to abuse it and then any "good" a system like that could produce is undone.
Simple-Valuable-5635@reddit
Orwell predicted this Or should I say told us the plan
Sad_Lingonberry_7949@reddit
But what if they use it against the "Far Right!"
VONChrizz@reddit
Everyone was shitting on China for doing this years ago, turns out China was just ahead of us in time
MorrowDisca@reddit
All biometrics can fuck off imo.
PsychologySpecific16@reddit
It's dystopian, there is serious racial bias concerns surrounding it's use and to be frank I despise it.
Morganx27@reddit
I. Its current form, I don't feel too bad about it. I'm not someone who needs to hide from the police, so I don't mind it too much at present. However, I'm not in favour of mass surveillance and I don't trust this tech to always be used for good, so in general I'm against it.
ResearchWooden5223@reddit
I am very apposed to mass facial recognition it feels like a massive overreach of the justice system that could be used as a mass spying tool to intrude on many aspects of daily life.
Rude-Date2496@reddit
I donât trust that our government will use it correctly
CustomerNo1338@reddit
Part of why I left. Itâs a dystopian direction of travel for sure. Where I live in Europe now there is no cameras anywhere and itâs safer. Ironic right.
Far_Mycologist_5782@reddit
Wear a facemask and a pair of sunglasses and the cameras will have no idea who you are.
TurnUpThe4D3D3D3@reddit
Dystopian but also useful from a LE perspective
steelcity91@reddit
Literally 1984.
OLSTERMEISTER@reddit
As long as its only used to catch criminals., im all for it.
PerfectEmphasis9016@reddit
Terrible. Will be used for the wrong reasons.
RugbyEdd@reddit
Ultimately it just feels like slapping a plaster on the real issues that cause crime. I'd rather see them investing the money into schemes to help prevent people getting into a life of crime in the first place.
But overall I'm not overly bothered. I get the fear behind surveillance, but we're already one of the most camera covered countries in the world, and countries like America have already been using facial recognition tech on their cameras for years, so the only real difference here is they're making it more visible as a deterrent. And it's only in public areas where anyone could record you anyway. I'd be more concerned with the invasive internet stuff they've been doing, since that effects people in their own homes.
flemtone@reddit
It has already been proven that they give false positives which result in innocent citizens being arrested. Police, dont rely on Ai to do your job for you.
Huge_Celery7189@reddit
If you havenât done anything wrong, and donât intend to do anything wrong, then I donât see a problem. It ultimately is there to protect us all, and you could oppose it and end up being thankful of it.
steffaann11@reddit
If youâve got nothing to hide, you wouldnât worry. I donât get why people get their knickers in a twist about police being present or there being surveillance, but then complain about how bad crime is! What exactly do you want then??
kikkawa@reddit
They had them in a town local to me, they've had to stop using them as their "software" was biased and identified more black people than anyone else.
Nijii01@reddit
Fuck that
taskkill-IM@reddit
People don't want national security measures until it's their property/area that's in trouble?
I would welcome this type of thing in Manchester if it meant the area being safer again, especially in and around piccadilly gardens.
NoRun6253@reddit
The sticker on the side of the van though??
Mysterious_Silver_27@reddit
Stasiâs wet dream over there
Poncemastergeneral@reddit
I donât think it should be used everywhere but some âtouristâ spots or extremely high traffic places then yes. Just the knowing itâs there would cut down crime.
Central London, shopping centres, arenas, stuff like the marathon, the London eye, train stations.
Places that people gather that you should have no expectation of privacy.
MaxRelaks@reddit
Makes you wonder if freedom actually exists in this day and age...
Knowing you observed all the time, partially followed in a matter of speaking. How can someone feel at ease knowing that??
laurbz@reddit
Itâs when they were bragging about it being âreally successfulâ on local pages and itâs not for me but if it makes people feel safer sure, but it feels a bit invasion of privacy?
AllMuckandMuscle@reddit
Itâs a waste on money and time since all the trouble wear masks
Orion-nebul4@reddit
Iâm not trying to be some hyperbolic nut job but this is how full surveillance states start
Icy-Meaning1801@reddit
I suppose I have nothing to hide
Own-Pen3465@reddit
What town
ThinkHomework1071@reddit
It's discrimination as if you wear religious headwear you are excluded. Also a sad state, Britain needs it now and didn't before, what's changed? Is it social media? Influx of foreigners, lack of police? Sad times
DoktaZaius@reddit
It's a shame that crime is so rampant, and that fighting it effectively is so far beyond traditional policing methods, that it's useful enough that we're even having this debate
pepegeon@reddit
Don't commit crime really
pepegeon@reddit
Regardless of you wanting it or not, the government know a lot about you anyway. I hope mass surveillance will help solve crimes quicker. I personally hope it will help identify and get some money out of people throwing out litter on streets and motorways.
martingump@reddit
A waste of time in Bradford and Birmingham....
Tanukipop@reddit
If it helps to get the right people in jail and keep others safe then fine. I have no issues, too many crimes or missing people happen without any decent footage when we live in a world full of cameras. As someone with a missing person in their lives, I wish there could have been more answers from things like this but I know, like all power, it's abused at some point.
Odd_Day_2674@reddit
I donât mind at all - nothing to hide here. If itâs going to help catch criminals Iâm all for it
Alarming-Turnip684@reddit
Why is everything Dystopian to some people? The UK has ALWAYS been a nanny-state, they lead Europe in terms of CCTV coverage. Fuck, even The Simpsons did an episode about itâŚ
sadboy2k03@reddit
These content identification and biometric recognition systems in general are not 100% accurate which has led people to be dragged into court on some pretty horrific charges.
You can take their word for it that it's safe and won't be abused but you also have no idea what processing they're doing and where the data it collects is stored. XKEYSCORE comes to mind.
It is a lot of money to waste especially at a time where police forces are reportedly struggling with budgets and it's purpose by design is to catch petty criminals that are warranted for failing to show up to court, etc.
I personally do not want my facial recognition data to be collected when there's no reason to collect that data on me.
Adventurous_Gas9324@reddit
Different angle of looking at it, imagine a loved one goes missing this could help locate them or help to know there last location
koyliMeld9003@reddit
If you are interested or concerned about mass surveillance / AI, I recommend watching this TV series - itâs currently showing on Amazon Prime.
caffeine_lights@reddit
or The Capture on BBC iPlayer is good as well.
Theadvertisement2@reddit
They already made their way into my city and it doesnt really bother me much since ive got no criminal record
WorldlyLiterature53@reddit
Big brother is coming,, if not already here
ganjaccount@reddit
The only way to fight this is to get a medium sized group of people to follow every elected politician, official, and decision maker around with cameras, and live stream their location, who they are with, what they are talking about, and how long.
cornishjb@reddit
Iâm fine
real-tallnotdeaf@reddit
I do think itâs a bad thing, but a thought I have is if youâre not a criminal you donât have anything to worry about. But I do agree that being constantly monitored is an unnerving feeling. Imagine if the system was hacked or something.
gloomfilter@reddit
Giving large amounts of power (or accepting practices, or however you want to put it) to the state or police does come with danger even if you are not currently a target of the use of that power.
I think the argument that they could be hacked is valid, but is not really the actual danger - the danger is that it could be done completely securely, and competently, but that we have taken one more step in the direction of the state surveilling everything we do.
real-tallnotdeaf@reddit
I completely agree, the more I think about it the more jarring it all is.
Rendogog@reddit
There are multiple cases of these misidentifying people resulting in incorrect arrest, so you absolutely do have something to worry about even if innocent.
Previous_Kale_4508@reddit
Given the rate at which libraries are being closed down, there's not going to be anything with Dewi decimal numbers left for 'the machine' to identify persons of interest.
Spirit1969@reddit
I can't say that it bothers me really. I'm not a crook. I try not to break any traffic laws, and can see, some positive sides to AI being used in surveillance. Just as if it could be part of my downfall if I was a crook. It could also prove innocence in a case of mistaken identity.
Rumhampolicy@reddit
I'm not a fan.
Non-wholesomechungus@reddit
It won't be used to enhance policing just used to enhance control on a population that is becoming more and more disillusioned by the established elites and complete lack of representation by said elites.
TenTwon_@reddit
I think the general public should take up paintballing.
Impressive_Nail2645@reddit
Sad but necessaryÂ
Luciardt@reddit
Hell no. Just no.
The_HDR_Sn1per@reddit
I think itâs a good thing and the sooner that better. I have nothing to hide and donât plan on committing any robberyâs, murders or any other crimes that might result in this technology catching me out. I want my children and others as safe as possible in this crazy world so if this tech helps take people off the streets and behind bars then I say full steam ahead. I work in this technology sector but has nothing to do with my thoughts whatsoever.
Hevding@reddit
Sheistyâs about to go through the roof
Football-Man-1889@reddit
Youâll only catch people who generally law abiding, that you can track down easily, just as already happens with speed cameras.
trypnosis@reddit
They are effective and as we iterate on the technology will become more effective.
I donât have an issue with them.
I think a lot less people with a criminal history will walk the streets, with the more of them we have.
They make me feel safe.
If you ever go to the US or EU you fingerprints will be used to be compared to all their criminals. Why not let our police force be as effective.
As for trust yes some might abuse it but we do a job of calling these people out over time. If some does I recon in time we will resolve the issue.
Police corruptions and brutality used to be rampant. Now it is rare and when caught is punished.
Is our system perfect? No
Will we keep improving it? Yes
Let the police have more and better systems as they come.
Far-Adhesiveness3763@reddit
I don't go to mass so I'll be fine
Calm_Wonder_4830@reddit
Couldn't give a shit.
IDKBear25@reddit
Yesterday I went to the petrol station for the first time in over a year, maybe 2 years, and when I saw the roof, there was 20 CCTV cameras.
20 FUCKING CCTV CAMERAS.
I have absolutely no doubt they have AI facial recognition capabilities to track peopleâs every single step, and other things like the brand of car they drive, the model, how much petrol they put in, what type of petrol they fill up with (normal or premium) etc and this is just 1 fucking example.
In supermarkets it will track the same such things.
And on street corners, it will track where you were, how long for, what you were doing etc.
CCTV cameras are on traffic lights now to track peopleâs every move.
Itâs all dystopian to me. It felt eerie yesterday being on the petrol station forecourt with my driving instructor and having 20 CCTV cameras track an everyday habit with such rigour.
I am not a criminal, I donât do anything illegal, however I do not want to be stalked in every single scenario going about my daily life.
Grandma-Try69@reddit
I don't mind and I am Pro surveillance in public. Safety of me and my family is more important than these thing IMO
If government want to track me there are literally 100s of way it can...
BradleyStickland@reddit
I don't see an issue with it personally. If you're not a criminal, it shouldn't really affect you. I haven't done wrong, therefore scanning my face and reinforcing that I am not a criminal is perfectly fine with me.
mongbatstar@reddit
Personally, as a fellow non-criminal, I'd prefer to be crediblely accused of a crime before being investigated.
BradleyStickland@reddit
what, lol? having this doesn't accuse you of being a criminal, it just catches the people who ARE criminals... if you haven't done anything wrong, you haven't got anything to worry about. by your logic, having your face/passport scanned at the airport is accusing you of being a criminal, but in actuality it just catches the people who are criminals....
mongbatstar@reddit
You just invented a response to your comment that never happened.
Are you ok?
BradleyStickland@reddit
brother i replied to you lmfao
mongbatstar@reddit
Oh shit you're dim.
Puppygirl621@reddit
I don't mean to be rude but are you English?
BradleyStickland@reddit
yep
zonked282@reddit
It's not like there isn't a CCTV camera recording you almost every moment you are outside already
BradleyStickland@reddit
It doesn't scan faces to possibly catch wanted criminals though. Surely catching even a few criminals is better than not having this and having criminals wandering the streets?
FrisbyKidH222@reddit
No problems whatsoever.
Rider-Jack@reddit
Its the reason im "scared of covid" đ
teapotslayer@reddit
People are really misunderstanding how these work.
The facial recognition is linked to photos that are taken when people are arrested. The cameras will only register a face it recognises from that system.
If youâve never been arrested then the system wonât even acknowledge your face and you will have no issues. If it does make a mistake and register you as another person. The police will look at the photo of who it thinks you are and will be able to see it made a mistake.
I understand why people are concerned, but the bottom line is if youâre not a criminal you have absolutely nothing to worry about.
CobaltFrame@reddit
A lot of crimes are committed by youths on bikes, e-scooters & motorcycles where the perpetrators are wearing some kind of face covering. The facial recognition stuff is good as a deterrent but what we need is more police officers on the streets. Ditch this technology in favour of actual policing.
B58Connoisseur@reddit
Dystopian. Makes me glad I donât live there.
Nielips@reddit
We need less wronguns so it's not a consideration in the first place.
MissNincompoop@reddit
Have a look into Facewatch that retail shops are using.
The retailer can report issues to Facewatch which then using AI, Facewatch will alert the store each time the person enters the store. Many retailers use this, do Facewatch alert all retailers about someone on a watch list? Could you be banned from all retail stores who use Facewatch because of a silly altercation in one specific store?
Like someone else said, CCTV has been around for ages, but noones checking every moment, logging every detail. I think it's becoming a genuine concern.
Knight_Castellan@reddit
Mothmanrmj@reddit
I don't really mind to be honest, they recently ran it in my local town a few weeks ago and caught a wanted pedophile, a man wanted for GBH and some other people that had skipped court for multiple offenses. If they started rounding people up based on religion or political allingments then yeah it would obviously be a problem but if its being used to catch wanted nonces then thats good on my books. I'll just simply avoid being flagged by it by not breaking the law.
comicsnerd@reddit
Italian villages have this system for centuries. It is called Grandma.
Ornery-Air3250@reddit
It's a reflection of what society has become.
As we have moved further and further away from a high trust community based society to where we are now things like this have become needed, which in turn push us further away from being a high trust community based society.
Sad.
Helen83FromVillage@reddit
This. We canât have a low-crime society with the current level of bad actors and without powerful tools in the policeâs hands.Â
scarredballsack@reddit
The idea of mass ai software and facial recognition does fill me with a sense of foreboding and dread , the flip side is that I've walked around with a mobile tracking device with a camera and a microphone in my pocket all day, voluntarily, and let's not for one minute assume that this device can't be used to 'spy ' on me.. in some way.
Whether its a corporation or a government we are all ceding our liberties and freedoms away a little at a time, want all those back? bin the smart phone and the Internet use cash only and start using pen and paper to communicate instead of texts and email.. not that we will so surveillance society here we are..
Just my ha'pennies worth..
ware2read@reddit
Iâve done nothing wrong so donât care if they have them up - nothing to hide
Specialist_Shake2425@reddit
Good
String-Good@reddit
I dont like it at all. There are enough cameras about already. I just don't have enough trust that the images will be deleted.
PrizeFront8677@reddit
I think they think you're animals that need to be watched and controlled 24/7. I'd kick their asses and dent their faces in for even thinking about it. But you do you.
gxb20@reddit
it gets black and asian people mixed up a lot also face coverings in the UK are legal so youre gonna see a lot more people wearing sunglasses and covid masks is my guess.
Raunien@reddit
Legal until the police stop you because they think you're acting suspiciously
Prestigious-Toe958@reddit
They can recognise sex offenders and catch them breaching their conditions. So Iâm all for it . I had nothing to hide and hardly think the government is interested in me and my daughter going to build a bear workshop and Greggs every Sunday .
DeliciousGrab7977@reddit
Used right itâs good but with a non zero chance of abuse the risk is probably higher than the reward therefor they should be abolished.
Objective_Base_6817@reddit
If it keeps us safer or whatever I don't care
savealltheelephants@reddit
I think more people will move to the country. My face is probably only ârecognizedâ when I make my weekly drive to Walmart, otherwise Iâm in a tiny town in local stores,
quellflynn@reddit
they asked people to be nice to each other and not be a silly sausage, but that didn't work.
so instead of putting police on the floor, they spent millions on AI and facial recognition.
Cheeselover710@reddit
As someone who moved here from a city in Canada where weâre not even allowed speed cameras, itâs more sad than anything. Cops are no longer someone we can rely on for public service. Iâve lived in Leeds for 4 years now, and my first comment to people who ask about my experience is that there is 0 police presence. Itâs all done through CCTV now. It breaks my heart for what kind of community could thrive with some proper funding, love and care.
chapatsea@reddit
Brilliant, one recently was told to stop because it was catching too many criminal, they just happened to be non white....... So it was deemed racist......
rapidbunny4404@reddit
How very soviet/Gestapo of them
English_Joe@reddit
No system is perfect. It will be abused.
Olddapman@reddit
Iâm all for it. Â If you do wrong then guess those folks wonât like it.
Then some will always have concerns about its use / abuse
Each to their own opinion.
Wiggidy-Wiggidy-bike@reddit
future crime incoming.
everything is coming together too well. digital ID, digital currency, AI tracking. add in the online safety act.
predicting what people might do and giving them a little nudge by maybe affecting their bank, or traveling ability when you think they might be going against the state a little too much. like the nudge unit is already a thing in the gov. and does disgusting stuff, itll just spread to prediction and even more political police
iulyus69@reddit
I've done nothing wrong. Why should be afraid?
ImakeKnifesatnight76@reddit
I haven't seen any yet, not even in Wales
thatautisticguy@reddit
No, i don't want to live in the minority report or 1984 thanks
SomeoneSlightlyGay@reddit
Itâs horrifyingly dystopian to spy on your citizens constantly and there have already been instances of it falsely flagging people of colour as criminals, I have nothing positive to say about it
Money-Director6649@reddit
that is scary and a clear violation of the constitution, a document written with the expectation/hope that we'd be smart enough to update it as things changed.
nobanpls2348738@reddit
MagicManUK@reddit
No issue.
sugarglassego@reddit
Oh itâs absolutely amazing to live in a dystopian sci-fi film.
DiscussionAncient626@reddit
I wrote, then deleted. That is what I think about it. (The deleted part) we are deeper than that. May delete this as well.
Spdoink@reddit
They are very bad news.
BlueHeron0_0@reddit
Fuck that. Before the police can start talking about how effective these cameras are against crime they better do at least what they're supposed to do themselves
Imaginary-Advice-229@reddit
I don't care tbh
Zealousideal-Sea7472@reddit
Is that festival place in basingstoke?
Significant-Arm-487@reddit
disgrace⌠but âdOnâT WoRrY iF yOuVE gOt NoThInG tO HiDeâ⌠absolute brain lobotomy of an argument
LuKat92@reddit
I already need to use my face to make a payment via the banking app, afaik thereâs nothing stopping the police/government getting hold of that. Weâre already half way down the slippery slope, itâs too late to climb back up
cozywit@reddit
I support it. If we actually see people caught, prosecuted and punished in a judicial system that both deters, reforms where possible but in the end protects the law abiding citizens above all.
So I don't support it.
WastelandOfConfusion@reddit
Theyâre harvesting all that data for a reason.
ScientistNational363@reddit
No issue. Weâre really not that interesting, weâre guilty of over inflating our own importance sometimes. Our social media accounts have all the information on us theyâll ever need. Add passports, driving licenses etc, this makes no difference.
High street retailers, cafes restaurants are really struggling. Anti social behaviour/knife crime an increasing issue. If this helps to catch the awful people who keep committing criminality which could put them out of business iâm fine with it.
underrated_prunes@reddit
Catches pedophiles and other criminals. Considering how rubbish police (understaffed) is, it is honestly probably the best they can do
ManIsready@reddit
Big brother Is watching you.
Who's watching them...?
jazzyjjr99@reddit
I have no evidence on how effective they are but on the face of it, if you're wanted in any sense by the police why would you ever walk past one of these lmao.
Like surely you'd just turn around before it gets a chance to properly see your face.
BuckRusty@reddit
I live in London - the most heavily surveilled city in the world⌠It is what it isâŚ
occasionallycyclonic@reddit
It makes me think that this is the real reason face masks were demonised during the pandemic, they knew this tech was coming
guinness1972@reddit
Before Covid, you couldnât go into most stores wearing a crash helmet for example, but now, you see it fairly commonly along with facemasks still. Also, how does this work for someone wearing a burka?
Bejaminmaston12@reddit
Never knew how bad it is getting in the UK, it's becoming a police state
s0ulcontr0l@reddit
lambdaburst@reddit
Saw an article about a man getting chucked out of Sainsbury's running this facial recognition stuff as a "known shoplifter" (false positive), and had to go contact the dipshits responsible for the AI and send them all his personal data in the hope they took him out of the system. And then who knows what they do with all his private info.
C20_H26_N2O@reddit
Was against it until I read the stats of who they arrested as a result of these cameras in Croydon over one weekend. Now Iâm all for it if it means it clears up sex offenders off our streets đđź
randymysteries@reddit
It's probably been in service for several years. There are CCTV cameras seemingly everywhere. Automated functionality makes them useful. Eventually it will switch from fighting crime to also imposing morality. For example, spouses videoed in hotel rooms with unrelated subjects could be fined or imprisoned for adultery. Fines would reduce taxes, but imprisonment would cost tax payers, unless offenders are shipped to one of the US concentration camps in South America.
Notnowcmg@reddit
Doesnât bother me in the slightest. Whenever you ask someone why they would be against it they either pretend they canât tell you, or they give you loads of âwhat ifâ scenarios - forgetting that a what if scenario has two different outcomes - itâs not always bad. I could step outside tomorrow and get hit by a car, is it going to stop me stepping outside? Absolutely not. Just like Iâm not going to spend time worrying about what if scenarios.
I promise you guys arenât as interesting as you might think, so unless youâre doing something you shouldnât be then you have zero reason to even give these things a second thought.
Sure Iâll get downvoted but Reddit karma is about as important as facial recognition in towns.
jeminar@reddit
Everyone deserves the right to fuck up privately.
How else can I experiment and get creative?
Temporary-Leek5045@reddit
English people will complain no matter what,
We want less crime, but not ID cards, no facial recognition.
woodfoxmoss@reddit
Wow it's almost as if ID cards and facial recognition won't actually do anything to lower crime
Temporary-Leek5045@reddit
Do you think? I'm genuinely curious about that. Because there's the whole 'everything is broken' cycle, between the paperwork, the literal lack of space in prisons, I guess that even if people are caught, not much can be done? But then monitoring can preventively stop crimes if people see a pattern, right?
flippertyflip@reddit
Like minority report?
woodfoxmoss@reddit
I'd rather see investment into addressing the root causes of crime rates rather than treating the symptoms. Genuine support to lift people out of poverty, better training/education opportunites, more youth programmes etc.
Obviously I don't want people who commit violent crimes to go undetected. But I'd rather not live in a surveillance state that does nothing to actually support its citizens to live a good life, personally. This will cause many more problems than it solves imo.
Klakson_95@reddit
I literally don't care because I don't do anything illegal and it helps to catch people who do things that are illegal
NuclearCleanUp1@reddit
Not good.
evolvedmammal@reddit
Are they trying to identify all the prisoners they released early by mistake?
WyrmKin@reddit
Stitches together well with government wanting you to supply identification for everything you do online.
Complete physical and digital surveillance.
Haunting-Button-4281@reddit
Its too late now...its out there, wont be long before we are taking DNA at birth anyway
New-Macaroon628@reddit
Phones are already doing this... social media, email, and everything in one Evo system is following you every second of your life...but a camera on a police van is what concerns people, brilliant
stonesco@reddit
Wrong.
People can say on this sub âI am not a criminal, it shouldnât matter we need it to stop crimeâ .
The fact that this Gov has decided to allow this, is shameful no matter how you put it. Should be added to the list of things that should be the nail in their premiership come the next few years.
In my opinion, wonât do much to tackle crime. Instead of leaders taking productive action.
Soggy_Cracker@reddit
It would be understandable if used to catch people with warrants and alerts.
But with what the flock system is doing, they arenât just going to collect that data and do nothing. They are going to begin tracking every move you make and develop your patterns all to sell to the highest bidder.
EnbyArthropod@reddit
I don't mind CCTV per se, but I strongly object to being tracked wherever I go. My phone apps don't know where I am unless I let them, that should be the case for all forms of monitoring. If facial recognition is to be used then use it retrospectively on recordings, and only track the person of interest - that should be a given in a free(ish) society.
List_-No@reddit
I have social media which is public with my name, friends family and places I've been. I gave my right up to being recognised via my face the moment I pressed sign up on Facebook all those years ago.
Dunkmaxxing@reddit
No modern government or company can be trusted to use it without corrupt intentions. Also, the better question is why do we have a society where crime is such a problem in the first place to the extent this is something deemed necessary at all?
ledow@reddit
It's so atrociously worthless that I object far more to the fact their using it than I would do to them just randomly stopping people on the street and asking them to ID themselves.
It's honestly a waste of money, and it's THAT that I object to most.
If you want to find criminals among us, stop every other person, search their pockets and check their ID.
All the arrests for things like this are for outstanding warrants, carrying weed, etc. which - sure - they're all crimes. But the facial recognition didn't really do much.
It's basically used as a way to stop-and-search (which I have no objection to) while trying to remove an inherent racial bias in the people doing that stop-and-search (which has been an issue, and which was the subject of much controversy). So what did they do? They put the blame on facial recognition instead which is... highly biased against certain skin tones!
Stop pissing money away, and just stop every other person. Like they say, there's 20 officers there. So have 5 stopping people and 12 checking their pockets and asking who they are. And the other three to ensure they're being selected and dealt with impartially. Rather than giving millions to tech that just DOESN'T work.
P.S. I'm white.
TheSecretIsMarmite@reddit
I hate them and don't trust the companies gathering the data and analysing it. There have been lots of reports of false positives, especially with non-white people.
They creep me out tbh and I'd rather the police were funded to do proper police work than this Orwellian crap.
BiscuitKid87@reddit
Where i live in London (Paddington) the councils CCTV has been integrated with Facial Recognition & AI linked to the metropolitan police, guess within a few years it will be standard practice
bossanovaallnight@reddit
Iâm not arsed. Iâve not done anything wrong
KCPRTV@reddit
The system itself? Meh. I have, however, ZERO, trust in the people who want to control and use it.
Truthfully, IMO, this is the one good place for AI use. The machine only forwards video to a human if it spots a suspected crime. Otherwise, it clears the logs every hour or something.
Yes, I do see the potential insanity Minority Report or that new pratt movie Mercy style.
But honestly, talks of this nature are somewhat pointless. The crux of the issue is trust in the good intentions of the people who control and process that data. In the history of humanity, not a single surveillance state had.
giantthanks@reddit
If the idea is to only recognise registered peopleâ criminals, escaped prisoners, people breaking restraining orders, stalkers, paedophiles, people breaking probation restrictions, tracking drug dealers, etc. then it's incredibly useful, cost effective and efficient.
I wonder if it could be used for unregistered people (perhaps cross referencing done form of digital ID such as driving licence or passport) to find missing persons, or to catch fly tippers, graffiti artists, those who litter, who don't pick up dog poo, those who urinate in public places, rapists, arsonists, football hooligans, vandals, people who park badly, speed or double park, drive without a licence, under a ban, without insurance, cyclists running lights, or those illegally using electric scooters...
That would mean that it's being used to criminalise, that privacy has been compromised, and while that could actually be justified as a deterrent to all of the above ails, there is the worry that it could check alibis, and track/level people on protest marches or rallies for unsavoury purposes.
On balance, I consider it worthwhile and a net benefit to society.
Best_Alternative349@reddit
Big Brother is watching you
brymuse@reddit
Watching the later series of Person of Interest gives you a clue about how hard it could become me to simply be anonymous in everyday life in the not too distant future. You'd have to have serious safeguards around how the information was used and who was allowed to view it and how long it could b stored for.
Forsaken-Sea2047@reddit
This is where you all walk around with paper bags on your heads and tin foil hats đ¤Ł
Nickjc88@reddit
If you're a criminal and you're on a database I can see how you'd hate them but I'm not a criminal so I don't care about them.
Spazhazzard@reddit
That's it, lick the boot.
Nickjc88@reddit
Nothing constructive to add? At least your name is accurate.
Spazhazzard@reddit
Ooooh, such a cutting remark. Anyone who is supportive of a government surveillance state is beneath contempt.
Nickjc88@reddit
And anyone that doesn't want criminals to be caught is obviously hiding something. If you're not on their database, you won't be stopped. It's no different to ANPR except with people and not cars. They already have details of everyone in the country, these vans just make it quicker to catch anyone that's wanted.Â
Spazhazzard@reddit
This is such cope. The idea that governments would only ever use this technology for actual criminals is a joke. Governments always, absolutely always, abuse their powers to track people that don't agree with them whether they're criminals or not.
I bet you're 100% in favour of digital ID as well.
Agent_Light_Torch@reddit
Depends what the false positive rate is, no?
cjc1983@reddit
Even if they falsely stop you. They ask for your iD, you prove who you are, they confirm the false flag wasn't you, you move on with your day after a 2 minute inconvenience...
...A far more agreeable inconvenience than getting mugged or stabbed by someone who's fled bail.
TheIPAway@reddit
why if your not a crim. Get pulled over check ID, OK of you go.
chuckling-cheese@reddit
Still wonât catch me đĽˇ
Davman65@reddit
They stopped doing it in one city because it was flagging up let me just say a certain section of society. https://news.sky.com/story/essex-police-pauses-use-of-live-facial-recognition-cameras-due-to-racial-bias-concerns-13521951
Katydid829@reddit
The old TV show, Person of Interest, coming to a city near you! Reality has turned into a living nightmare.
Prestigious_Art2486@reddit
I'm dead against all of this digital monitoring. It's bad enough that the brick in your pocket constantly passes on what you are doing in regards to your movements, surfing and spending. Add facial recognition and there goes any chance on anonymous movements. Personally the less I interact with any network them better.
RyvitaBrevis@reddit
It's like conducting a search of everyone who passes by, without obtaining a warrant. Completely unacceptable violation and over-reach.
0ska88@reddit
Get the face masks out again
rabid-fox@reddit
Negative, completely open to exploitation.
There are systems that detect behavioral cues rather than facial recognition which im fine with.
coco-kiki@reddit
I think itâs good. I have nothing to hide. Catch all the rapists please
Zephinism@reddit
Not bothered in the slightest if it leads to significantly more arrests.
Max375623875@reddit
I no longer live in England, and every time I see something like this it seems absolutely insane
LambrettaLI150S@reddit
I can't see the point. They catch criminals on camera and do nothing.
Historical_Monk_6118@reddit
I'm all for it, until it works against me, then its a breech of privacy.
Amurana@reddit
I'd put on my face mask the moment I saw one of those. I'm not up to anything, but I'm also not going to make their job easier for them.
WhoYaTalkinTo@reddit
I haven't done anything so I don't care
yoho1234@reddit
Not a criminal. No problem.
R_dante@reddit
Invasive
velos85@reddit
I really couldn't give a shit about it in principle, but the way it's been rolled out is shambolic in some areas.
For example, Essex Police implemented their facial recognition on the same setup as the Metro Police, but it was a different system, so it was setup completely incorrect.
Charming-Objective14@reddit
The real question is who watches the watches.
Anxious_squirrelz@reddit
In trials its been shown to have a biased against certain groups. Combined with being used in certain areas more than others it's just racial profiling under a different name.
agiasiauto@reddit
Iâm always conflicted by stuff like this, because I am rationally aware that ânothing to hide, nothing to fearâ is a bad argument that can be a slippery slope to tyranny.
But I also do unironically have nothing to hide, and therefore feel no anxiety about police or the government knowing my face.
But I do want everyone to retain their freedom.
But I also would like police to catch and detail more violent criminals.
Itâs complex.
vicott@reddit
It is using fear to squeeze more tax payers money an use it to move us towards an authoritarian future.
iffyClyro@reddit
I think most people misunderstand what the technology is and what it does.
Your face isnât in the system unless so to speak unless youâre wanted.
Eryeahmaybeok@reddit
Other forces have software allowing the police to identify everyone in any pictures and footage they can get their hands on â from CCTV cameras to what we post on our social media accounts. It's called âretrospective facial recognitionâ, because the images and videos already exist, rather than using face-scanning cameras in real time like âlive facial recognitionâ does.
Hammersmith and Fulham has approved plans for 500 CCTV cameras to be equipped with retrospective facial recognition capabilities, storing all footage to allow searches to find all locations where a given face can be identified.
defonotuk@reddit
Except when it becomes normalised there's nothing preventing all the more negative uses (tracking, correlation and assumption of guilt based on an imperfect technology).
morg_b@reddit
100% in favour. Itâs only being used to target people who are already wanted by the police.
Jonoabbo@reddit
I don't think anything can be done about it, pretty sure we've been watched, tracked and monitored for years at this point. Better to live and let live.
CurleyCee13@reddit
I absolutely loathe it. It's a major step in lack of privacy, overwatch and it's invasive. A slippery slope to social credit scores and it's racist technology. It's been statistically proven these systems mix up Asian and black faces.
hdhddf@reddit
fuck off with this kind of thing. the rise in mass surveillance and censorship needs to be opposed and resisted.
anotherusernameste@reddit
Time to start wearing the đĽ¸
Capital-Ad8143@reddit
If we have video evidence of somebody assaulting someone, but no name, and these can help catch them? Yeah sure - that sounds useful.
If they're just curating a database of peoples movements, then nah not keen. It all depends on how the information is being used.
EyeAlternative1664@reddit
Donât care. Â
steveinstow@reddit
Only the dodgy ones cover their faces.
BigLick13@reddit
We need rules against people covering face first.
Shit ton of people cover their face bloody criminals
WestJobs@reddit
Black Mirror.
RegularHovercraft@reddit
I mean, Father Christmas watched you all year round so...
SadEntertainment1455@reddit
Remember one thing, whoâs watching the watchers?
RegularHovercraft@reddit
Far more worried about my browsing habits being monitored by private companies.
RegularHovercraft@reddit
Don't mind. Don't care. Useful for picking up baddies whcih is what it is for.
DmtGrm@reddit
Basingstoke! on subject - these days it is not police, they are just users, the technology stack is a private company with their t&c, starting from innocent consumer preferences detection all way up to the wildest conspiracy theories. Anyone can check crime rates now, and later, when this technology will be in place - my bet: there will be no difference there
poundsdpound@reddit
If it was going to be a change to public behaviour, views, impact more strongly on society etc then it would have affected Tesco opening times by now. It hasn't, and Tescos still open as usual obviously
/s
Glittering-Dare-7099@reddit
This is the result of allowing the 3rd world in unchecked
whiskywizard31@reddit
It's fine.
Scallywagsrout@reddit
I'm not fussed about it, not a criminal so not bothered.
blimper996@reddit
Iâve got nothing to hide. Nothing So Iâm planning to set up a camera peeping through the gap in my neighbours curtains,every night after dusk Heâs a senior police officer and his neighbour is in local government, so Iâm sure theyâve nothing to hide But Iâm not sure theyâll be entirely happy about this
No-Ruin-5760@reddit
I donât know how anyone can be so concerned with AI facial recognition when you carry around a device in your pocket that tells every organisation you have given details for (and some you havenât) when you are taking a dump.
The government could find you very quickly if they wanted to but lets be honest, no one on this subreddit is important enough to the government or any other organisation to be stalked by them and if you think you are⌠iâd suggest seeing a doctor.
Hell at least this added surveillance will do some kind of benefit by helping to find and identify offenders and put people who need to be taken to court, in front of it.
Craicriture@reddit
Slippery slope and also shown to be very problematic where it repeatedly misidentified people in the UK rollouts.
Ok_Apartment_6530@reddit
This should be at the top of
Skilldibop@reddit
Yeah the trials didn't go well.... but they seem to want to press ahead with it anyway?
SandalPatch@reddit
Iâve only got one face so not too concerned.
Double_Collection155@reddit
Crime is out of control. Just sit near a busy bus stop for a while and you'll see a phone get stolen by a person on a bike, or go sit in a Greggs and you'll see multiple people walk in and take things and leave without paying. Escooters on the road, illegal modified ebikes everywhere, masked road men intimidating and threatening people with no reprocusions, money laundering businesses with no customers on every high street.Â
Those cameras aren't going to help with any of that if our prisons are full and people caught will be given pitiful sentences. Depending on your area there could be lots of illegal migrants of whom we have no idea about their past. How do these cameras help? They might catch someone with a warrant but they'll be out in 3 months.Â
Interesting-One7810@reddit
print out a bunch of epstein and diddy face masks and hand them out around the corner đ
TheGrinningSkull@reddit
Imagine someone wears a mask of the top ten most wanted. Would they get in trouble for impersonating a wanted person?
Ok_Math4576@reddit
Itâs Orwellian. Even in Victorian times, you had to be a convicted criminal to be placed into the Panopticon. Now the Panopticon is everywhere.
KarmicRage@reddit
Shouldn't be used. It isn't perfect and when you're playing with people's freedom it should be 100% accurate every single time. Anything less than that and it has too much risk involved. Plus I highly doubt they delete the information as they claim to do, get that shit off our streets
Hellzer0@reddit
FUCK NO
Dubsndimes29@reddit
If they're pulling wanted criminals off the street then I see no problem. As long as it's not being used to pick out somebody minding their own business as suspicious behaviour which would just cause aggro.
ferdia6@reddit
If it leads to less crime, fewer teens assaulting and harassing folk and getting away with it I'd be all for it but you know that just won't be the caseÂ
bluejackmovedagain@reddit
I wouldn't be opposed to it being used in a targeted way, e.g. the police getting a court order to use it to look for a specific high risk person, but the way it is being used at the moment really concerns me.Â
_Dreamer_Deceiver_@reddit
It's still got to scan everyone it sees whether they have a court order or not.
bluejackmovedagain@reddit
But it would only be scanning them against a database of one or two people's faces, and only in an area where it is reasonable to be looking for those people.
There's a difference between putting cameras up in busy places around the country and looking for anyone who is wanted in relation to even minor offenses, and putting a camera up in an area to look for someone who poses an imminent risk to the public in an area that person is believed to frequent.
EfficientTitle9779@reddit
If you cry constantly about there not being enough police on the streets you simply cannot be mad at this technology being used. From a police perspective itâs cheaper and easier to use whilst also being effective.
From a personal perspective I donât love it but at this point thereâs cameras literally everywhere that are starting to have AI implemented in them and thereâs nothing I can do about them either. Also the âcrime is rampantâ âif youâve done nothing wrongâ crowd is so vocal my opinion isnât going to matter.
Hitching-galaxy@reddit
Will it be in force for the Stephen Laxley Lennon hate march? Thatâs the key question for me.
TheSJDRising@reddit
We don't need one of these cameras to spot Sharon Osbourne.
Hitching-galaxy@reddit
Thatâs true.
Hope it isnât in Leicester Square in June though, everyone will get confused between her and Skeletor with the He Man premier
Routine-Rip-2414@reddit
It's the shift from passive recording to active, AI-driven tracking that's the real game-changer. That constant, unblinking digital gaze feels like it fundamentally alters the space between public and private.
lifebroth@reddit
Waste of time and resources. Stop shoplifters first.
BirthdayBoth304@reddit
Terrifying.
Caedes1@reddit
It's not there for our benefit or safety.
befrforasec@reddit
Lazy. They should pay people for working on finding criminals instead of trusting software to do it
Jonno_92@reddit
I mean if you're not a criminal then it shouldn't really bother you.
milliondollerming@reddit
Complete overstretch of what should be acceptable. People who do nothing significant will have there information recorded while people who commit offences will likely cover their faces. So itâs taking people facial data and recording it without consent and for me without justification. Overly authoritarian. Backwards step for country.
JuneauEu@reddit
Regardless of having nothing to hide, you shouldn't be freely able to invade my right to a private life.
I pay taxes, I support the democratic system, not... this.
The problem in itself isn't the system, it's the level of access and openess to abuse these systems are, the people who police this, are not any "better" or more "good" then I. In fact, as we've seen over the years, corruption within these types of organisations is as widespread as it is in any other.
Do you know how many data leaks we have?
No where is safe, all it takes is someone with access to login, add their neighbour to a database, add a few fake profiles on the internet and suddenly, you're a murder suspect, or worse.
The good people are willing to trust in the process and hte system, the bad people do everything they cna to abuse it. Just look at *insert a lot of other countries and systems around the world* for enough evidence on why this stuff needs to go away.
Pandydandy7@reddit
I mean this in the nicest possible way, the government doesn't find you that interesting
Tricky-Alps2810@reddit
Sounds great to me. Only troublemakers need worry.
Providing these systems adequately distinguish non white faces *
AJ_Stangerson@reddit
It's great for automatically fining people for minor parking contraventions, or littering. Doesn't seem to stop things like stabbings or sexual assaults though.
MiddleNo5285@reddit
That's not how it works.
AJ_Stangerson@reddit
My point being that the state has becoming very good at making life miserable for generally law abiding people who go about trying to keep to themselves, but doesn't seem to be able to deal with serious crime.
MiddleNo5285@reddit
source: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn04304/
AJ_Stangerson@reddit
I've looked at your data and you're right. I made a dumb comment. But it's ok now, I can accept the 24/7 mass surveillance of my life, huge state over reach and the general emiseration of living in this country that has happened in my lifetime because only 53,000 people got stabbed last year, 2,000 people less than when the government put us all under house arrest because of the flu, and tried to stop us going for a beer without some kind of passport.
MiddleNo5285@reddit
To be fair you did mention stabbings as a pain point in your original comment (pardon the pun). I wanted to give you some good news that stabbings have actually decreased YoY.
pouchey2@reddit
I have less issue with surveillance as such and more of an issue with the ever decreasing involvement of humans.
Right now we're still seeing way too many false positives with AI anti-cheat systems etc in games. Translate that over to facial recognition and mistakes can be genuinely life changing. I also think far too much weight is given to these systems and there's a risk of jumping to arrests etc without all the evidence.
SousukeUK@reddit
Good
Strongid@reddit
What is my opinion about crime? Bad. What is my opinion about these surveillance efforts, bad too. We are living in a country were there is almost zero crime prevention, like patrolling police and etc. But there is sure a lot of surveillance where they only act after the fact. How camera will help me when I will be mugged in a broad daylight or someones bike being stolen. We need real prevention not more surveillance...
Interesting_Front709@reddit
Very aligned with Agenda 2030/WEF
dynze@reddit
Iâve got nothing to hide so no issue
Marvinleadshot@reddit
Not good enough especially for people who aren't white, it's well known to have a shit track record at recognising black or asian faces.
AndromedaDependency@reddit
I just don't like state surveillance. It feels like overreach into people's personal lives.
Plus it just drives surveillance creep. Today it's facial recognition cameras matching a criminal database, tomorrow it is saving all of the faces it's scanned and their location. The next day there are cameras on every street corner tracking your every movement.
It sounds hyperbolic but the street corner cameras and tracking whereabouts has happened in various cities across the US, one of them has just started the removal process after public pushback
iffyClyro@reddit
Not sure youâre fully understanding the definition of surveillance.
The technology recognised people that are already in the system and actively sought by police.
Takes sex offenders off the streets.
Born-Statistician817@reddit
If u have a drivers license or a passport u are also in the system. And the system has to scan all faces to find what its looking for. If it scans a face it has to log it. Thats how programming works.
iiibehemothiii@reddit
Not really
Having a driving licence doesn't mean the govt/whoever knows where you're driving to, or when
Having a passport isn't an intrusion as you don't carry it with you and it isn't required for 99% of activities in life.
The concern over this is that the CCTV/recognition IS there all the time, and you can't get away from it.
Again, not true. It could scan a face, try to match it to a database of known faces (the "baddies"*) and if no match then discard that face, and the attached time/location. It could be a zero-memory system except for people who are matched/flagged.
*Tomorrow morning, that list of political baddies could include you.
LambonaHam@reddit
It can recognise anyone, and for any reason specified by the police / government.
AndromedaDependency@reddit
Yes, read the rest of what I wrote.
Today they are matching a criminal database. From that point it's just a small tweak in policy for them to store the data. And on. And on
horseradish_smoothie@reddit
Just like RIPA was introduced to counter terrorism, now used by councils to enforce school catchments.
AndyOf77@reddit
Picking a deliberately emotive issue to try and prove your bullshit point isn't big or clever.
LambonaHam@reddit
In theory constant CCTV is a good thing. The issue is that police and governments have consistently proven that they cannot be trusted with the power they already have, let alone AI face recognition.
CryptographerMore944@reddit
The next lockdowns are going to be utterly dystopianÂ
cb0495@reddit
I donât agree with it.
The majority of people arenât criminals.
Where is this footage going, who has access to it and is it ever deleted and if not where is it stored?
My local B&M uses facial recognition so I donât go in anymore. Itâs overkill.
flippinsailor@reddit
well, its not the UK, and not facial recognition but license plate reader cameras on the other side of the pond. San Jose Ca. 474 automated license plate cameras installed and operated by a third party contractor. I think the company name is "Flock" but dont quote me on that. Before they were installed, the claim was data would just be used to track specific individuals the police were searching for, warrants out for them yada yada. Data would only be stored for short period of time, measures implemented to prevent abuse, all the standard platitudes. As it turns out, the police departments do in fact only store the data for 30 days. The third part contractor however stores the data for a year and at a taxpayer funded cost of $300USD per camera. Also, in the time block that investigators studied (the last 6 month of 2025), average search rate of the data was in excess of 15,000 times per day. A considerable portion of those were from ICE (immigration and customs enforcement for those not familiar with the latest garbage going on over here). No warrants issued, no verifiable justifications, basically just to see if they could spot someone who "looked like an illegal",,, whatever that looks like -insert eye roll here-. A multitude of problems.
As with any surveillance, no matter how carefully justified or what flowery platitudes those collecting the data want to mouth, there is ALWAYS the capacity for misuse, and what CAN be misused, WILL be misused. By them or by someone else. It's not just a matter of misuse by a government, although that would be the most common situation. There is also the very real possibility of an individual or group of individuals getting the data, sorting it by vehicle value, tracking those vehicles daily routines to know exactly when they are away from their homes and where their homes are. Thats just one very simple example. If someone is driving around a $200k mercedes, chances are they have some valuable stuff at home.
Some call it paranoia, 'tin foil' conspiracies yada yada. But i am an old computer programmer. I know what data is worth, how many ways it can be sorted and some of the viable predictions are that can be made from it. As far as absolutely securing data collected goes, there is absolutely no way to secure it 100%. None. It would be worthless if it was 100% secured. Anything encrypted can be decrypted. It just depends on if its worth the work and trouble. Anything transmitted can be intercepted, same dependency. And any network, wired, wireless, cellular, satellite, whatever, is only as secure as the weakest point.
WhyToHide@reddit
I got nothing to hide, so Iâm not against it. I donât know why anyone would be against if they are not criminal.Â
Twenty_Weasels@reddit
Because the people in charge of deciding who is a criminal and who isnât canât be trusted at all, obviously
floorscentadolescent@reddit
Mate this isn't Russia where they throw random people in jail, you're obviously not going to be flagged on thier camera if you're not in a criminal database
Ok-You4214@reddit
I think that line of thinking is itself dangerous. Remember in pre-WW2 Germany Jewish people had nothing to hide, and many crackdowns happen based not on what a person does but who they are.
Right now something could be made which is good, and is used for good - but the infrastructure has then been built for something to be used for an utterly evil purpose with no guardrails to protect people from it.
Victorius_Meldrus@reddit
Bollocks.
Leather-Analyst7523@reddit
I dunno, I unlocked my phone with my face to read this post. Not sure I really care.
CryptographerMore944@reddit
That's on you, you set that up yourself on your device.
tacticall0tion@reddit
It has its place, and I understand the benefits. I absolutely do not trust it to not be abused by either the police, or other services with access to the data. I also don't trust it to be accurate enough to be effective yet, and its been pushed out quickly to justify the spending. I believe we're likely to see an increase in wrongful? arrests as it becomes more widely adopted for the simple fact, its far more inaccurate when scanning anything other than white faces, and there is a racial bias in the police.
notemark@reddit
Personally I don't like it as it treats everyone with suspicion and is indiscriminate in it's use.
For me it's just another reason not to go into towns.
LegendaryBengal@reddit
I was a researcher in biometrics and specifically in bias in these sorts of systems. I also spoke with an officer at length about this and their process
The main thing I was looking to hear was whether there is a human in the loop, which according to the officer, there is. The system itself just picks out matches but there's always a human which decides whether the person imaged by the system matches the one in the database.
The chance of a false positive is very low, like 1:10^4. In the chance of a false positive, no action is taken regardless.
The systems are tested by third party vendors from what I gathered. The issue here is that the policy surrounding the use of AI is grey at best. Most biometric systems are developed by third parties so we don't know what sort of training data or processes they use, therefore we don't know how much bias they have out of the box.
My research was basically pushing for a more open source approach and having publicly available testing datasets and metrics for these systems but was cut short due to funding and other nonsense...
Extreme_Objective984@reddit
So the system is based off a watchlist that is uploaded to the van. Images it records or kept for a fraction of a second, to do identification on, then deleted. It flags individuals only on the watchlist to a human, they do what they can to confirm identity.
LegendaryBengal@reddit
This is the understanding I got, but again this is just based on what the officer told me.
They have a bunch of info and policy on their website but a lot of it's jargon. Would be useful to have a simple explanation and assurance regarding stuff like whether images are stored and the requirement for a human in the loop, etc
Popular_Sir863@reddit
The info and policy is full of jargon because it's supposed to confuse. It's not exactly like the police are above lying or covering things up.Â
ElliottCoe@reddit
It's a tough one isn't it? Yet the internet exists, loyalty cards exist, there is just constant data tracking happening anyway...
HotRubDownParty@reddit
Get your bike stolen. Get punched in the face. Get abused. Police take no action. This can't be about solving crime. Feels far more sinister.
floorscentadolescent@reddit
I think I'd rather have a higher chance than of criminals being caught then people being slightly uncomfortable because they're on a screen they'll never see
matr1x27@reddit
I hate it, but unfortunately I'm not an ultra-wealthy person so can't do anything to stop it
beurremouche@reddit
I've been quietly shocked at how few people are aware of numberplate recognition cameras, constantly surveilling all cars. It's one thing, for both systems, to use technology on an as needed basis, to search for suspected criminals, quite another to conduct surveillance all the time on all of us.
alperton@reddit
Iâm worried, our data is given/passed palantir and transferred third party governments and corporations which might used in some other forms I wonât oblige. I donât trust how our data is used and stored.
churdburg@reddit
I donât remember consenting to it, feels very children of men and I really donât want to live in a panopticon
Dog_Murder_By_RobKey@reddit
Personally I'm indifferent to this
The government can track us through our cars, fridges, phones and from our bank transactions
What's one more slice to the overall shit sandwich
GullibleBreakfast983@reddit
This is Basingstoke
shnu62@reddit
All the more reason to wear a face mask in public
Superb_Extension3169@reddit
Couldnât give a shit.
StarNullify@reddit
Gotta get the Hijabs on
SpyChinchilla@reddit
Look, I hate it.
But I'm already covered by cameras and getting tracked everywhere I go. I'm kind of just passed caring.
snakeoildriller@reddit
I'm not really okay with this, for several reasons:
Facial data is inevitably being collected to populate databases, and while one will obviously the NPC database, who are they sharing the data with?
What is it really being used for - AI training, hopefully so that false-positives are reduced?
Where is the data being stored? The UK initially, but as we've seen with some age-verification data, a version of it is used for additional data-training abroad.
Will it help bring criminals to justice? Who knows! Even it genuinely spots a "person of interest", what are the chances of getting a conviction and custodial time and/or a fine? Honestly...
I do not have a tinfoil garment of any description - it's just one more component in a Government mechanism that just happens to have gone into overdrive to collect PII on its citizens.
sideshowrob2@reddit
It's a weird argument that "I had to chop a finger off and give it to meta and google to use my phone, so what's wrong with the govt also chopping a finger off?" How long before you're fingerless?
Practical-Story-802@reddit
Doesn't bother me in the slightest, ive never committed even the smallest of crimes and I dont intend to. Your image would only be used to identify u, do nothing wrong and it wont be used. And on the flip side, if ur attacked on a night out then if this helps catch the offender then u will be glad its there. We all expect privacy, but we also expect all the help there is when we need it.
EpicEpicnessTheEpic@reddit
If it's used as descrcibed and only checks against police databases for know criminals then fine. Not much different to any form of computer seacrhing really. Beyond that I'd be concerned, but I'm not what sure what purpose would be achieved. Trying to monitor the popualtion of the UK, 24/7 would require enormous resources, cost into the billions and what exactly would you do with that all that data?
BigFeet234@reddit
Naturally adverse but I can see how useful it could be if used in a limited way. You feed it a picture of a suspect or fugitive. But I dont feel.like I know enough to really know.
FitSolution2882@reddit
Completely dystopian and a massive over reach of state powers mixed with pathetically lazy and cost cutting (at least in theory it's cost cutting) ways of policing.
It's becoming a really rather infuriating trope now of how much the UK Government wishes to ban just about everything rather than finding ways to enforce the actual fucking law in the first place.
It really is ridiculous.
no_good_usrname_left@reddit
Suddenly millennials donât look so silly with the moustache finger tattoos. Built in incognito mode đĽ¸
PKblaze@reddit
Fine with it. It's a part of progress.
A lot of crime goes completely unpunished. If this helps identify criminals or reduces crime then I'm not going to complain.
JoesRealAccount@reddit
Strongly pro.
Drunk_Cartographer@reddit
I want less crime but I donât want actual measures to reduce crime.
AndyOf77@reddit
Measures to reduce crime would be having a million jail places and courts that got tougher, sticking a camera in your face for bullshit reasons sort of isn't.
ComprehensiveEmu227@reddit
How, care to evidence your claims?
AndyOf77@reddit
Well half of the current problem with feral scumbags running around is that they know that if they end up in court there's nowhere to put them anyway so unless their crime is particularly heinous then they'll most likely get a CPO anyway
ComprehensiveEmu227@reddit
So no evidence, just feelings.
AndyOf77@reddit
And what exactly do you think will be achieved with spy cameras alone? A few wanted people might get caught for sure but aside from that it flies in the face of "innocent til proven guilty" and that's before you even get to us basically walking into 1984 with no resistance, yeah real slick.
ComprehensiveEmu227@reddit
So no evidence, just feelings?
AndyOf77@reddit
Are you trying to imply that we can solve all crime with these FR cameras then? Not sure what your point is other than being happy to be controlled like the good little citizen you clearly are đ
ComprehensiveEmu227@reddit
So, no evidence?
I'm not arguing with you. I'm trying to understand what evidence you make your claims on?
Individual liberties be damned, I'd rather feel safe. Give me China over the US
AndyOf77@reddit
For crying out loud OF COURSE some people would think twice if they knew they were DEFINITELY going to jail, Indonesia have stats to back that up but I'm sure such studies have been conducted if you get off on the concept so much, as for "individual liberties be dammed", on that point alone just go to hell wrong 'un
ComprehensiveEmu227@reddit
Why are you crying?
AndyOf77@reddit
I'm not crying, it's like this, you think we should all lose our individual liberties and I think that makes you a massive kunt.
AnUdderDay@reddit
The fact that I could probably travel from Penzance to John O Groats and always be in some sort of surveillance is fucking disturbing
WarmJewel@reddit
Innocent people should have nothing to fear from it.
Hot-Sign-249@reddit
If you are against it then you have something to hide.
IIIllIllllIIIIllIlIl@reddit
Pick one of the following: 1) Investment in technology to help catch criminals (facial recognition, AI tracking, better quality cameras, etc.) 2) Massive increase in police officer recruitment/funding to help them catch criminals the old fashioned way 3) Criminals confidently walking the streets without fear
Gold-Mine-Trash@reddit
Depends how it's used and managed. Therein lies the problem.
RepresentativeOil113@reddit
The old totalitarian tiptoe
LongNamedRedditUser@reddit
Have some sympathy for the police - it is so inconvenient for them when people don't do their crimes on twitter.
Hefty-Sheepherder-82@reddit
At least in America they donât ride around and do it in your face they hide behind a screen and wait for you to sign in. đ
sideshowrob2@reddit
People will keep saying "slippery slope" is a fallacy at every step of the way into the next dystopian nightmare.
RopesAreForPussies@reddit
Itâs a good idea if thereâs 0% chance of abuse in the future- like if a certain degenerate party came into power. Problem is humans are horrible people and so it will be abused at some point.
Jimmy_Tightlips@reddit
It's the poster child of Anarcho-Tyranny.
Super-Nuntendo@reddit
I would rather that instead of pumping money and effort into technology and more complicated computer systems, they concentrated on their most important asset.Â
That is people.
Pretty sure dodgy types will just avoid these vans, or wear a balaclava.
misspixal4688@reddit
I've seen cases of this system flagging the wrong people and even 1 incident of that is to many.
Panman6_6@reddit
Go for it. Monitor us all.
ControversyCaution2@reddit
The dishonestly is weird
If you go up to any of these officers and ask what itâs used for and they say âitâs to catch the pedophiles who are walking past who are evading usâ because they know thatâs the easiest thing to get on board with
jelly-rod-123@reddit
Pushes crime off the high street and criminals into the estates.
Criminals (or anyone these days) dont need to go to towns/busy areas where these vans are, why do police think they do! Maybe they catch one or two but side effects are same as banning drugs, just moves it to somewhere else like black markets.
Unique-Seesaw-1415@reddit
Bullshit
Pockysocks@reddit
If it caught criminals that lead to actual convictions and repercussions then it's tolerable but if it catches very few criminals and if the few it does catch only get a slap on the wrist and sent on their merry way then what's the point?
FormatAndSee@reddit
Just means the innocents get put into the system and the scrotes just keep on walking around in hoodies and caps with their heads down.
gretchyface@reddit
They make more mistakes recognising racial minorities, so it's yet another tool of casual systemic oppression at the Police's disposal. Fits right in with their already ingrained racial bias.
Flashy-Nectarine1675@reddit
It's a great thing, I love being spied on.
Impressive_Match_484@reddit
If itâs genuinely used to detect criminals etc then go for it. I have nothing to hide and couldnât care less if they see me walking through a random place in public. My phone and god knows how many apps know my exact location already.
Gro022@reddit
Meh. We're already filmed everywhere we go. I don't break laws so doesn't bother me much.
Spare_Blueberries@reddit
If for catching the criminals that's good....
CreativeAdeptness477@reddit
It's already established that there's no expectation of privacy when you're in public. Some random could always be secretly filming me. It makes no difference to me whether that secret random is police or not.
I'd not want it in my home and take great pains to ensure privacy online, etc, but out in public I have no such expectation and never have had. It's unrealistic to expect privacy in public.
That it's police or whatever... ok if we're not having as many uniformed police around we need an alternative, this is the alternative, and I'm OK with that because I don't have any sort of ideological problem with law enforcement. It's necessary in some form or other.
Since I'm not out there committing crimes this doesn't impact me in the slightest so there's zero 'paranoia' involved. Total non-issue for me personally.
SecondAttemps@reddit
Itâs wrong, out and out. Thereâs always been the jokes about the UK being a nanny state and now it feels like itâs truly becoming one
ReflexArch@reddit
Will this catch the knife carrying thugs, burglars and rogue traders ripping off my elderly neighbour who broke down in front of me recently or will it be used for something else?
All depends how it is used imo.
RandomTyreFitter@reddit
Person of Interest springs to mind
Beautiful_Hawk548@reddit
General consensus seems to be the technology itself isn't the problem, it's who it's used by and how.
Even someone absolutely pro this must be able to imagine a day where the political party they think are the "crazies" left or right, could come into power and then do with it what they want.
retiredblade@reddit
If it gets the scum off the streets great , but where would we put them all the prisons are full and they get let out early just because they are overcrowded.
Electronblue69@reddit
Black mirror I guess it's only gonna get more intrusive until we are all watched 24-7 đ
Yangxiolong22@reddit
"It was the patrols snooping into people's windows. The patrols did not matter. Only the Thought Police mattered."- 1984
Howthehelldoido@reddit
Couldnt care less.
I don't break the law.
Also, this being able to find someone who is lost, or has been taken against their will? Brilliant?
As a tool to track down a criminal or someone who has absconded from jail? Brilliant
"oh, but I don't trust the government"
This isn't the United States, our MP'S arent the enemy.
NefariousnessLow983@reddit
"Recognise this!" Lobs brick
marktuk@reddit
Not too concerned with the tech. I'm concerned about if the people using it have had enough training and are able to look past their on bias to consider the possibility of a false positive.
Really, a match should just be a prompt to "go talk to that person", not a slam dunk reason for arrest. Arguably, if they can't verify the identity of the person after talking to them, they shouldn't be allowed to detain them on facial recognition alone. Innocent until PROVEN guilty, and all that.
theNixher@reddit
Cars are being set up to either electronically limit your speed without an override, or report their owners for speeding, all this connectivity and tech we love is going to be used against us.
CCTV has been around for years, personally I don't care, the only people worried are either doing something wrong, or don't understand that they have already given up all privacy and anonymity by being online, using a bank and having utility bills.
lordsteve1@reddit
I can see why itâs so appealing to those in power; itâs a relatively cheap way to spot wrong-uns assuming you know their face in advance and needs barely any human presence to run it. Exactly how effective it is remains questionable though as it can still get false positives and many of the people youâd want to find fast might be wearing face coverings etc so it struggles with them anyway.
My biggest issues though is that a far better approach would be to actually increase police presence on the ground during the day so that people see them on patrol and know thereâs a presence. That reassures the population and it also acts as a deterrent if thereâs plenty of chance for a criminal to get caught in the act. But that costs money and nobody wants to fund it so the alternative is get a cheap AI to do things instead.
Plus where the point in any attempt to reduce or tackle crime if the court and prison system just lets people off the hook or canât handle the backlog.
swain-@reddit
Love it
Dark_Spider_Angel@reddit
Were those pictures taken in Basingstoke?
vanbentski@reddit
Itâs fine. We are too far gone anyway
Pepsi_E@reddit
Tbh I don't really see the big deal, CCTV is very prevalent in the UK (London is thr 3rd most cctv'd city in the world) and if they're effective at what they do I don't really see an issue.
LieLevel7361@reddit
Problem for me is when somebody cover face and they make this person to take it off. From what I know there is no law which justify this. We don't have law forbidding face covering.. Maybe we should but that's another bag of worms.
AdPrestigious2387@reddit
And then people complain that the police never do anythingÂ
semorebunz@reddit
how about dwp gets one , scan high streets then ask how come you claim you cant walk 10 feet yet ive filmed you wandering around town every day drinking special brew
EnergyResearch28484@reddit
i was shocked to learn they do not already do this
CommanderCorrigan@reddit
Agenda 2030
PalatableVermin9025@reddit
My personal theory:
WW3 is gonna break out massively and most governments are going to use it as an excuse to monitor people's:
*Location is at all times
*Having ID linked to our phones (so we can always be identified and tracked)
*Eating habits and restrictions on what food we can buy
*Consuming habits such as gas, electric, petrol - again with restrictions imposed
*Rubbish habits like recycling correctly and having it linked to individual carbon footprint prints - fines for non compliance
*Everything we do online too
I genuinely hope I'm wrong, but I can see it becoming a reality within a decade
MerchantofDoom@reddit
It is the steps afterwards to think and maybe worry about!!
In some areas of China they use it to identify jay walkers who then get a fine. The fine is taken directly from the WePay account without notice and their face is put on a public wall of shame.
If you have nothing to hide it is protection, but if the government has other intentions, it is an intrusion!!
nfoote@reddit
How do I get this for dumb and selfish parking during the school run?
Large-Lettuce-7940@reddit
or for people who dont pick up the dog shit when out on walks
MerchantofDoom@reddit
Or litterers!!
I was driving through Bath a year ago when I saw 2 girls throw McDonalds rubbish with cups on the footpath as I was driving towards them.
I just stopped the car, wound down the passenger window and politely asked them to pick it up and put it in a bin. I went on to explain that I would put the dash footage on YouTube if the rubbish was there again when I came back.
It wasnât there!
NinjaTeaDrinker@reddit
We were one of the first towns to get these cameras in a residential area. 16 in total. We apparently got a grant from the government. They are 360. Anpr. Audio. 2 miles radius. Facial recognition and tracking. It doesn't feel good or any safer and the police haven't boasted about them being used to catch anyone up to no good. One is near my garden and often see it pointing at my house
vexx@reddit
Letâs be honest, if you have age verification you should hate this.
OKCoookieDough@reddit
Used to be dead set against, as I thought it crossed an obvious line in a democracy that the state should be invisible in your everyday - and you shouldnât need to feel like youâre under suspicion.
However, after witnessing so much crime from shoplifting to phone snatching, facial recognition is a modern policing method which genuine does make an impact on high-risk offenders.
I still think the vans are intrusive. Would be in favour of more out of mind options such as upgrading CCTV cameras to recognise faces - but it would erode transparency.
Real_J_Jonah_Jameson@reddit
My opinion is a bit too extreme and would get me arrested
EvolvingEachDay@reddit
Facial recognition is like Al in that sure thereâs plenty of very good use cases, but the scope for it to be used nefariously is far too great and so it would be better for humanity to scrap it and move on.
Connect-Bug9988@reddit
Didn't an ex KGB agent go public saying Britain has many more times the level of surveillance that soviet-era Russia had, and this comment was 20 years ago.
I'd imagine it's way more advanced now, and only getting worse.
Privacy looks like a thing of the past for many.
WetElbow@reddit
Look at America. Easy for a democracy to become paper thin. Can end up a tool for the dictator.
catsvbadgers@reddit
Just had to scan my fingerprints to go into the Netherlands. Its all surely going to be rolled out everywhere.
Probably Palantir doing something evil with it all that we will only find out when its too late
OkNewspaper6271@reddit
Isn't this contrary to human rights?
Yet_Another_Nerd_@reddit
It does amuse me that people will complain about their privacy with things like this but then give all their details every time they download a new app on their phone as if those big companies donât make a fortune from selling off your data.
Tired_2295@reddit
Time to start wearing 2019 face masks again.
OLLIE798@reddit
I do not want any US (or Chinese) based surveillance technology in my life.
Dcj91@reddit
Biometrics used to unlock phones.
Posting pictures of yourselves via social media.
Probably been to an airport.
The govt and others have our faces. đ¤ˇđ˝
annonn9984@reddit
I live in a rough area, the crime and antisocial behaviour is rampant. I wish we could get these on every corner.
Some_Artichoke_8148@reddit
Brilliant. CCTV is brilliant also. If it were up to me there would be CCTV with FR built in on every street and every public place in the UK. Itâs a great deterrent to crime and helps the police investigate crime. I would also make DNA sampling mandatory for the entire population. Why not ?
NickHoadley@reddit
Invasion of privacy.
Astorant@reddit
Itâs unnerving but since Iâve got nothing to hide it doesnât bother me.
Cisco756124@reddit
disgusting
fpsweston@reddit
They keep trialing this shit every other week in the Malls, Basingstoke (where OP is now) and all the boomers on Facebook support it.
Dystopian as shit and this will only become more invasive. Not to mention it being wildly inaccurate and disproportionately targets minorities.
CoffeeIgnoramus@reddit
I actually asked Thames Valley police to tell me how they secured it from abuse and how they are protecting people who do not want to be found (legitimate reasons, such as political targets and organised crime victims, they are more common than you think). Because there are highly skilled people looking for people to harm them. I have worked with people who did not want to be seen on photos, let alone on something that can literally identify you and your location in milliseconds.
Naturally, I got an letter that was fairly vague saying that it was secure and that data isn't stored... But they didn't really comment on how the system checks faces, because it must be sent (somehow) to a central database, so in theory, that data is possible to intercept if it isn't self-contained in the van itself. But they just didn't even mention it.
HOWEVER, I did get confirmation that covering your face was ok to do and would not get you stopped! Which is not what was happening to some people.
r_mutt69@reddit
Donât commit crime. The po po wonât be looking for you otherwise
Borgmeister@reddit
I don't really think it matters how you feel about the surveillance itself - it is happening, and not just by the state. So working from that baseline it is about acknowledgement, mitigation and how we feel about how we might need to change.
Aer0Sith1@reddit
Clearly in the minority here but I donât see the issue. Each to their own and everyoneâs opinions are valid, I just personally think that even if they catch 1 person with this itâs a benefit to the local community, and I have no issue with them scanning my face as I have nothing to hide.
Infinite-Piano3311@reddit
Lazy but effective?
d-a-s-a-l-i@reddit
I think there should be a significant high bar that has to be met for this to be the best approach to find someone.
Then the question is also what database(s) the data is being compared to.
I also donât want them to take collateral finds and benefit from that.
newtonbase@reddit
We are being filmed constantly anyway. I'd much rather they lift the criminals now rather than try to trace them after they've done further harm.Â
Fantastic_Picture384@reddit
Most people won't care... but I do, but there's not much we can do when every party is in favour of it
Kezly@reddit
Really don't give a shit.
I'm boring. You're boring. 99% of the time the police simply aren't interested in you. Sorry if you think you're special but you really aren't.
The only people who seem concerned are the "I dunt want the guverment tracking me!! I av a right 2 privacy" Facebook types.
jWalwyn@reddit
Such a stupid take. It doesn't concern you, until all of a sudden it does concern you.
Kezly@reddit
If it concerns me then surely I'd have done something to warrant that concern?
jWalwyn@reddit
> "Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say"
wdwhereicome2015@reddit
Who sign up for Clubcard, boots advantage etc so are tacked by private companies anyway
Kezly@reddit
They carry a phone with GPS enabled at all times and drive a car that tracks their trips and locations too
Careless_Effort_9463@reddit
Basingstoke mentioned đŁď¸đŁď¸đŁď¸
Temporary-Zebra97@reddit
Useful tool for law enforcement with more benefits than concerns, plus it winds up a certain set of the population so I totally approve.
Rendogog@reddit
Not really, bringing much benefit though is it, crime rates haven't really dropped because of it.
Temporary-Zebra97@reddit
Not all about crime rates is it?, disruptions and intel gathering are just as important.
Rendogog@reddit
If it isn't about crime what justification is there for gathering intel on the general population? it used to be that you were suspected of something before they started gathering intel on you.
cjgmmgjc85@reddit
It won't be long until everyone will be wearing balaclavas
seanwebb68@reddit
Just watch bbc âThe Captureâ some of the stuff that happens in this tv series is already possible. We have seen deepfake porn sites go up, created by horrible people. The question is do we trust our police and government if not then who knows whatâs next?
AlucardVTep3s@reddit
We often discuss this topic from our perspective, which is valid, but, I wonder what the operators inside must feel? Having all this information being presented to them about the people around them, in their metal container.
wizpip@reddit
I think a lot of people have been watching too many films about government corruption and overreach. Having a public record of where I've been outside, as a single man, is going to provide a lot more alibis for me than problems it's going to create.
We're in an age where anyone can create a convincing AI image or video of anyone doing something suspicious. I'd rather the authorities had a source of truth than relying on word of mouth or potentially fake images.
People always seem to think that these systems can be abused in a negative way against them, but it's much easier to be corrupt when nobody is watching. Manufacturing a false narrative with all these different sources is going to be practically impossible, and therefore the AI stuff is no worse than manual policing.
It will of course make it more difficult to move around if the police want you for something.
MrLuchador@reddit
I feel like this has to violate some sort of basic law Iâm not aware of
anotherwankusername@reddit
The problem is with misidentification and humans not believing other humans saying itâs not them when the computer is telling them something else. Technology blindness. This has happened a fair amount especially with ethnic minorities and even more specifically with black women which is the demographic these systems seem to struggle the most with. This is spoken about in a couple Naomi Klein books Iâve read and the book Freedom To Think by Susie Alegre. Iâve not read it yet by if this is a topic youâre interested in thereâs a book called Surveillance Capitalism which Iâm going to read next but itâs mentioned a lot in other similar books.
dylsreddit@reddit
I recently read Doppelganger, and re-watched The Capture, which when combined into social commentary on today's world nearly drove me to drink.
I've come to the conclusion that a surveillance state already exists and is, in essence, inevitable. I live in the middle of nowhere and even my neighbour has a Ring doorbell.
I am deftly aware that my neighbour is not the only person able to avail that footage from whichever server it lives on.
yahyahyehcocobungo@reddit
Police will say they don't have the time or resources. But is it worth catching 2 criminals for the expense of 300000 images.
At some point all those images will be handed to Palantir or some other US tech company. It's already coming to our laptops in the coming months because California made a law to say software companies must verify their users. So your iphones will ask you to verify at some point this year. This is problematic for free software made by ordinary people because they won't have the resources to do this. Why would a calculator need to verify you anyways?
frankieepurr@reddit
Can I ask why we are the only country in Europe to do so?
JerryCornelius22@reddit
1984 - we watch our freedoms evaporate under the guise that it's for out own protection - the trouble is, as with everything there are pro's and cons - alas the powers that be are not benign but are all about control through fear. The UK is not counted as a free country, we do not have freedom of speech. We have sleepwalked into this sorry state of affairs.
funbundle@reddit
Iâm not too bothered by it, I more bothered about being monitored for have the âwrong opinionâ and being listened to on our devices, whether in private messages and even through our microphones.
Then they use cctv to get ya.
CowDontMeow@reddit
More proactive policing is required which needs funding, at the moment theyâre stretch so thin burglaries, thefts etc rarely go beyond âhereâs a crime reference get fuckedâ
This is a lazy cop-out and doesnât address why petty crime is going up nor does it put a âBobby on the beatâ as a preventative measure.
Iâm not a fan of the constant surveillance, I donât do anything wrong but I also donât trust anything government based to store my data due to leaks, itâs bad enough when your info is leaked by websites getting hacked but my exact whereabouts, daily patterns etc is a completely different ball game.
galacticturd@reddit
I donât trust that the AI systems arenât inherently biased.
DenieD83@reddit
Personally I feel like it's the police over stepping boundaries and also that money could be spent better on things they should actually be doing.
MilkIceLolly@reddit
I want to be concerned. But I'm so done with having twats and criminals get no consequences that I'm starting to think we should have more of it.
Lack668@reddit
Couldnât care less. If it catches wanted criminals then great. Loads of people will cry about it then happily let tech companies use all their personal data as a commodity. The government already have your picture if you have a passport or driving license and know where you live but are bound by data protection, unlike when you happily give away all your personal info by hitting âagreeâ on Facebook
_Dreamer_Deceiver_@reddit
The government have my picture on my passport but if I go to the shops to buy bog roll, my passport isn't scanned to check if I'm a crook
killy_321@reddit
As a normal law abiding citizen I have nothing to hide, however the way the police seems to operate against their own citizens these days I don't trust them not to not abuse or simply just fail to use this technology properly.
Milam1996@reddit
If the system worked perfectly then okay. Iâm not really a privacy paranoia person like MI5 already has a stick up everyoneâs ass and knows what you had for breakfast, especially when youâre in public. My issue is the people who are getting banned from supermarkets because computer says no and it wasnt even them who stole they just have generic person face. You supposed to just starve to death because computer says no? All the super markets reported record profits yet shop lifting is somehow such a major problem? Only one thing can be true and i dont really care for tesco shareholders enough to think billy should starve to death because he looks a little bit like dave.
greenpowerman99@reddit
If itâs used to catch active wanted criminals then thatâs fine, but I suspect that itâs going to be ordinary citizens who owe money that they are going to target.
raquille-@reddit
I donât care really as I recognise my own face already.
Geoffstibbons@reddit
I think it will be used in future for mass control
Mccobsta@reddit
We've already seen that facial recognition is just not good there's way to many false positives with people effectively being banned from places as no matter what it keeps flagging them even though they're not in a databases
pookiednell@reddit
The criminals, at least in London, cover their faces anyway so itâs just the rest of us that have to suffer
Watchgeek_AC@reddit
Iâve got nothing to hide I donât care
JChristSocialist@reddit
Doesnât work if you shake your head side to side rapidly I heard from a man at Rubber Dinghy Rapids.
nameymcnameyboy@reddit
They're gonna arrest me cos my eyeliner is so sharp it constitutes a weapon
_KAZ-2YG_@reddit
It will just encourage more people to wear balaclavas/face coverings.
I have nothing to hide. But that doesn't mean I'm ok with being constantly tracked by surveillance.
AwkwardTie9427@reddit
I'm ok with it. Got nothing to hide.
username-alrdy-takn@reddit
I am quite looking forward to the day I come across one because i will immediately cover my face with whatever I have. not a crime to do so. they will surely question me and i will say i do not consent to this and walk away
outkast922@reddit
Not a fan - but anyone concealing their identity should be easy to apprehend for not complying (& possible fine).The most vocal against it, don't seem to realise this, as another of their goals is banning face coverings.
Wild_Demand4021@reddit
Didn't they stop doing this is certain towns because it was considered racist of some kind đ¤ dont quote me I just remember seeing it on Reddit before hand
InitiativeNumerous63@reddit
If itâs used responsibly, ethically and for the right reasons e.g. identifying a person responsible for a crime then Iâm for it. But we all know that it wonât be
blomba2@reddit
Theyâre searching for people posting hurty words online
cdh79@reddit
Sadly it doesn't work on balaclavas and ebikes.
Plane-Physics2653@reddit
This looks like a specific operation.
I have let go of issues with CCTV/face recognition per se. But the police should only be able to access the footage with permission from a court on the basis that a crime of a certain magnitude has taken place.
Affectionate_Feed_88@reddit
Basingstoke mentioned!
New-Web4704@reddit
I understand the feeling of paranoia. We lived fine at home and then my dad put a camera up on the front door. Nothing crazy. Seems normal. Most folks do it. My mum is now paranoid and refuses to chat near the front door and feels like he's watching all the time. Not everyone is like that but we have to accept that's what it means if for more folks than we realise.
KoolNKrazi@reddit
Absolutely against, but also eyyy Basingstoke mention
Unhappy-Customer5277@reddit
burn and break them all a revolution is due and it will come soon
ClimbNature@reddit
People don't realise how sophisticated this technology already is and will be moving forward.
It's not just looking at your face for long. It'll be identifying you, your age and ethnicity, who you interacted with, how long you interacted with them for, what shops you go to, what you purchased, how long you looked at an item on the shelf, how you walk (gait analysis), where you travelled to, what car you drove, what license plate, how long you drove for.
Then all that data will be combined with your online presence, which apps you use, what you buy, what you took pictures of and when, who you chatted to online, what you searched, what illnesses keep you up at night, what family dramas you're having and needed google to research, your gps data from your phone and car.
Then all that data is combined with your smart watch health data that is monitoring your blood pressure, heart rate, sleep, movement etc.
ALL that data will be combined and stored somewhere on someone else's computer that you don't have access to, and will be used to profile you for all possible things in the future, both by advertising companies and the government. You'll be denied health care insurance, you'll be denied mortgages, you'll pay a premium on car insurance etc etc the list is endless.
This is the future we are barrelling towards.
Ok-Yogurtcloset3467@reddit
It misidentified black and Asian people at least 10x more than white people so, as you can imagine, I am not a fan. Its crazy that it would even be rolled out until it can correctly identify all individuals of all races equally. Although, I'll be honest, I still think it shouldn't be.
CH4RL13WH1T3@reddit
If nothing else it's lazy policing. They should be pursuing crime, not waiting for them to fall in their lap.
wildcharmander1992@reddit
my town is one of the highest crime areas In the UK . It's also the largest town without a dedicated police station.
We also don't have a hospital
Meaning if an assault happens in the town centre, the ambulance comes from the next town over and can take an hour
The police come from even further if there isn't a couple doing the rounds etc to hit quotas
So I personally welcome things like this because the Tories made us a waste land in more ways than one in every term they've ever been in charge ( which is why it frustrates me when my town votes for them, even if you're anti labour the worse they do is just not improve us, Tories actively get a lot of there cash for other areas by closing/stopping development/selling assets from my town when they're in power)
I can understand the facial recognition shit is a boogieman to some people but it's the same as fingerprints really, if you haven't / aren't committing crime they arent gonna care about your day to day business or know who you are anyways
With the added bonus that if a crime is committed it's easier to identify the culprit/witnesses hopefully leading to convictions
Id rather this than still have big brother watching 24-7 but when something happens ( like the guy robbing my local shop with a samurai sword when my Mrs and kid were in shop terrified) the footage is near unusable because it's a blurry potato
TheTruthIsOutThere_x@reddit
I totally believe it'll be misused. They'll use it to catch people they want to catch, not who should be caught - big difference (e.g. social media posts instead of shoplifting etc).
Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit
Your opinion is all well and good but Iâve dealt with the police, judges and juries. They watch so much CSI that they think anything vaguely scientific is indisputable proof.
theModge@reddit
It doesn't really matter whether a) it works or b) we like it, it's being done to us and no party is opposed to it.
The only thing preventing us being tracked effectively is governmental incompetence: despite the technology working and being mature they'll manage to buy a 10 year old system that does not in fact work.
Fanjo_mcclanjo@reddit
I wish we could have an ai tool to track governmental incompetence and punish them accordingly.
RegretEasy8846@reddit
Iâm for it; I have nothing to hide and plenty to gain in the context of safety. Photography and videography have been allowed in public places for a long time, this is just that with an Ai twist. I donât care.
jadedflames@reddit
The problem is that the AI recognition tools are still prone to getting things wrong. People have been arrested for bad AI IDs.
The tech just isn't there yet. I understand I live in a surveillance state - I moved to London for god's sake, I knew what I was getting. But the AI face recognition concerns me.
RegretEasy8846@reddit
Well thatâs a different thing for me, they need to be verifying what itâs saying or accusing, that is dangerous if left unchecked.
Valten78@reddit
Before we met my wife was sexualy assaulted by a taxi driver. She went to the police who unfortunately where not able to trace the man with the limited information she was able to remember.
Then about a year later she read a story in a local newspaper about a taxi driver who had been found guilty of raping a passenger. She recognised the photo immediately as the man who had attacked her.
He was caught because CCTV was used to corroborate the story of the woman who reported him. Such footage wasn't available when he picked up and attacked my wife.
I used to be against CCTV everywhere until my wife told me this. All my liberal instincts vanished. If CCTV helped stop this bastard well then good. I wish he'd been caught on tape sooner. Who knows how many women might have been spared.
I kind of feel the same way about this technology too.
Middle--Earth@reddit
I'm fine with it.
Ok_Alternative_530@reddit
Iâm not out committing crimes and Iâm not cheating on anyone. It doesnât bother me, and if it helps prevent or solve crimes then to me it seems like a net positive.
ArmzDiem@reddit
Suddenly thought of the capture
probablyaythrowaway@reddit
Considering the software has misidentified people and has shown bias. Plus how cagey theyâre being about the system. No I dont trust it.
No-Echo-8927@reddit
why would i be bothered that someone knows where i am? I'm already outside, surrounde by other people who can see me. There's no difference.
DL3432@reddit
All for it. There's way too much low level crime that is not efficient to enforce. If this helps, then good.
morebob12@reddit
This van doesnât have facial recognition equipment btw
ChewiesLipstickWilly@reddit
Well, they have to start trickling in things that'll eventually be the norm and oversea everything as capitalism crumbles and fascism rises in the West. Fun times ahead
RainbowPenguin1000@reddit
Iâm all for it.
I know ultimately people are worried that they can be tracked in daily life and their movements be recorded on some government system but I feel that is far less disturbing than people being stabbed, mugged and both physically and sexually assaulted which are all things that would decrease if this was in place on a wider scale.
Sacrificing some privacy and freedom for a safer society is worthwhile in my eyes.
EscapeArtist92@reddit
Don't really care to be honest. I haven't done anything wrong so what is there to be worried about.
demoralising@reddit
I don't like them, but I think it'll get to a point (if we're not already there) where the regular CCTV cameras are capable of facial recognition. It's funny that a van with a camera on top of it feels intrusive yet cameras all over town and in shops and car parks and lifts are just everyday things that we barely notice nor care about....
Main_Contribution274@reddit
Already doing it.
CatchRevolutionary65@reddit
Itâs a police response to government not doing anything about worsening living conditions
bigarseonblast@reddit
1984
Fanjo_mcclanjo@reddit
Well historically there has never been an example of a time where governments abused powers so what could go wrong?
PerkeNdencen@reddit
Dead against it. The panopticon literally drives people mad. You don't have to be doing anything illegal, morally wrong, ethically dubious or otherwise. The notion that at any time, anywhere, you might be being watched will ultimately drive you mad. We should make more of the right to anonymously go about your business.
Fungled@reddit
Either itâs the establishment tacitly admitting that theyâve lost control, or this is entirely what they want. Both are awful
Teaofthetime@reddit
Not a problem for me. The more it's used the better it will get and if it helps keep criminal activities down then that's a good thing.
Super_Plastic5069@reddit
I just walk about with my come face on. Checkmate rozzers!!
MrPogoUK@reddit
A massive factor for me is whether itâs just checking against a database of wanted criminals and discarding any non-matches, or building a profile of everyone it sees every time and place it sees them.
QuailTechnical5143@reddit
Iâve worked in law enforcement and I can say that this technology makes a HUGE number of mistakes. Picking up random people as wanted criminals or shoplifters prompting stores to kick perfectly normal customers out on the grounds that âthe systemâ has identified them.
Not to say that it doesnât pick up a few wronguns as well, particularly at events but itâs just not working as well as some people would have you believe.
Orangeandjasmine777@reddit
I have mixed feelings. There is a part of me that thinks it makes us safer. On the other hand, it's "control" and I wonder if it's necessary.
cosmic_monsters_inc@reddit
Isn't this that thing they said they definitely weren't going to be doing when they started getting this tech in?
some-bloke-@reddit
They only recognise people that are wanted for serious criminal offences. So, if you are not wanted for a serious criminal offence, you will be fine.
hdhxuxufxufufiffif@reddit
What's the error rate?
LambonaHam@reddit
In theory it should be great.
However, the police and the government have consistently proven that they cannot be trusted with this level of power. They'll only ever use it when it benefits themselves, not us.
nomodsman@reddit
Mavakor@reddit
I hate it
International-Tie917@reddit
I hate it. It's a massive invasion and I think any chief of any force who implements it should be imprisoned for breaching human rights.
AndWhatBeard@reddit
Even my phone can't recognise me half the time.
I am on a database so they do have my DNA and a picture but that was in my distant youth. I realised quite quickly I was not going to make it in the criminal world. I am joking a bit, a girl started a fight with me many years ago, she came off a lot worse and I was the one arrested and charged for it.
Unhappy-Giraffe-563@reddit
Iâd rather this than crime đ
celem83@reddit
Nah, come up with another way to control crime that doesnt itself feel like a crime
Unhappy-Giraffe-563@reddit
You never heard of cctv? You think your internet activity isnât monitored and tracked?Â
celem83@reddit
Atm VPNs are still legal, so I do what I can with internet security.
Im aware that cctv is a thing, but it is not yet plumbed directly into these FR systems
(It may be in some places, Im not in London, Im also not in a populous city)
Unhappy-Giraffe-563@reddit
Why are you so paranoid? What are you hiding?Â
kaanbha@reddit
Exactly - if it helps get dangerous people off our streets then it is a good thing.
Unhappy-Giraffe-563@reddit
Exactly. If you do nothing wrong then you have nothing to worry about. Simples.
wdwhereicome2015@reddit
But donât see them in high crime hotspots as would be turned on their side identifying seagulls and pigeons đ
ServerLost@reddit
It's intrinsically racist, keep misidentifying Asian men.
TheBerdedOne@reddit
Doesn't bother me. I gave up my data the moment that I was introduced to this world. I'm all for any tools to aide the police in capturing criminals.
They happened to have something similar in Kings Cross station, and I got chatting with one of the officers there, and he mentioned that it had only been active for around 2 hours and they had already arrested 3 people who have been on the run.
1 person who had been wanted for 13 years, and 2 who were on the run for around 3-6 months.
Say what you will, the technology is there and works. Just remember, if you're anti-giving up your data, perhaps don't consider signing up to websites, taking out personal finance agreements, getting a house, getting a car, going on holiday, getting a job, starting a business, buying shopping/groceries etc. etc.
shin-chan@reddit
Just another step towards the dystopian big brother society we all seem so determined to reach. At some point it's hard to keep caring.
kitti_wake@reddit
There was some interesting examples of how ai is used on the recent episodes of Forensics: The Real CSI (on BBC) and it was hard to argue it wasn't great at solving some pretty horrible crimes there.
However, that wasn't these stationed vehicle collection point ones or whatever they're called, but used instead to quickly scan through and narrow down a bunch of different footage the police collect from door cams and other cctv spots. Whereas it would normally take many painful hours for the officers to individually look through every one in the hope the right person would appear in it.
Effective_Ad_1953@reddit
Big brother state as we march closer to a orwellian dystopian future.
Common-Aardvark-8358@reddit
Itâs here and thereâs nothing anyone can do about it
demoralising@reddit
This is the right answer. People act like we can do something about them, but they're here. We're being watched everywhere we go. The vans are just a very visual reminder.
scottgal2@reddit
This is just a van they put them there and often leave them empty apart from when there's crowds (then they'll raise the mast).. Facial scanning just isn't as valuable / widespread as you think. The investment / computing power to do it constantly just isn't worth it; for most people they could already find you through your phone location.
The vans are deterrence not really that useful. The angle when low gives you better facial imaging but they get blocked too often to be really usable. The 20-30 (with 3-4 PTZ they'll use for facial recognition) CCTV cameras all around you are really the big thing.
On match days they'll use a pre-loaded db of banned fans / troublemakers and do targetted recognition but that's a more direct threat.
Source: Software developer who has consulted to the UK govt and Police Scotland on automated crowd scanning and recognition technologies (costly, sparsely used, more tightly controlled than you may imagine). ANPR however...EVERYWHERE.
Still_Pass_5110@reddit
My thoughts can be summed up in a few words.....
A few words
No I'm just kidding but actually.... I hope we don't become like China.
haaiiychii@reddit
Too many false positives from Facial recognition and AI for me to ever like it. I'll cover up and face mask around them, fuck them.
UnfortunateWah@reddit
Currently I donât believe they keep a record of your face if you get scanned and donât have markers.
How long that will persist? Who knows.
Iâm not against technology being used to increase the detection rate of wanted individuals, I would be against police being able to pull up your location from the last 3 weeks from facial recognition that keeps a record.
I mean they do this already with ANPR if needed, but Iâm not sure that hypothetical future would be good for the nation.
CumGuzlinGutterSluts@reddit
Juggalo face paint completely protects you just btw
SecTeff@reddit
I hate it. None of this really makes the U.K. a safer place.
Iâm totally unconvinced it represents good value for money aside from it violating everything that makes me feel proud open and free democratic values
Portablefrdge@reddit
It's intrusive. Similar to taking a picture of random people cutting about their business and dumping it on reddit.
B4DM4N12Z@reddit
I don't necessarily like it, plus I'd be paranoid if the system made a mistake and thought I was the criminal.
Which I saw in a mini-documentary about this where the system flagged a lady for stealing even though the lady never stole, and now this lady is anxious cause the shop workers will look at her in a certain way.
ManInGarage28@reddit
You're naive if you think it wasn't happening anyway.
ChangingMonkfish@reddit
To scan the face of everyone in town all the time just on the off-chance you might catch a criminal (i.e. just fishing rather than a targeted search for a specific person for a limited amount of time) is excessive and shouldnât be allowed.
The default position should be that people are left alone by the authorities, not constantly surveilled.
e-pancake@reddit
itâs fucking sinister
ShowMeYourPapers@reddit
I'm too old for this shit. Seeing as I'm having chemo I'm going to have my face covered when I'm out in public anyway.
Additional_Hippo_878@reddit
The footage WILL be kept and abused. I think there is no doubt about that, unfortunately. Great for tracking crims, but that won't be all 'they' use it for. In many ways AI = Artificial Interference. Humans are often greed-driven, selfish. and quite stupid.
JamesLilian@reddit
I think itâs a good thing. Crime has gone through the roof in the city I live in, if facial recognition helps then so be it. I live a very boring life so I am not bothered one bit about being included- they can film me 24/7 if they really want to.
Special-Ad-5554@reddit
Don't trust it one bit. I would happily destroy it if it wasn't a crime
MushroomTop1381@reddit
Hate it. A world without privacy is just ugh. What happens when it comes under use by the wrong people too?
IvyFernMoss@reddit
Grim. Hate it.
hhfugrr3@reddit
I think it should be properly regulated. I've seen no evidence that it does anything useful when used by the police. I think it's completely inappropriate when used by private companies. It's not so long ago that we were criticising the Chinese for this sort of mass surveillance.
Brutehex@reddit
Reminds me of the scenes in the minority report with the constant eye scanning, I wonder how long till thatâs a thing đ¤
FroHawk98@reddit
Didn't they pull them due to racial bias in the AI models?
I hate them.
But I think these will just be the general, recognition against the police database, not the AI variant.
MiddleNo5285@reddit
What AI variant are you talking about? Sounds interesting
Wipeout_uk@reddit
dont like it, hide your face, big brother is always watching in the UK...
Lost_Afropick@reddit
Terrified.
It will have human user faults and not be perfect but people will treat it as infallible and there will be miscarriages of justice based it's use.
phlopip@reddit
People writing on the internet that they donât want the police/authorities to be able to track them in a high street. Oh the irony.
Funion_knight@reddit
If your carrying a smart phone with you then what is your worry your already being tracked.
Jazzlike_Quiet9941@reddit
Really don't care, for as long as I'm not a criminal.
Intruder313@reddit
I'm for it as long as it's accurate and I can sue for being falsely accused due to a misidentification
Face coverings would need to be deemed illegal though
CanineCorvidious@reddit
Including religious head coverings
seadcon@reddit
Facial recognition in towns today.
Facial recognition online shopping tomorrow.
BastardHelmet@reddit
A reg plate for the body. It will be as hellish as ANPR cameras pumping out automated fines. Face coverings will be outlawed at some point
Brilliant_Bowler_994@reddit
Im just going to wear a burkha.Â
Lanthanidedeposit@reddit
It won't be long before it's an offence to try and spoof the cameras.
Little_Strike_4398@reddit
It effectively already is - you are under no obligation to show your face or walk past these vans, but if you cover your face or try to avoid the van the police take that as 'suspicious' and stop you anyway
Thorpedo870@reddit
Im pretty left wing and im against it
It could be the thin edge of a much bigger wedge
MerchantofDoom@reddit
It is the steps afterwards to think and maybe worry about!!
In some areas of China they use it to identify jay walkers who then get a fine. The fine is taken directly from the WePay account without notice and their face is put on a public wall of shame.
If you have nothing to hide it is protection, but if the government has other intentions, it is an intrusion!!
Puppygirl621@reddit
They're evil but English people love some security theatre, look at the replies in this thread, the people want the state fucking them raw, thats actually their desire. And this isn't a desire placed there by the scary evil state, its just the national character of this country, its like theres a genetic drive for submission and conformity.
Vega5529@reddit
"English people" "State" Yank detected.
BlondePotatoBoi@reddit
There's already cases of the tech wrongly accusing people of shoplifting. AI is still a fairly infant technology and it's being used too much too soon.
New_Slice_1580@reddit
If the police were not institutionally corrupt I would be for it
But they are
I_ALWAYS_UPVOTE_CATS@reddit
There have to be safeguards. This technology has previously been poor at distinguishing non-white faces. Has that been improved? There's also the potential for the wrong person to get flagged if they happen to look a bit similar to a suspect. This isn't a problem per se as long as the technology is merely used as a starting point for human-led investigation. If it gets to the point where protestations of 'that's not me' are ignored because 'the computer said it is', then that's a problem. The latter point is certainly a concern but I don't think it's guaranteed to happen as some people are claiming.
If the system truly does just compare faces to a database of suspects and delete everyone else, then I don't see the problem. If they're able to start using, say, the passport database to identify everyone walking by, then that would be a step too far.
It is somewhat amusing, however, to see people complaining about being 'tracked by the state' via facial recognition while they carry round a device that can already be tracked near enough in real time by foreign corporations as well as the authorities.
FlippingGerman@reddit
To your last point - it is at least voluntary! Thatâs the big difference, the matter of choice.Â
DrH1983@reddit
I'm not particularly bothered myself, like I don't care if a facial recognition van drives past and there can be some benefits of it helps identify criminals, but I do have concerns about how it could be abused.
Could we see potential future governments abuse the system? It's not impossible to imagine more fascistic governments using the data in ways not attended.
More pressing is the issues with false positives, especially when data sets might be biased against certain demographics.
PercyVader@reddit
I THINK ITâS AWESOME!!!
EdAlex1993@reddit
Bro if not not a criminal, nothing to worry about
EdAlex1993@reddit
Those who downvote think I care ? LOL I donât support it either whole idea, but normal people donât need to stress about it
pcgamez@reddit
You need to carefully consider what you mean when you say normal. That is an ever shifting definition in the UK..Â
EdAlex1993@reddit
This is Reddit mate, I can post biggest nonsense every if I want to lol
GopnikOIi@reddit
Literally the same as saying I don't care about free speech because I have nothing to say
pcgamez@reddit
Literally not true
Prolapse94@reddit
No, no, it is true.
If you've ever had biometrics taken in relation to an offence, the systems uses that photo to ID a person. So if you're wanted for a Fail to Appear for example, the system uses the biometrics image as a reference and it scans people's faces for a match
Previously, this would be done manually via a grainy image from CCTV but it's automated and very accurate
spudds96@reddit
Theyâve already been doing it for a few years either way
Itâs one of those things thatâs inevitable
ODFoxtrotOscar@reddit
That we have been sleepwalking into even greater State surveillance than East Germany and the Stasi
MountainMuffin1980@reddit
I don't trust it not to be abused at some point. I mean, I dunno, I'm not intending to ever do a crime so it doesn't really bother me too much. But what tjf at some point I get accused of attending a rally for a terrorist organisation, becuase they're tracker semaw me walk near one?
International-Wear57@reddit
Those things are very racist
Due-Parsley953@reddit
It will quickly become yet another technology used "for our benefit and safety" that will be used against us.
Yahiroz@reddit
My main issue is when the police/security team blindly trusts what the facial recognition detects, there's already been a few cases where it's misidentified people. They need to properly check to see if the results are correct before targeting innocent people.
InsaneInTheRAMdrain@reddit
I used to care, but fighting it is like trying to stand in front of a wave.
Before, we were worried about personal information, gps data with phones, and cctv cameras everywhere. Now that's just everyday life. The new generations rarely even think about it.
This is the same, how to feel when it's already everywhere.
And if the government wants to do something, they will just sneak it in while no ones looking. Like digital iD, quickly followed by online id etc.
We had the biggest petitions ever in the uk against these and they still said "fuck you we're doing it".
lamaldo78@reddit
If it reduces crime and anti social behaviour, as long as they're transparent ie no hidden agenda then I'm okay with it.
baeworth@reddit
On one hand Iâm not worried because im a law abiding citizen and Iâm sure our phones are doing much worse.
That being said, people arenât consenting to this and it feels unnecessary. Until there are stats proving a huge decrease in crime or increase of serious criminals caught, it just feels too dystopian and brings a bad vibe
koyliMeld9003@reddit
Personally, I donât mind, I have nothing to hide and abide by the law. Those who are intent on causing trouble , or do not wish to be identified, will just cover their faces.
soulsteela@reddit
Iâd have to leave the house for it to affect me đ, I own several hats n scarves.
P-l-Staker@reddit
Full scarf and wooly hat in the middle of summer let's goooo!
Man's not hot
Interesting-Tip-812@reddit
It's an intrusive and unwanted attack on our freedom, sovereignty and it's an unnerving glimpse of our digitally controlled future. GTF
Awkward-Power-9617@reddit
I wonder if I can get an invisible bandwidth laser that can burn out a camera sensorÂ
Woffingshire@reddit
If it's usedike this I don't nessessary mind it. By that I mean that the police are out in clearly marked vans doing it from the van as a temporary tool in that situation.
If it were every single CCTV camera tracking my at all times I would be far more wary. It's something we've criticised China for doing for year
fothergillfuckup@reddit
I think Big Brother is watching.
DangerousDisplay7664@reddit
I think it gets it wrong more than anyone realises and results in people being banned from entire shopping centres and retail parks because someone who looked a bit like them stole something.
Granted, the number is low percentage wise but the figure should be zero IMO.
Victorius_Meldrus@reddit
Could. Not. Give. A. Fuck.
The only time I ever even think about it is when one of these sus posts appear. I'm not much of a criminal at all these days. On the infitesimally small chance that I get misidentified, I suspect it'll take all of about 15 minutes to confirm I was at work/home/shopping and not stealing some old lady's handbag and wheelying away on an e-bike.
CyclingBrit@reddit
theres quite a high chance of misidentification and the 15 mins you speak of could be multiple hours
Victorius_Meldrus@reddit
Do you have an actual figure for the misidentification rate? I assume you know what model the Police are using?
sitdowncomfy@reddit
Did we learn nothing from the spycops scandal? These are not people to be trusted with mass surveillance
rjyung1@reddit
The way it works is that it scans your face, checks against a pre-existing database, then immediately deletes the scan if no match is found.Â
I think cautiously accepting this is a good way forward - not without scrutiny, but also not with any hysteria just because its novel technology.Â
turkishhousefan@reddit
You don't work in IT, do you?
AndyOf77@reddit
Problem with that is that hardly anybody trusts in the fact that it will immediately delete the image, also it could be the first step towards a Chinese style social system, and for that alone they can get fucked.
IndividualCurious322@reddit
Dystopian.
geordieooosha69@reddit
Well it looks like they dont have it in Epsom. Bastards.
HorrorAccomplished78@reddit
I always wanted more TV exposure. This will have to do.
nickdaniels92@reddit
If it's actually successful at getting wanted people off the streets then it's totally fine IMO and makes sense. Research some years ago was also successful at training models to identify people from how they walk (gait recognition), and they should be exploring that avenue as well, but probably aren't.
I have concerns about the amount of transparency there'll be on success rates, the false positives, how well false identification is handled, and the general competence or lack of with those rolling it out and managing it going forward. So good tech, but likely going to be compromised by the humans working with it.
PotatoTomato52@reddit
Life imitates art imitates life
enterprise1701h@reddit
Whats the point front line officers know who the scumbags are in every town centre, the ones chasing problems every day, they lock them up, release them the next day and cps drop the case and the cycle repeats, its only worth catching offenders if they are actually going back to jail
GamerGuyAlly@reddit
Dystopian. Strongly oppose it.
neverbeensideways@reddit
We asked for more safety. So we get things like this to find the evil ones. Then we complain about freedom đââď¸ if you aint doing out wrong why you bothered about been on camera walking to a shop. Most of you choose freely to have you faces on social media, yes you have given permission for that but your images still get used in a similar way to theese vansđ¤ it really doesnt bother me. Hundreds of people pass eatch other a day, and if this helps catch a someone planning to stab up a school then film away!
celem83@reddit
Not ok, i'll go everywhere masked if they do this.
Im happy to identify myself on demand, im not ok with being identified as a ground-state of existence
soviet_bias_good@reddit
If you arenât known to the police one way or another, which is usually through custody photos or images obtained in investigations, often times through CCTV (or in extreme cases, passport/ID photos, but those are only reserved for high-risk suspects like suspected terrorists), you have very little to worry about. Live Facial Recognition only targets a small number of people, often absconders or people on a warrant for reoffending.
shredderroland@reddit
What's the difference between a human observing you vs that same human evaluating what the surveillance system has flagged up?
BobDude65@reddit
Hate it.
GrimmwulfeGaming@reddit
The UK is one of the most surveiled countries in the world. It was previously studoed that on average you're caught on around 7 cameras a day, 14 in London. That was from quite a while ago so it's likely gone up.
I don't think people hate the idea of surveillance in fact it's a key part of security and safety for both public and private reaaons
I think the problem is that facial recognition is largely AI driven and therefore has the same faults and inaccuracies. It's only a matter of time before we see 'person wrongly convicted of crime due to facial recognition camera'.
The other concern and my own personal one is its just another thing we're fobbing off on a computer so it becomes a wider issue of less requirements for actual officers in a time where we really need more boots on ground.
Sea_Photograph_3998@reddit
A gang of men dragging a 20 year old woman into a church in Epsom, Surrey and gang raping her inside the church is dystopian tbf. This kind of mass facial recognition is necessary.
âMainstreamâ (old) media are saying it happened outside the church. Theyâre frightened of reporting the truth.
dataplague@reddit
Shouldnât be necessary
Victorius_Meldrus@reddit
Shouldn't be necessary to lock your bike/car when you leave it unattended, either. Lots of things shouldn't be necessary, but we don't live in an ideal world.
Sea_Photograph_3998@reddit
I agree. But it is.
yafe-flacko@reddit
yes. do it. if you canât show your face in public, thatâs your problem
_D0MiNiX_@reddit
show middle finger when you see them. oh wait. you can never be sure what's illegal these days.
eufemiapiccio77@reddit
Remember no face no case. So itâs pointless itâs just collecting AI training data and wonât actually do anything meaningful like increase catch rate or reduce crime etc
maceion@reddit
No problem. Such a mass observation allowed a person to be identified and convicted a few months ago.
DilapidatedVessel@reddit
Just another symptom of the western governments current collective hard on for mass surveillance and privacy erosion.
Can't wait to be falsely accused of a heinous crime one day just because some crappy AI system matches my face to some other guy doing something terrible.
eufemiapiccio77@reddit
I donât understand what itâs meant to achieve?
liviothan@reddit
Itâs so big brother. BUT if it makes streets safer then I am for it.
Overgrown_fetus1305@reddit
I hate it, the tech has a ton of false positives and is racist in practice, and I shouldn't be spied on while the police aren't even really going after landlords that illegally evict tenants. Or corrupt CEOs/politicians. If it was up to me, we'd ban it entirely; I might live in England, I don't want to live in Ingsoc.
quarky_uk@reddit
Great idea. Much more accurate than relying on people to of it.
pobox1663@reddit
The chilling effect is a thing and extremely dangerous for society in the long term. Making certain the people know theyre being watched is a major step towards an undefeatable tyranny.
Ikkarus7@reddit
Couldnât care less honestly. There are CCTVs all around and I havenât got anything to hide so why worry? Just go about my day as usual and will forget about it in about 5 minutes time.
Temo2212@reddit
Face covering is LEGAL in the UK so what is the point of facial recognition cameras? It definitely not gonna work against criminals until face covering is legal.
wordshavenomeanings@reddit
I don't think crims will be walking to tesco with a balaclava on every day.
Temo2212@reddit
Oh yea, let's rely on criminals good will not to wear balaclava. what can go wrong :d
Occamsfacecloth@reddit
I suppose as long as they're only wearing it when doing crimes it would still work
wordshavenomeanings@reddit
It is more about catching people they already know.
Its a huge resource drain to try to tack down a wife beater the old fashioned way.
Red-Jaeger@reddit
The problem Iâm finding here is surely this will be flagging the same individuals over and over.
Admittedly, Iâm not totally clued up on the state of prisons recently, but isnât the general consensus that our prisons are full to capacity? If these criminals are getting brought in through this facial recognition process, then given suspended sentences or warnings because the system is already full and then going back out into the wild, does that not make this a less cost effective option than just more closely monitoring those already known to them?
I feel like the whole policing/prison system need a bit of a shake up to make it more effective because it seems to be underfunded and unstaffed at every turn and then waste what money they do have on this when, imo, it could be better spent elsewhere.
_Rvvers@reddit
Doesnât make a difference if all the scumbags are covering their faces.
Stormagedd0nDarkLord@reddit
Hope they get my good side.
Donkeytonk@reddit
We already have one of the highest concentrations of CCTV cameras. We've been living this for years already. Anyone with the funds and resources can see everything on yoru phone already.
Batalfie@reddit
It's disgusting
SpongeFixation@reddit
The people who need to be recognised are all wearing balaclava anyway đ¤Ł
Jimny977@reddit
If I believed in our institutions and safeguards, and believed in our politics not to get extreme, authoritarian, corrupt etc, then sure, it would be a reasonable safety and policing measure. I do not believe in those things.
miuipixel@reddit
Only if it can be used to catch criminals
KeyJunket1175@reddit
what's the point, if you don't ban covering the face in public (like most of Europe does)?
map01302@reddit
I totally agree, since the pandemic it's not unusual to see kids in ski masks. Going back 2 or 3 decades people would have been calling the police thinking these people were ira or religious extremists about to detonate a bomb. Now it's normal.Â
Gloomy_Pastry@reddit
"We need more policemen out to check people"
"Hey, we have this new tech that can ID people, it takes away the need for somoene to recognise someone so the police can do other things"
"No, not that"
Similar with ANPR, "OMG why are you finding people with no insurance or driving illegally, you should be aout catching Peedoes"
"errm, they are traffic police, their role is to catch traffic offences.
Artistic_Western_623@reddit
Lol I couldn't agree more. I can't think of any reason to be against this.
I mean other people on the street can see you; it's not like you're invisible when cameras aren't around. This is just a more efficient method of identifying wanted individuals.
Sir_Diealot@reddit
It can get in the bin.
maksigm@reddit
It was a mistake obviously
No_Topic5591@reddit
I'd be a little surprised if it actually worked, given that ANPR cameras can't even reliably read my car's number plate correctly.
AndyOf77@reddit
I have nothing to hide but I'm pulling my snood up, nobody asked me for my consent so they haven't got it yet, i also do the same in shops known for using FR.
dowhileuntil787@reddit
I can't say I _like_ it, but if it's effective and actually prevents crime, it's pretty hard to argue that we shouldn't use it with appropriate safeguards.
dobber72@reddit
It's only useful if the courts and the justice system use them effectively. You have all those cameras to catch a criminal who just gets a suspended sentence, time after time.
bowen7477@reddit
Don't give a shit tbh.
rileyvace@reddit
With the amount of crime we've had in my city recently I am all for it.
We keep getting loads of teen from London and surrounding areas coming down and vandalising cemeteries, destroying trees, setting fire to vehicles, stabbing each other.
Like, so much shit I see on the headlines just this past week. https://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/26012527.southend-dispersal-order-launched-keep-public-safe/
brum_newbie@reddit
The issue is the previous government cut police spending so do they actually have the resources to follow up on petty crimes?
sennalvera@reddit
Not bothered. I find much of the discourse around it to be slightly hysterical.
dbxp@reddit
I can see how it could be helpful but I think in the UK we need to sort the courts and sentencing out first. Being able to detect people really easily but then just giving them a slap on the wrist which they ignore is pointless.Â
I think on balance it should be limited to areas of significant security interest. If someone is wandering around the perimeter fence of a nuclear power plant or military base then having facial recognition to track their movement makes sense.
theoretical_chemist@reddit
If it didn't get abused or used for the wrong things, it's great right? Don't be a dickhead and your face won't flag anything.
RTB897@reddit
I'm massively against it in towns but out in the more remote parts of the countryside where nobody goes, I'm all for it. đ
Markies_Myth@reddit
Clear untainted CCTV is not guaranteed. The coverage varies enormously. They had footage of the Putney Pusher and still couldn't find him.Â
AutoModerator@reddit
Please help keep AskUK welcoming!
When replying to submission/post please make genuine efforts to answer the question given. Please no jokes, judgements, etc. If a post is marked 'Serious Answers Only' you may receive a ban for violating this rule.
Don't be a dick to each other. If getting heated, just block and move on.
This is a strictly no-politics subreddit!
Please help us by reporting comments that break these rules.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.