What are your opinions on mass facial recognition in towns?

[-]

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 don’t feel comfortable with my movements being put together by the AI aspect as well. It’s 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:

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 you’d expect the majority to feel that way. That isn’t the case.

"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

“if you’ve done nothing wrong you have nothing to hide” is a great way of saying “i have never once thought about the past or the future”

plus all that stuff about “why do you draw the curtains at night?”, and “why do you close your bedroom door when you’re having sex?”, along with “why does your doctor close the door when discussing medical matters?” - surely if you do that you must be guilty of a crime…

[-]

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.

Distinct-Tour-5654@reddit

Exactly...fed up of being told theirs hot single moms near me, show me BBQ ads 🤣

[-]

kpblvekgxd@reddit

😂😂😂

[-]

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 one’s location, spending habits or what mood they were in ? 😂

[-]

Ill-Intention-306@reddit

Do you think the police develop this tech themselves in-house or something? Theyre just clients.

And they were only using them as an excuse anyway...

[-]

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

[-]

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.

[-]

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.

'Surveillance has been deployed to the region. Do not assume it is there for your safety'.

Dark Summit.

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

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.

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

An important part of human exploration and silliness is that the past will, eventually, be forgotten, or dampened with time.

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

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

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.

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

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

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.

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

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.

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 ..

I think a lot of people feel they have nothing to hide which is fine

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.

[-]

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.

I feel bad for everyone else with what's coming but I've had years of practice.

The live facial recognition systems used by police have a lot of misconceptions about them. For one they don’t use AI.

They don’t 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

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!

you are pre warned you are entering the zone so you have opportunity to move away from it

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

I've heard enough stories of "we don't keep your data"

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.

[-]

You don't care about GDPR being ignored then on your personal data?

[-]

Namiweso@reddit

Nope - I’m on all kinds of social media. My personal data isn’t exactly a secret.

Unless I start getting spam emails or post, I couldn’t 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.

No, that’s 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 wasn’t 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 you’re 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). It’s no different to an ANPR camera. It’s not judge, jury and executioner. It’s a tool (yes, like me)

[-]

mb271828@reddit

The camera is faster, more accurate

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. You’re clearly an intelligent person… what is your biggest realistic fear from these cameras?

[-]

mb271828@reddit

It still needs a human to act, or not act on that information

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.

what is your biggest realistic fear from these cameras?

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

That’s their own choice though, if you choose not to read the T’s & C’s then that’s 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. It’s 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

It’s 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 “catching the baddies” without realising how these things could be utilised against them in the future.

Lack668@reddit

I don’t disagree with you, I’m 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. It’s 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 people’s privacy and that’s 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.

[-]

How did you know my name? 🤔

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.

All of these cameras in London and the police still can't identify who the Putney Pusher is.

I understand it sounds like I'm stretching, but honestly would it surprise us, with how the country's been going?

[-]

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.

[-]

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.

Let’s just do away with a more efficient technology just because Steve the scaffolder doesn’t want the government to know he eats McDonalds 5 times a week

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?

[-]

Betweentheminds@reddit

Look up SuperRecogniser research from Josh Davis at Greenwich, he’s 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?

It’s 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

Because one should be able to move around this country anonymously.

Okay, it appears you maybe don’t understand the technology. What is it about facial recognition that’s 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 doesn’t. 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 you’re not a criminal? If so ypu should be fine.

[-]

LambonaHam@reddit

What is it about this application of facial recognition that’s stopping you from moving around anonymously?

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 lol

[-]

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

Governance and regulation on this has got to be strict as fuck.

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

Isn't the legal position on cctv etc that you have no reasonable expectation of privacy in public?

Legal is different to moral.

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. You’re 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? It’s 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.

It’s not 24/7 it’s a van that pitches up on the odd high street here and there it’s not monitoring your life or anyone’s 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.

It’s not 24/7 it’s a van that pitches up on the odd high street here and there it’s not monitoring your life or anyone’s life for that matter.

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 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

you’re presuming a 100% precision then?

Nobody claims to have that: You can’t just ignore false positives in your proposition, that’s entirely fictional

[-]

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 that’s not entirely the way to look at it. If you’re a criminal wanted for a crime more serious than shop lifting and you’re aware of a facial recognition camera in an area, you’ll 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.

[-]

[-]

bright_sorbet1@reddit

24/7 😂😂.

You think there's a facial recognition van in your home babe?

[-]

EfficientTitle9779@reddit

No but they’re 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 isn’t 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

aren’t just on vans though??

[-]

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.

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 don’t agree with it. But personally, with the mental capacity I have left after work and home life… knowing I’ve done nothing bad the government can use my details against me for… I don’t 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 £millions 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

saying we're heading into a Minority Report situation seems like an over reaction

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.

buttersismantequilla@reddit

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

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?

[-]

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 haven’t read up nearly enough about it, nor can I begin to understand the scientific basis of the evidence but I think it’s clear the conviction is unsafe and a new trial is needed.

[-]

Glad-Advantage8254@reddit

I haven’t read up nearly enough about it, nor can I begin to understand the scientific basis of the evidence but I think it’s clear the conviction is unsafe and a new trial is needed.

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 can’t have a Turnbull facial recognition identification.

[-]

Pick_Up_Autist@reddit

Forensic might be the word you're searching for.

[-]

Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit

That’s 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.

Is it famously error prone? Anything ive ever used with facial recognition has never made an error.

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.

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.

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 isn’t on record? As in “we were told it was a 6’5 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 wasn’t you so you’re completely innocent and off you go”?

[-]

PeppercornWizard@reddit

An arrest that doesn’t result in any charges is unlikely to influence anything… it’s not a ‘criminal record’, though obviously the police have to keep a record that it’s actually happened.

[-]

Why_you_so_wrong_@reddit

Congress could write a new constitution and the US courts aren’t 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.

[-]

The legal system is certainly robust but that doesn’t mean it’s 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

[-]

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 £10m 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: “Power is maintained by controlling the past, manipulating language (Newspeak), constant surveillance, and breaking the human mind.” 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". "

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.

This is capturing everyone…it’s a “move” so the people will get used to surveillance under the guise of “criminality” …just like the banning of social media for the “safety of children”…small steps leading us into more dystopia.

[-]

Saw_Boss@reddit

just like the banning of social media for the “safety of children”…small steps leading us into more dystopia.

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 “safety of children” is not for the children, it’s “compliance“ for everyone to give their birth date…it’s 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 ID…it ends on the 5th May. Were we notified, was it advertised, did we receive a letter informing us? If we don’t 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?

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 it’s 1984 authoritarian that you can’t 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

[-]

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, it’s such a shame seeing as how free we were in the 90’s.

[-]

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

They’re 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

Don’t need them, we’ve got bank cards, phones, social media, driving licenses etc.

Again, been going on for years.

I didn't explicitly acknowledge one of the most surface-level features of the book

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...

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.

Another day, another redditor who clearly either hasn't read or understood 1984 claiming that something resembles it.

[-]

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

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.

The constant surveillance in 1984 is literally what drives the story.

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

And how can the government exert such powers over thought? Constant monitoring

You can’t 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

Probably looking for domestic/foreign terrorists.

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.

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.

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.

Identifying a suspect with this technology still doesn't put an officer in the right place and right time.

They say it only scans for faces in the criminal database and every other face scanned is deleted shortly after by the system.

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.

[-]

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 Flock’s license plate data to identify a woman seeking an abortion.

Over a monthlong period, an officer with the Johnson County Sheriff’s Office accessed over 80,000 license plate records from Texas, Washington, and Illinois to try to locate a woman whom authorities said had a “self-administered abortion.” While the sheriff said the woman’s 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.

Otherwise_Public2579@reddit

It’s only the guilty that should be concerned

[-]

quagaawarrior@reddit

That Big Brother is watching me.

[-]

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.

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.

[-]

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.

There is nothing more dystopian than creating a database that can be used against you when you become a threat to power.

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.

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?'

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 don’t face consequences for their incessant robbing of the local Greggs so it’s like everyone else has visual handcuffs put on them for no good reason.

[-]

wlfinsparroqhawk1969@reddit

Just another freedom we’ve lost without being asked or even consulted about

[-]

trolliebobs@reddit

Personally, I like the Four Lions Anti-Surveillance technique....

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!

A very regularly occurring criticism of the police you get is usually along the lines of “I was burgled/mugged/etc and the police did nothing”.

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 don’t, and particularly low level offenders are increasingly becoming aware of that.

Surveillance helps, I’ve 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.

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!! 😁😁

(i fucking hate it)

[-]

masterdufu@reddit

I’m glad. If it bangs up criminals it does its job. Honestly you guys talk about this stuff as if it’s going to be 1984

[-]

UntappdBeer@reddit

China approves of this.

[-]

1K-27@reddit

As much as it would help, it’s probably very easily able to be used for the worse…

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 I’d 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 I’ve also not committed any crimes so I’m not bothered. I feel a bit safer knowing there are some police present if anything.

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). There’s cctv everywhere already but whenever you need to see the footage its always “oh yeah it doesn’t work” or “it gets deleted after 12-24 hours so we dont have the footage” or “yeah here it is” but it’s the worst possible quality imaginable so its still useless.

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.

[-]

NoRun6253@reddit

The sticker on the side of the van though??

[-]

Mysterious_Silver_27@reddit

Stasi’s wet dream over there

[-]

Poncemastergeneral@reddit

I don’t think it should be used everywhere but some “tourist” spots or extremely high traffic places then yes. Just the knowing it’s 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...

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

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 people’s 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 people’s every move.

It’s 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 don’t 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.

[-]

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

Cheeselover710@reddit

As someone who moved here from a city in Canada where we’re not even allowed speed cameras, it’s more sad than anything. Cops are no longer someone we can rely on for public service. I’ve 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. It’s 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

WastelandOfConfusion@reddit

They’re harvesting all that data for a reason.

[-]

ScientistNational363@reddit

No issue. We’re really not that interesting, we’re guilty of over inflating our own importance sometimes. Our social media accounts have all the information on us they’ll 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 i’m fine with it.

[-]

I live in London - the most heavily surveilled city in the world… It is what it is…

[-]

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 couldn’t 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 I’m all for it if it means it clears up sex offenders off our streets 👍🏼

[-]

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

Doesn’t bother me in the slightest. Whenever you ask someone why they would be against it they either pretend they can’t tell you, or they give you loads of “what if” scenarios - forgetting that a what if scenario has two different outcomes - it’s 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 I’m not going to spend time worrying about what if scenarios.

I promise you guys aren’t as interesting as you might think, so unless you’re doing something you shouldn’t be then you have zero reason to even give these things a second thought.

Sure I’ll get downvoted but Reddit karma is about as important as facial recognition in towns.

[-]

jeminar@reddit

Everyone deserves the right to fuck up privately.

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.

EnbyArthropod@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.

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...

Negative, completely open to exploitation.

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

I’m always conflicted by stuff like this, because I am rationally aware that “nothing to hide, nothing to fear” 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.

It’s complex.

[-]

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

Don’t care.

[-]

steveinstow@reddit

Only the dodgy ones cover their faces.

[-]

BigLick13@reddit

We need rules against people covering face first.

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

I’ve got nothing to hide. Nothing So I’m planning to set up a camera peeping through the gap in my neighbours curtains,every night after dusk He’s a senior police officer and his neighbour is in local government, so I’m sure they’ve nothing to hide But I’m not sure they’ll be entirely happy about this

[-]

No-Ruin-5760@reddit

I don’t 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 haven’t) 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… i’d suggest seeing a doctor.

Will it be in force for the Stephen Laxley Lennon hate march? That’s the key question for me.

[-]

TheSJDRising@reddit

We don't need one of these cameras to spot Sharon Osbourne.

[-]

Hitching-galaxy@reddit

That’s true.

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 *

[-]

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

I just don't like state surveillance. It feels like overreach into people's personal lives.

Not sure you’re 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.

If it scans a face it has to log it. Thats how programming works.

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.

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

[-]

GullibleBreakfast983@reddit

This is Basingstoke

[-]

shnu62@reddit

All the more reason to wear a face mask in public

[-]

Superb_Extension3169@reddit

Couldn’t 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...

Fine with it. It's a part of progress.

So, no evidence?

I'm not arguing with you. I'm trying to understand what evidence you make your claims on?

[-]

misspixal4688@reddit

I've seen cases of this system flagging the wrong people and even 1 incident of that is to many.

[-]

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 👀

[-]

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.

[-]

I can see why it’s so appealing to those in power; it’s 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 you’d 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 there’s a presence. That reassures the population and it also acts as a deterrent if there’s 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.

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.

[-]

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 there’s 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.

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.

[-]

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.

[-]

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.

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

I’m not too bothered by it, I more bothered about being monitored for have the ‘wrong opinion’ 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 they’re stretch so thin burglaries, thefts etc rarely go beyond “here’s a crime reference get fucked”

This is a lazy cop-out and doesn’t address why petty crime is going up nor does it put a “Bobby on the beat” as a preventative measure.

It will just encourage more people to wear balaclavas/face coverings.

This looks like a specific operation.

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

I’d rather this than crime 👍

[-]

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 isn’t monitored and tracked?

[-]

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

Effective_Ad_1953@reddit

Big brother state as we march closer to a orwellian dystopian future.

[-]

Common-Aardvark-8358@reddit

It’s here and there’s nothing anyone can do about it

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 don’t believe they keep a record of your face if you get scanned and don’t have markers.

How long that will persist? Who knows.

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

[-]

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 don’t want the police/authorities to be able to track them in a high street. Oh the irony.

[-]

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! That’s the big difference, the matter of choice.

[-]

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.

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

They’ve already been doing it for a few years either way

koyliMeld9003@reddit

Personally, I don’t 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

I’d have to leave the house for it to affect me 😈, 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 sensor

[-]

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

[-]

theres quite a high chance of misidentification and the 15 mins you speak of could be multiple hours

Facial recognition error prompts police to arrest Asian man for burglary 100 miles away

Police arrested a man for a burglary in a city he had never visited after face scanning software deployed across the UK confused him with another person of south Asian heritage.

Alvi Choudhury, 26, a software engineer, was working at the home he shares with his parents in Southampton in January when police knocked on his door, handcuffed him and held him in custody for nearly 10 hours before releasing him at 2am.

[-]

Victorius_Meldrus@reddit

theres quite a high chance of misidentification

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.

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 💁‍♂️ 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 vans🤌 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.

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.

Just another symptom of the western governments current collective hard on for mass surveillance and privacy erosion.

Red-Jaeger@reddit

The problem I’m finding here is surely this will be flagging the same individuals over and over.

Admittedly, I’m not totally clued up on the state of prisons recently, but isn’t 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?

"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.

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.

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.

[-]

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.