Sorry, whats the problem with face detect for police use?
-
ZurdoDev wrote:
They do share that one single thing in common. But nothing else.
Bingo. I just believe if I'm not okay with allowing one thing to happen, then why allow the other. Nip it in the bud, so to speak. Don't allow precedents to be established.
ZurdoDev wrote:
Yes, I understand you think it is a slippery slope.
Yes. It's all about recognizing where things start. That's it.
dandy72 wrote:
It's all about recognizing where things start. That's it.
Indeed. And we have different opinions on where that is.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
-
Just reading through an article on Amazon and mentions the rekognistion tool, and that some "civil right activists claim it could lead to wrongful arrests". Its a tool. Yes, I understand if someone dumb and just relies on a tool 100%, that is on the human misusing the tool. A human is still involved in the process. It probably took a long time for CCTV black/white video recordings and camera to be tolerated. But it always sounds like person recognition tools are far worse. My basic understanding: At a big stadium you can have police focused on more intensive tasks then tons scanning the crowd. You still have a few scanning the crowd. Face detect tool identifies someone of high interest. Info is directed to nearest officer to approach. Office now should handle the rest as if they spotted the person them self. End. If a wrongful arrest happens, that is the fault of the existing system in place. If the computer made a lock or release decision, then I would be against it. That is NOT what it is being used for. "oh, but their are cases where judges use machine-learning tools to make decisions". Again, that is a poor judge mis understanding how the tool should be used - weather that is lack of training or been trained in a missleading way by the sellers of the tool. Now let me use this to better detect my cat to allow into the house. I still have a 10% fail that the neighbors cat is being allowed in. both tabbies and I think its something to do with the lighting ;P
The issue with all of this stuff isn't about now, it's about the future. These types of technologies are going to get better and better, and they'll be incrementally implemented more and more and more over time. Eventually, it's going to get misused and misused badly by someone in power, and of course many, many times over in smaller ways along the way. And there are always people in every country who believe that any measure is justified to achieve whatever goal they have. And that goal may be as laudable as protecting our security. But ultimately the systems they put into place to achieve that goal can become as dangerous as the thing they seek to protect us against when the folks in power start using it against us. The scarier part is when their interest is in protecting themselves. Consider a Nixon administration with the level of surveillance we have now, or what will likely be possible 50 years from now. And by 'us' that means us collectively, or those questioning the government right to do this or that, or those opposing the party in power, or a company or organization that someone is power feels is not in the best interests of the country (which often translates to the interests of their political party or social view or themselves.) And of course it really will hit the fan with something bad happens. Then those folks who have the 'by any means necessary' view of the world are often let off the leash (in a plausible deniability sort of way of course.) And the gains in latitude that they make in those situations are seldom pushed back all the way or even much at all after the crisis is over. Everything is hunky dory until it's not. And ultimately, freedom is not free. That saying often means one particular thing, but it also means that, if you want to be free you cannot be perfectly safe.
Explorans limites defectum
-
dandy72 wrote:
It's all about recognizing where things start. That's it.
Indeed. And we have different opinions on where that is.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
-
The issue with all of this stuff isn't about now, it's about the future. These types of technologies are going to get better and better, and they'll be incrementally implemented more and more and more over time. Eventually, it's going to get misused and misused badly by someone in power, and of course many, many times over in smaller ways along the way. And there are always people in every country who believe that any measure is justified to achieve whatever goal they have. And that goal may be as laudable as protecting our security. But ultimately the systems they put into place to achieve that goal can become as dangerous as the thing they seek to protect us against when the folks in power start using it against us. The scarier part is when their interest is in protecting themselves. Consider a Nixon administration with the level of surveillance we have now, or what will likely be possible 50 years from now. And by 'us' that means us collectively, or those questioning the government right to do this or that, or those opposing the party in power, or a company or organization that someone is power feels is not in the best interests of the country (which often translates to the interests of their political party or social view or themselves.) And of course it really will hit the fan with something bad happens. Then those folks who have the 'by any means necessary' view of the world are often let off the leash (in a plausible deniability sort of way of course.) And the gains in latitude that they make in those situations are seldom pushed back all the way or even much at all after the crisis is over. Everything is hunky dory until it's not. And ultimately, freedom is not free. That saying often means one particular thing, but it also means that, if you want to be free you cannot be perfectly safe.
Explorans limites defectum
Dean Roddey wrote:
And of course it really will hit the fan with something bad happens.
I am afraid not. That is an essential part of the problem. We might conmdemn "totalitarian" practices with great intensity, but when we introduce very similar practices ourselves, it is far from "the shit hitting the fan", but to "secure the safety of the people of our nation". Or something like that. In other cases it may be to secure the pureness of the souls of our children, or something else which is extremely tied to our morals or our culture as of this year. In any case: We are extremely good at finding reasons/excuses/explanations for our use of the same practices that we not along ago condemned in other cultures. Quite often, it should have been "the shit hitting the fan", but history tells ut that it just doesn't happpen in cases where our "free, democratic" socieety adopts pratices from totalitarian societies. We change a tiny little detail, claiming that this detail makes all the difference: It really is just a minor thing that we never would have considered as significant if it was presented by that totalitarian regime, but as long as we were the ones coming up with this detail, we can use that minor difference to distinguish what we do, which is perfectly acceptable, from what those others do, which is totally condemnable.
-
Dean Roddey wrote:
And of course it really will hit the fan with something bad happens.
I am afraid not. That is an essential part of the problem. We might conmdemn "totalitarian" practices with great intensity, but when we introduce very similar practices ourselves, it is far from "the shit hitting the fan", but to "secure the safety of the people of our nation". Or something like that. In other cases it may be to secure the pureness of the souls of our children, or something else which is extremely tied to our morals or our culture as of this year. In any case: We are extremely good at finding reasons/excuses/explanations for our use of the same practices that we not along ago condemned in other cultures. Quite often, it should have been "the shit hitting the fan", but history tells ut that it just doesn't happpen in cases where our "free, democratic" socieety adopts pratices from totalitarian societies. We change a tiny little detail, claiming that this detail makes all the difference: It really is just a minor thing that we never would have considered as significant if it was presented by that totalitarian regime, but as long as we were the ones coming up with this detail, we can use that minor difference to distinguish what we do, which is perfectly acceptable, from what those others do, which is totally condemnable.
You misunderstood. The point was, that it WILL just creep up and creep up and creep up. THEN, when something bad happens (another 911'ish event), suddenly all of these capabilities will lose a large chunk of any controls that might have been put on them, in the name of safety and security. Or, worst case, we have some sort of 70's style social unrest, and it will be completely opened up against the 'trouble makers'. It's always easier for the more paranoid folks who take the 'security at all costs' approach to argue for their way when something goes wrong. The problem is that then these relaxed restrictions seldom get re-tightened after we finish cleaning the fan blades.
Explorans limites defectum
-
I don't care what people say about me or think about me. Why would I? You have a lot of "what ifs" but I refuse to live my life that paranoid.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
-
Because you might be thrown in jail. You might loose your job. You might loose your friends. You might loose your business. Your neighbours might frown at you and tell their own kids not to play with yours. You may be unable finding a plumber who wants to come to your house to fix that leak. And so on. You are free not to care about such consequences.
Member 7989122 wrote:
You are free not to care about such consequences.
Exactly. :thumbsup: All of those "mights" you listed have always been mights. Nothing new.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
-
So? So did the old lady watching out her window that said she saw a guy. And this guy can go sue the heck out of the company and make a fortune.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
-
So? So did the old lady watching out her window that said she saw a guy. And this guy can go sue the heck out of the company and make a fortune.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
The same argument holds for any totalitarian dictatorship tracking every one of the 24/7: For each individual case, it is nothing different from a neighbour (or whoever) watching your moves from the window. Whether it is just an old lady or a STASI agent, it is just watching you. Nothing to worry about.
-
The same argument holds for any totalitarian dictatorship tracking every one of the 24/7: For each individual case, it is nothing different from a neighbour (or whoever) watching your moves from the window. Whether it is just an old lady or a STASI agent, it is just watching you. Nothing to worry about.
Member 7989122 wrote:
for any totalitarian dictatorship
Not the same as an old woman. And the US is not a dictatorship, unless the idiots vote for Bernie. And if we ever get to the point where there is an actual threat from the government, tracking will be the least of our worries.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
-
Just reading through an article on Amazon and mentions the rekognistion tool, and that some "civil right activists claim it could lead to wrongful arrests". Its a tool. Yes, I understand if someone dumb and just relies on a tool 100%, that is on the human misusing the tool. A human is still involved in the process. It probably took a long time for CCTV black/white video recordings and camera to be tolerated. But it always sounds like person recognition tools are far worse. My basic understanding: At a big stadium you can have police focused on more intensive tasks then tons scanning the crowd. You still have a few scanning the crowd. Face detect tool identifies someone of high interest. Info is directed to nearest officer to approach. Office now should handle the rest as if they spotted the person them self. End. If a wrongful arrest happens, that is the fault of the existing system in place. If the computer made a lock or release decision, then I would be against it. That is NOT what it is being used for. "oh, but their are cases where judges use machine-learning tools to make decisions". Again, that is a poor judge mis understanding how the tool should be used - weather that is lack of training or been trained in a missleading way by the sellers of the tool. Now let me use this to better detect my cat to allow into the house. I still have a 10% fail that the neighbors cat is being allowed in. both tabbies and I think its something to do with the lighting ;P
For the most part I have no qualms with data about me being obtained and used to verify fair use/behaviour/whatever, or allow me to use some service and the likes. What I do have a problem with is those data being stored anywhere that's accessible through the internet. Nowadays, no database is secure from getting hacked, and the data it contains is therefore potentially available for abuse of any kind. This problem gets real when data are obtained in large amounts: large amounts of data means large databases, and that makes it a high priority target for hackers. Not that any hacker may have interest in any of those records, but these data can be sold for a nice profit to those that have. You might say that it's a good thing the police can use these databases to help them find identify criminals. And I would concur. But, remember: the criminals typically have much better equipment and expertise on their hands than the police, they are not limited by legislation, and they have the option to obtain any data they want, provided it has been recorded somewhere. Therefore, for any criminal caught by the police with the help of such data, 10 innocent people are harmed by criminals using the very same data. I say, better not have that data in the first place. The crimes being prevented by not having these data stored anywhere would easily outnumber the crimes being prevented by criminals getting caught. tl;dr.: Cyber criminalty wouldn't exist without cyber data. Less data means less crimes.
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)