Met Police To Deploy Facial Recognition Cameras (bbc.com) 52
The Metropolitan Police has announced it will use live facial recognition cameras operationally for the first time on London streets. From a report: The cameras will be in use for five to six hours at a time, with bespoke lists of suspects wanted for serious and violent crimes drawn up each time. Police say the cameras identified 70% of suspects but an independent review found much lower accuracy. Privacy campaigners said it was a "serious threat to civil liberties." Following earlier pilots in London and deployments by South Wales Police, the cameras are due to be put into action within a month. Police say they will warn local communities and consult with them in advance.
Yeah totally not sarcasm (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Powerful laws got put in place to find anyone thinking of doing a political crime.
The power to detect, find, track and stop a crime well before the results of any such preparation.
Re: (Score:3)
I remember in the `90s Officer Saxon stopped me three different times thinking I was the same damn guy that he really wanted to catch. I can just imagine how much more of a hassle it would be if he had a little box telling him he was right.
Other way (Score:2)
I can just imagine how much more of a hassle it would be if he had a little box telling him he was right.
But what if, and this is way more likely, the little box was telling him he was WRONG.
Computers don't have the same human biases that led that one officer to dislike you. They can have false positives but it will not be because they simply dislike you.
Re: (Score:3)
Instead, computers have strong biases that are nearly unknowable to humans. Every cop who sees you could be stopping you, because to the machine learning your face looks like a 1973 Chevy. There's no rhyme or reason to that stuff. And people have a sad tendency to blindly believe what computers tell them, unless they know a whole lot about the industry.
That's the thing about profiling: humans can be trained not to do it, with some success, but it's the entire basis of machine learning, and it's nearly im
Re: (Score:2)
Don't like it wear a facemask for you health, problem solved, they can not make it illegal outside because of pollution, dust particles and pollen https://www.amazon.com/s?k=dus... [amazon.com]. It will become a trend. The psuedo celebrities will be more than willing to push it, it means they can wander the streets in privacy, hidden amongst all the other people, wearing masks for their health. A police officer can ask you to show your face but can not ask you to not replace the mask once they have seen you. Cameras and
Re: (Score:3)
This is an Orwellian dystopia we're talking about, and you think they won't outlaw face masks? Just try to walk into a convenience store in London with a hoodie that hides your face today. Of course, a burka will be allowed everywhere in London, otherwise it's racist, so there is one out.
Re: (Score:2)
Hang on... that's two things right there. If the shop owner wants you to take your hood off, or your crash helmet off or whatever, then that's their business. What happens out on the street is none of their business, though.
Likewise, if a law is passed to stop face masks being worn, then it only applies on the street. If you walk into a shop, they're quite at liberty to hand you a mask and tell you to put it on while you're in their shop.
As for the dystopia - yeah, I imagine "hiding your face" will become p
Re:Other way (Score:5, Informative)
A police officer can ask you to show your face
In the UK, a police officer can ask you anything, but there are very specific laws covering what you have to do if stopped by the police.
If a police officer stops you and asks you questions, this is a 'Stop and Question'. They have no power do force you to do anything unless they escalate to a 'Stop and Search', which they're only able to do under certain conditions (below). By law they must also issue you with a written receipt for the search. If it's not a formal 'Stop and Search', you don't have to say or do anything, or remove any clothing, and are free to walk away.
So from the UK government's own information [www.gov.uk]:
Stop and question: police powers
A police officer might stop you and ask:
You don't have to stop or answer any questions. If you don't and there's no other reason to suspect you, then this alone can't be used as a reason to search or arrest you.
Stop and search: police powers
A police officer has powers to stop and search you if they have 'reasonable grounds' to suspect you're carrying:
Re: (Score:1)
Cops in the UK do whatever the heck they want, and you have little recourse.
This shit is scary enough here in the US where I have extensive legal rights protected by a written Constitution.
Re:Other way (Score:4, Interesting)
Cops in the UK do whatever the heck they want, and you have little recourse.
This shit is scary enough here in the US where I have extensive legal rights protected by a written Constitution.
You have the constitutional right to be shot in the back while doing nothing wrong. I'll stick with the UK police, thanks.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, as long as you say something nationalistic, the Specials can't shoot you.
It is the same principle as, if you say something macho while handling chemicals, the cancer can't see you.
Re: (Score:2)
Cops in the UK do whatever the heck they want, and you have little recourse.
You can always petition the EU courts in Strasbourg. Well, until the 31st that is...
Re: (Score:3)
I didn't know the guy he was looking for, but many of my friends did, and they all agreed we looked similar. Nobody that knew the other guy thought the cop was harassing me. They just thought it was funny that the cops didn't know the guy had shaved his head and grown a mustache.
So far, these technologies have much higher false-positive rates than humans. Much higher.
Re: (Score:1)
Perhaps solving that problem isn't the goal?
Re: (Score:1)
If you have nothing to hide...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
In the United States, an expectation to privacy still applies even while in public. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/expectation_of_privacy [cornell.edu]
As for the UK, they seem to enjoy a similar test under a "reasonable expectation to privacy", so I do not see where you stand with saying that people in public have no right to privacy. If a person is assaulted in public, is that not a violation of their privacy, to be secure in their person?
Re: (Score:2)
They just need some narrative to push surveillance of ordinary citizens. Of course that is the real goal here.
Re: (Score:3)
It's cost saving. The government got rid of 20,000 police officers so now there is a massive shortage and crime is up. Hiring more will take years and costs s lot of money, so deploy some facial recognition instead.
The UK is fucked because once outside the EU human rights are next on the chopping block, and idiots will cheer for it.
Re: (Score:2)
The UK's not withdrawing from the European Convention on Human Rights, so none of the human rights stuff is going to change (at least, unless the government changes its mind and we withdraw, joining countries such as, erm, Belarus). The ECHR is nothing to do with the EU, that's a common mistake.
Re: (Score:1)
Lots of interesting ideas about laws got projected from the UK and EU to the Soviet Union..around 1980..
Let the actions of the SAS be the guide to that
The UK always had its stop and search laws...
Laws on what was the tools needed to steal from a bank.
The "human rights" going back decades dont really stop any UK gov from doing police work.
The extra powerful EU privacy laws might have in EU nations.
But the role of the UK pol
Re: (Score:2)
Police cant be hired and used in the numbers needed. Where did the police funding go for years? Who stopped funding the police?
The Tories. They are conservatives and took the global financial crash as an opportunity to drive down wages, drive down taxes and shrink the public sector. That meant getting rid of 20,000 police, among other things.
Now they want to get 20,000 police back, or at least claim to. I'm assuming it was a lie and will be forgotten now.
Anyway the decision was purely ideological.
Human righ
Re: Yeah totally not sarcasm (Score:2)
Its going to be amazing resolution of some dude in a white hoodie and face covering. Everyone is just gonna be running around in Alan Walker masks. Complete waste of cash.
Remember your training - French Resistance (Score:2)
Most facial recognition devices can be defeated with the same tactics the French and Norwegian Resistance used against the Nazis.
Watch the movies, learn the techniques, and realize the Ministry of Silly Walks is actually one of the British Army instruction manuals brought to life.
Hoodies with other faces, extra chins, patterns on your face - all work to make this useless.
Especially if you're not white.
Live in Freedom, not in Totalitarian Fear.
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
Trying to evade facial recognition devices will result in a police chat down
Police power got change politically to not allow as much "Stop and search" in the past but such police powers can be granted again
In a wider community of normal people
Admiration (Score:3)
You have to admire the persistence of the police in deploying technology that is prone to false positives, false negatives and not admissible in court.
Re: (Score:2)
They want to profile ordinary citizens. No need for accuracy or admissibility.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You have to admire the persistence of the police in deploying technology that is prone to false positives, false negatives and not admissible in court.
Prosecutor performance is at least related to the number of convictions
But for police officers, I believe it is based on the number of arrests, so false positives are ok.
Just film them back (Score:2)
You are allowed to do that and they hate it.
It doesn't have to be a privacy threat. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The world is swirling down the toilet (Score:2)
You'll never walk alone (Score:1)
Nuke it from orbit... (Score:2)
Fictional dystopias (Score:1)
No government will avoid increased push-button policing. Modern surveillance equipment is creating the fictional dystopias of the 20th century, where the government could punish anyone, anytime, according to the whim of those in power.