I've not really thought through the implications of these but I have initial mixed feelings - interested in hearing different takes.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz7p2xnlyzzo
I've nothing to hide so doesn't bother me.
I've nothing to hide so doesn't bother me.
Eh. One doesn't logically follow from the other.
Or do you mean you don't have a face, in which case apologies and condolences.
It's like every new technology for detecting 'wrong-doing'
Some will always be falsely accused - the number will be higher during the implementation phase and early development phase. Hopefully the technology will improve rapidly.
Just hope that, if you are one of the falsely accused, you have other evidence that provides an alibi :o)
I guess that all means I'm OK with it and I'm hoping I don't get into trouble while they are implementing this 🤣
It's not something I'm bothered by, so don't worry about it - OP was asking of opinions. It's a good thing if this enables efficient use of police resources to pull up the 'baddies'. Then again, they'd run out of prison space if they caught everyone.
It's a good thing if this enables efficient use of police resources to pull up the 'baddies'
It always makes me wonder what sort of baddies are they randomly hoping to find in a crowd of people going about their normal business? International supervillains? Carlos The Jackal? Or just your normal, everyday fraudsters, wife beaters and recidivist speeders...
The link suggests shoplifters could be a use case. There's some bonkers statistic about how few people carry out the vast majority of shoplifting, and most are already known to the police. I guess they're hoping to deter these people?
Put me in the "concerned" camp... especially if this ends up being used for protestors and immigrants.
Or just your normal, everyday fraudsters, wife beaters and recidivist speeders...
I don't think wife beaters are 'normal' or 'everday'.
I suggest a facial recognition camera would do a good job in getting them locked up.
The link suggests shoplifters could be a use case....
Put me in the "concerned" camp...
Anything you want to tell us?
I don't think wife beaters are 'normal' or 'everday'.
I'd disagree. There will be people on here who abuse their partners. You'll know people, friends, colleagues, etc who are abusers or victims. I've known more abuse victims through my life than stabbing victims, and that was sort of my point, without meaning to argue specifics - does the facial recognition van make the world a safer, better place? Does it help prevent male violence and rape, or is it just toys for the boys again*? I'm genuinely interested how they use it.
* a phrase used by Baroness Casey, iirc, to describe funding which was always available for weapons for armed units when compared to massively underfunded rape investigations.
Pfft, you'll never take me alive, copper
Just a thought, are they being used in a genuine search for skallies and wrong-uns OR are they compiling a data-base of everyday regular peeps? If it’s the latter than I’d personally find that both intrusive and worrying; in the same vein as compulsory DNA collection. Yes, yes I know “if you ain’t done nuffink wrong blah, blah blah’ but that’s my thirty shillings worth.
I've not really thought through the implications of these but I have initial mixed feelings - interested in hearing different takes.
Not sure why you're particularly worried.
It's a camera that says "I think this is Stealy McGrabber", and does it quicker than the average copper can.
I'm about as worried as I am about those average speed detector things, TBH.
The link suggests shoplifters could be a use case
They had one in my town yesterday and police social media posts suggested they were mainly nabbing people who were banned from the area due to prolific thieving. Possibly along with people who had broken remand.
Can see it also being used to spot football hooligans on match day, but share the concerns about targeting protesters etc
For me it's like ANPR for people rather than cars. ANPR is used to identify vehicles that either shouldn't be on the road (tax and mot etc) or where the vehicle is linked to some sort of criminal activity (stolen, cloned plates, dealing drugs etc). If facial recognition usage is similar then it seems like a way for a smaller police force to remain effective(*). So far so good, but there's a lot of potential for misuse, especially with the current trajectory of UK politics.
* - But not as effective as one that is adequately funded, staffed and trained.
Kanye West Cardboard Face Mask - Tesco Groceries
Expect it to be an offence to try and circumvent the system in a year or less
Put me in the "concerned" camp... especially if this ends up being used for protestors and immigrants.
As ever, would be fine if its used for "proper" criminals, but mission creep and political desperation make me think that's a naive hope
I don't like it.
I see there is a use case - but at the same time I also see how it could become an issue.
There are examples of people who have never even been into a shop before being asked to leave due to being identified as shoplifters through the facial recognition network. Now take that an apply it to an individual who cameras identify as a person of interest to the police.
Then you need to prove you are not that person of interest. Which takes us into ID card territory.
The scope for this technology to be used incorrectly is high - mission creep as mentioned above.
These are in Leeds I think; given the likely place they’ll be deployed I might go and have a nosey tomorrow.
The obvious flaw to me is that if you’re a bad’un you might risk walking past a policeman or van on the street as you’re relying on them recognising you from a long mental list of bad’uns. If you’re a bad’un and you see a police van with an enormous plethora of cameras sticking out the top of it the you’ll surely not take the chance and just stay away. That of course assumes you spot it before it spots you; it might be able to spot you at 1000yds in which case fair enough, but if not it is as best a deterrent and a testing of technology for future more stealthy deployments.
especially if this ends up being used for protestors
+1
Enough had been done already to try and limit protesters.
The balaclava'd scrotes will love going past those on the back wheels of their Sur-ons. Think of the clicks they'll get. Kinda needs bodies on the ground and some political backbone to make it work. Makes it easy to nick a bunch of middle class people persistently holding up signs, though.
especially if this ends up being used for protestors and immigrants
You think it isn't already? 😆
We'll all be part of the database sooner or later.
My understanding is that for a chosen day they could be looking for people who are wanted on a recall to prison, or sex offenders with conditons eg not to be with children etc. People that walk past the van get seen by the camera, their face is compared to the list of faces, and if there's a match they get stopped nearby and things get checked. The face scans that don't match get deleted.
Remember that your phone is usually pinging away with where you are all the time anyway, tin foil wearers of Freedom City.
I'd be surprised if they have anything inside them.
Reminds me of the old Tv detector vans.
Look! we're policing! just look at how much we are policing and feel safe in the streets as you consume.
I really don't like this. If you add it in to all payments going electronic then the idea of being closed down because someone has misidentified you is horrible. It would be lovely if you could just then rock up to a police station and they would say sorry, press a button and it would all go away but we know it doesn't work that way. I'm off to practice my facial recognition makeup
are they compiling a data-base of everyday regular peeps?
Hate to to tell you this bit they already have that data base. Came back into Manchester airport three weeks ago and they were testing new immigration systems. They are the same as the old ones except you dont scan your passport anymore. The camera just scans your face, recognises you and lets you through. Very few people were getting rejected suggesting most of us were already in the system.
Who is running the back office system that stores all the data. AWS, Palantir, Grok, and how is it controlled.
I get facial recognition is cool at one level (getting on BA flight at JFK), but blanket use in the high street.....how do we know how it's being administered
I can understand the I’ve got nothing to hide so who cares sentiment but things like this send a chill down my spine. We’re already the most surveilled people who have ever lived, how much more will be enough?
Maybe we should force people to have a gopro on 24/7 and have AI monitor it, crime could be reduced to near zero. If you’ve got nothing to hide you’ve got nothing to fear. The logic seems the same to me.
Lots of research indicating racial bias in facial recognition, so if you're white, you have a little less to worry about.
I've nothing to hide so doesn't bother me.
You might not have, but these systems are notoriously bad at actually recognising faces, so it’s not impossible that you might get picked up because you bear an uncanny resemblance to someone who is wanted for serious crimes.
For me it's like ANPR for people rather than cars. ANPR is used to identify vehicles that either shouldn't be on the road (tax and mot etc) or where the vehicle is linked to some sort of criminal activity (stolen, cloned plates, dealing drugs etc).
Except car registration plates are generally very clear and easy to read, because they’re designed to be. Humans, on the other hand, come in a bewildering variety of shapes, sizes, colours and facial features, which can fool camera systems, especially if the weather is colder and people are wearing hats, scarves, hoods, etc. Add to that glasses and sunglasses if the weather is bright.
Maybe I should get a V for Vendetta mask, or start wearing my Rorschach mask from Watchmen…
It already is in some countries, protestors at least. I wouldn't think it'll be long before it's fully implemented by one of the orange shitgibbons hangers on, Borgino or Noem at a guess.especially if this ends up being used for protestors and immigrants.
Like one of the systems developed in the US had something like a 90% accuracy rating with white and i think Hispanic faces and approaching 15% (wow, well done) with anyone darker, which is about 75% of the global population.Lots of research indicating racial bias in facial recognition, so if you're white, you have a little less to worry about.
They tested almost exclusively on white faces.
The whole thing sort of reminds me of the Judge Dredd story "Blobs" where eventually no one could be recognised (plastic surgery) so they all had to have serial numbers tattooed on their foreheads...
Like ANPR, facial recognition has been around for a while. The first arrest credited to ANPR was in 1981, would you believe
It already is in some countries, protestors at least. I wouldn't think it'll be long before it's fully implemented by one of the orange shitgibbons hangers on, Borgino or Noem at a guess.
Live Facial Recognition has been used in the UK for a few years. Croydon in S.London became the first site in a political democracy for fixed Facial Recognition cameras in March.
It isn't subject to specific law but a mix of other legislation and policy:
Force policy documents should also provide that the composition of watchlists:
is based on the intelligence case
is reviewed before each deployment, to ensure that all images meet the necessity and proportionality criteria for inclusion
is not excessive for the purpose of the LFR deployment https://www.college.police.uk/app/live-facial-recognition
I guess that it can be used for some categories of protester who are predicated towards criminal actions. The important proviso is that you should only use a specific watchlist for a specific deployment. The watchlist for longer deployments must be regularly reviewed, e.g. during a weekend event.
The bottom line. If you're not a shoplifter and it's on anti-shoplifter deployment then it won't ping you (unless you have an identical twin who is a shoplifter)
Like one of the systems developed in the US had something like a 90% accuracy rating with white and i think Hispanic faces and approaching 15% (wow, well done) with anyone darker, which is about 75% of the global population.
Accuracy was tested in the UK in 2023 for systems used by S.Wales Police and the Met (and probably since then)
Accuracy depends on the algorithm used but is improving all the time.
The National Physical Laboratory (NPL) tested the algorithms South Wales Police (SWP) and the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) have been using.
At the settings they use the NPL found that for:
LFR (Live Facial Recognition) - there were no statistically significant differences in performance based on gender or ethnicity in the way they use it. In practice, at the time of publication, there have been no false alerts this year.
RFR (Retrospective Facial Recognition - post incident scanning of images with AI) and OIFR (Operator Initiated Facial Recognition - Google lens type app) - 100% accuracy in identifying a correct match with no false matches.
https://homeofficemedia.blog.gov.uk/2023/10/29/police-use-of-facial-recognition-factsheet/
The balaclava'd scrotes will love going past those on the back wheels of their Sur-ons.
Reminds me of the urban myth about someone stealing or cloning the plates off a camera van & then speeding past said van numerous times 😀
And yet they're not interested in CCTV from train stations etc of scrotes nicking bikes......
dunno why they bother, its not like theres prison places / court dates for whoever this is supposed to catch
I dont know where i stand on this. One side of me things its too controlling and the other thinks its great for reducing crime.
I dont think we have the room to punish everyone but its the threat of punishment that will stop people from committing crimes.
I do think we need to stop the nutters with balaclavas prancing around everywhere. everyone wearing a balaclava should be stopped and searched imo. 😉
I do think we need to stop the nutters with balaclavas prancing around everywhere. everyone wearing a balaclava should be stopped and searched imo.
Reminds me of a film I saw a long time ago, about hunt saboteurs. One of the huntsmen complained to the police about a sab wearing a balaclava. The policeman wandered over and asked why he was wearing it and got the reply, 'Because it's cold.' End of conversation. As far as I'm aware balaclavas aren't illegal yet.
the other thinks its great for reducing crime.
Is it? In all the stuff linked above about accuracy of recognition, etc, I don't see any links to reduction in shoplifting or anti-social behaviour. We live in a society where people walk into Greggs, with no facial covering, grab an armful of stuff and walk straight back out. And then do it again the next day because there is no consequence. How does this van stop things like that?
well considering its fairly accurate (unless your black) are we saying thats its failure to reduce crime is because most people committing crime are black? ooooh idlejon wash your mouth out with soap! 🙂
to me it appears that people may be committing more crimes or maybe im just recognising it more as i get older and more grumpy? but i think its is probably because there appears to be little punishment, ability to catch people, consequence for people if caught? coupled with a glorifying of acts of utter stupidity on things like youtube.
We cant put more bobbies on the beat but we can gather data and pull this together to create a most likely place to be for a criminal? certanally for high profile criminals (like murder / rape etc) where they pose an imediate danger to the public i would much rather they be put behind bars as soon as possible.
We live in a society where people walk into Greggs, with no facial covering, grab an armful of stuff and walk straight back out
There's an argument for stores and petrol stations to change their premises.
The tech to pay in advance for fuel, for example, has existed for decades.
Display stock behind the counter. Larger stores already have dedicated security staff
Why should public services sort the big chains security problems out? No payment, no goods
A few weeks back, I heard about these being used to monitor crowds at a stadium event (football, IIRC).
My automatic reaction is to not like it.
But then I thought, if there were police ...ummm... policing the crowd, and one spotted someone he knew was banned from the stadium for previous violence, I'd expect that policeperson to act on that, not just let them walk in anyway. And these cameras do the same, only probably much better. Since I thought of it that way, find it hard to worry about this.
There's an argument for stores and petrol stations to change their premises.
The tech to pay in advance for fuel, for example, has existed for decades.
Display stock behind the counter. Larger stores already have dedicated security staff
I'd much rather live in a world where people don't commit crime because they know and fear the consequences rather than one where we're all treated as potential criminals.
I've nothing to hide so doesn't bother me
What could go wrong? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cqxg8v74d8jo
There's an argument for stores and petrol stations to change their premises.
The tech to pay in advance for fuel, for example, has existed for decades.
Display stock behind the counter. Larger stores already have dedicated security staff
I'd much rather live in a world where people don't commit crime because they know and fear the consequences rather than one where we're all treated as potential criminals.
Me too. Unfortunately that world doesn't exist.
The Met is currently reporting a £260mn budget shortfall, which is more than the annual budget for several forces, e.g. Derbyshire with 2100 officers and its 800,000 population - 391 pop : 1 officer (not picking on them, just first on the list)
STW formatting messing with the link^^ Replace the + with %20 e.g. Police%20Funding%20Settlement%202024-25%20WMS.pdf
Moving displays around isn't treating everyone as a potential criminal and it has the bonus of reducing the psychological hook of making comfort items, e.g. alcohol, too easily available. Cigarettes, vapes, scratchcards, etc are stored behind counters.
Spend a tenner a day on prescribed methadone or heroin, or spend £300m with Palantir to stop junkies shoplifting so they can sell the swag and buy heroin? It's a tough one for sure.
Except car registration plates are generally very clear and easy to read, because they’re designed to be. Humans, on the other hand, come in a bewildering variety of shapes, sizes, colours and facial features, which can fool camera systems, especially if the weather is colder and people are wearing hats, scarves, hoods, etc.
sounds like something ID Cards would resolve.
try this test on your own data - I have years worth of photos, screenshots and general tat on my google photos folder. if I click on search and select "people" its perhaps not surprising that its astonishingly good at automatically pulling together all the photos ive ever taken of family members. and so it should be, theres loads of them.
its also however incredibly impressive at correctly identifying people where I only have a few photos. a distant family member appears in the background of a small handful of photos over several years from child to adult - no bother, theyre all there. it matches robert Carlisle as begbie in a meme ive shared with a still from a film where I was trying to identify another actor. the technology is amazing. it makes a few mistakes, but not many.
HOWEVER - what about my black friends. well my pal Rich I have plenty photos of. but whats this, the notorious BIG album cover and a screenshot of the the black guy in Elf
then I notice its picked up Trugoy the Dove from a photo of the cover of "3 feet high and rising" with loads of matches - those matches are as follows: -
1. 3 members of blue man group
2. the cover of the book "William Shakespeares Star Wars"
3. a silver back gorilla
4. Samuel L Jackson in a meme
5. Samuel L Jackson again
6. a dark skinned guy in the background of a work event from years ago - pretty sure he was Iranian
7. the cover of "straight outa Compton"
8. a young black boy from the background of a photo of my son at an exhibition
9. yet another Samuel L Jackson meme
I dare say theres a good reason for this, but I can absolutely see why some people feel that whatever algorithms are used in facial recognition software might be just a teensy weensy bit racist in their action.
I'd be interested to hear what other people observe running the same test
It's a step to far for me. I am not sure I trust this Labour government with such technology and I definitely don't trust Farage.
I dare say theres a good reason for this, but I can absolutely see why some people feel that whatever algorithms are used in facial recognition software might be just a teensy weensy bit racist in their action.
I don’t think it’s racism as such, more the fact that the technology just can’t cope with photos where the contrast is low, just the same as trying to take photos of different colour clothing for catalogues, light coloured clothing easily shows folds and other details, whereas dark coloured, especially black, dark grey, navy blue, have very little contrast, so often look like a flat field of a particular colour.
I used to retouch illustrations for various clients, one was Titleist, the golf equipment manufacturer, and any of their merchandise that was black was incredibly difficult to make look three dimensional!
The same thing happens with human features, when the lighting is poor or very flat, which is very likely in the circumstances that facial recognition technology is likely being used, and this issue has been raised repeatedly as a reason not to employ it in random locations where poor light is most commonly found.
It is racist to pump out technology when it persistently fails around one racial group, and causes them adverse consequences, and you hand wave it away because you (as an institution/system) don't particularly care about that adverse impact.
the concept - approve
the current issues with it being racist, and the issues with people who are misidentified - strongly dissapprove
if anyone wants to be in a public space with other members of the public including me and you, I think they should be identifiable. If someone who is wanted, or banned from a particular place decides to breach that ban, I'd be happy for a copper to be able to quickly identify them.*
I'm also happy for private businesses such as a supermarket or sports ground to be able to actually ban people from their private areas.
I got properly slammed on here last year for being against face coverings, which is kind of the avenue this is driving us down.
*a few years back my friends dad who was a police officer got a commendation for managing to spot a known local wanted scally who happened to drive past him on the street. Excellent work from him but the fact that it was award worthy shows how infrequently it actually worked out, and how this person was up until this point able to travel around freely.
@CountZero - sorry, just to be clear, having reread the post, I was not suggesting in any way that you were racist. The "you" in the post was referring to the people implementing the technology/society generally.
The problem in colloquial English is that if you say "when one goes to the supermarket" instead of "when you go to the supermarket", one immediately sounds like Hyacinth Bouquet (RIP) even if it's much clearer!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2056r07rjlo
Interesting results from the Croydon trials, 12% reduction in crime in the area where the trial was taking place and almost no false positives, less than 1% and that was cleared up without an arrest. Some will say that is a Fail then for the system but as part of this is to develop better systems, you need 'mistakes' so you can understand why it was a mistake and further improve the matching algorithms to be better in future. That includes 'targetting' specific parts of the population if the technology doesn't work for them.
But as per another link above, there was no bias exhibited to the gender or ethnicity in the testing.
The individual cited above who was wrongly detained previously has his complaint heard in the courts next week, that'll be an interesting one to watch on. His complaint AIUI being lack of accuracy, and the loss of privacy which is a tougher one. I'm staying out of the politics of whether privacy is infringed, everyone has an opinion on that but I'd strongly suggest that testing suggests that accuracy is pretty robust, and used properly is a very useful tool for identifying people far faster and more accurately than manually.
Just. No. The growing observation state and the perennial militarization of police are two big anti-democratit moves that folks seem weirdly supportive.
for Croydon, the media coverage is so similar across outlets that it looks like parasitic reporting or regurgitation of a met or home office press release. That alone is a reason to doubt the information imo.
Not happy, there are already too many innocent people in jail. DNA reveled the level of injustice in rape and murder cases especailly amont minorities. This sort of thing is going to make it even harder to prove you are innocent when the courts should be proving you guilty. I don't care if it's "only" one percent. I'd rather see several guilty people continue to walk the streets than one innocent in jail, especailly for the sort of crimes they say this is useful for. And +1 for Kelvin.
I’m afraid my view of this sort of thing is very much based on what we’ve seen in the past with things like, for instance, the child support agency.
Sold to the public as “absolutely necessary to catch all those awful fathers who refuse to pay maintenance for their children” (who wouldn’t vote for that!) but then actually being used to increase existing payments, which were then often deducted directly from earnings, from fathers already paying maintenance, then not passing the increased amount on to the mothers concerned but rather using the difference to pay mothers of children who’s fathers refused to pay……
It turned out that it cost something like 6 Grand to find an absent father, but next to nothing to simply increase existing maintenance.
Of course they knew that all along…..
Lets see if this does good work, or if it’s used “for evil” 😉
or you face gets recognised at a protest against a genocidal regime that the government supports and is linked to your digital ID, and then you go for a job with serco or g4s and you can't get even basic security clearance.
404 media has reported on several surveillance stories in the USA. The ‘exceptions’ where surveillance tech, law enforcement, or ICE got things wrong from camera coverage and facial recognition seem to provide a flow of stories. Almost like there’s some kind of probability component involved.
And calls for national ID cards, physical or digital? No thanks. Another unnecessary, expensive measure that’s not needed.
There are examples of people who have never even been into a shop before being asked to leave due to being identified as shoplifters through the facial recognition network. Now take that an apply it to an individual who cameras identify as a person of interest to the police.
Then you need to prove you are not that person of interest. Which takes us into ID card territory.
The thing is though - all policing to date has been done on the basis of being recognised - a picture or description is given by the victim of a crime - that description is circulated and used to try and identify the perpetrator.
I was once picked up by the CID as the suspect in a bank robbery - act not just any bank but the branch I actually banked with. It was established quite quickly that I wasn't the perp - because I was a customer and the staff recognised me - but there was also no way of describing him more accurately without also describing me so I was given a card to carry by the CID to identify me as not the droid they were looking for as I was likely to keep being apprehended (never got to use it though so either theres was a limit to how many descriptions the police could keep in their heads as they went about their daily duty or the guy was caught soon after). Unlike something like facial recognition my 'description' was much more broad brush - height, build, age-range, colour, haircut and dress-sense really. Sothe perp could have evade detection just by getting a haircut or wearing a hat and meanwhile any lanky, scruffy ****er could be subject to the same wrongful identification as me.
It seems to me any digital / automated system would produce fewer false positives that a system based on a verbal description of gender, race, build and dress sense.
Not happy, there are already too many innocent people in jail. DNA reveled the level of injustice in rape and murder cases especailly amont minorities. This sort of thing is going to make it even harder to prove you are innocent when the courts should be proving you guilty. I don't care if it's "only" one percent. I'd rather see several guilty people continue to walk the streets than one innocent in jail, especailly for the sort of crimes they say this is useful for. And +1 for Kelvin.
In the context of your examples, the AI doesn't convict but it enables an arrest and gets a suspect into an interview. That's when the hard work begins
The faster the arrest the more likely that police will find transferred crime scene evidence, if it exists. If crime scene evidence is present with the suspect on arrest then it's likely to be better evidence, not worse.
The faster the arrest, the quicker a charging decision will be made. That means that an aggrieved person will get protection more quickly through bail conditions, remand in custody, etc.
Facial recognition doesn't taint later ID parades, unlike touring the streets with a witness who picks a suspect out for that arrest
There are plenty of examples of witnesses picking an innocent person out of some form of identification parade, way more than are associated with the use AI
Who is running the back office system that stores all the data. AWS, Palantir, Grok, and how is it controlled.
I get facial recognition is cool at one level (getting on BA flight at JFK), but blanket use in the high street.....how do we know how it's being administered
Don't worry, Fujitsu got the dev/support contract...
Ooo and isn't it on average 6 doppelgangers per... Plus all the a bit alikes that'll no doubt trigger the alarm.
That's the purpose of these trials, to train the technology to reduce the false positives (and false negatives) and get it better and better at doing what a human can only do a limited amount of. No-one's being convicted on the basis of the system advising a copper that they have matched a face to a database, and while some may predict the future that's not what happens now.
Add in potential for other forms of biometric info - eg: height, forensic gait analysis, etc. and these systems will be incredibly robust at identifying with very high accuracy. What is done with that ID, is a different things for me.
Hmmm.
I wonder where on the "societal cost per crime" scale these type of offences (shop-lifting) vs white collar crime (fraud, corporate tax evasion, corruption etc) fall?
Meaning, are these types of vans and the technology more of a costly PR exercise (like TV detector vans) rather than a effective tool for improving the well-being of the country as a whole?
I'm sure your typical white collar, middle class fraudster (whose crimes are typically a lot more costly than a couple of stolen six packs of beer) won't be scared of walking down their local high street...
So those of you that see no great harm in this tech - read this:
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/feb/25/facial-recognition-error-prompts-police-to-arrest-asian-man-for-burglary-100-miles-away
the tech is not robust, its errors disproportionately effect non white folk, it causes harm. Like Sat Navs folk will blindly believe it.
So those of you that see no great harm in this tech - read this:
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/feb/25/facial-recognition-error-prompts-police-to-arrest-asian-man-for-burglary-100-miles-awaythe tech is not robust, its errors disproportionately effect non white folk, it causes harm. Like Sat Navs folk will blindly believe it.
This, plus all the local wronguns round my way are all wearing balaclavas on thier scooters and electric motorbikes anyway... So it seems a bit redundant.
Maybe the police need annual eye tests and need to be examined on their ability to compare a suspect with a picture.
It would seem the the police involved in TJ's post, skills set in this area are woeful.
The fact that the person arrested had a full beard might have alerted them?
This technology is just going to embed the police’s institutional racism, as seen above.
Individual officers may not be racist, but somehow collectively they manage to be. As various reports and enquiries always find.
Bruce - its that folk blindly (sic) trust technology. Same as sat navs
You can't park there, mate!
Picture not uploading properly.. But imagine a van parked in the sea. Lol
Here's a gif instead.
