San Francisco May Be the First City in the Nation to Ban Facial Recognition

Discussion in 'HardForum Tech News' started by Megalith, Feb 3, 2019.

  1. Jagger100

    Jagger100 [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,471
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Some police cars are equipped with cameras that document all license plates they can read and records the location with a timestamp. So I think this is an unlikely scenario.
     
  2. Biznatch

    Biznatch 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,223
    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    Like the other person making a similar claim, you are gonna need to provide sources to back this up.

    And texas has a population of 23.8m. So the 100k records in your claim you're trying to scare us with comes up to .0042% of the population of the state, even if that number was accurate which I doubt. That isn't really going to have any effect on an election, otherwise there would have been no way Ted would have gotten re-elected.....
     
  3. kju1

    kju1 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,032
    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2002
    I think you and are on the same page. I agree on some very focused survelliance to catch specific targets but not dragnet and see what you get. Too Orwellian for me.

    On a side note you mentioned Sierra Vista. I used to live there! Worked there for a DoD contractor a long time ago. Small world!
     
    lcpiper likes this.
  4. Zarathustra[H]

    Zarathustra[H] Official Forum Curmudgeon

    Messages:
    28,250
    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2000

    As with all of this stuff, I'm not concerned with legitimate uses of the data, like police with warrants trying to catch bad guys.

    It's the inevitable abuses either by employees working on them, or by external hackers getting access to the systems without permission.

    And we know this stuff happens. it happens often enough within the NSA that they even have a name for it, "LOVEINT" when the systems are accessed for persona gain and spying on loved ones or love interests.

    Whenever there is data it will be abused and targeted for being compromised. The only way to avoid this is to avoid collecting data.
     
  5. kju1

    kju1 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,032
    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2002
    To be fair once per year is not often. And its blatantly illegal and the person doing it gets fired if not also charged with a crime.
     
  6. lcpiper

    lcpiper [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,528
    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2008
    I get what you are saying, and I don't see your position as unreasonable at all. It's taken some time for you and I to better understand each other.

    But that article was blown totally out of proportion if you remember. In fact, the same information, had it not been written as an assassination piece, actually shows that the NSA does a damned good job policing itself, not that it's rife with misuse and abuse.

    But it seems you never bought into my take on it so it remains to you an example of the bad.
     
  7. lcpiper

    lcpiper [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,528
    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2008

    You are correct that it was rare, of course some feel that once is too much, and I can allow them that, even if I feel that perfect is a pretty high mark to shoot for, when it comes to humans.

    You are also correct about the legality part. But most of the people in this article weren't actually charged and some "got away with it" if you call resigning before they can fire you, sometimes with your pension and benefits, getting away with it.

    But I still think it's important to make the distinction that the NSA can't charge anyone with a crime, arrest, or prosecute an employee who does this. All they can do is fire them, and refer the incident to the Justice Department for possible prosecution, and Justice, for reasons I do not know, have traditionally failed to pursue these cases. That might be because in order to prosecute them, they would have to take the cases to court, and no one wants to talk about the activities in court because they are active collection capabilities and missions, etc. Better to be happy that you weeded them out, most of the cases either resulted in no personal information being obtained at all, or the abuse was directed against foreign nationals almost universally overseas outside of the US. So not against Americans.
     
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2019