You've been scanned

Discussion in 'TalkCeltic Pub' started by angusceltic67, May 16, 2019.

Discuss You've been scanned in the TalkCeltic Pub area at TalkCeltic.net.

  1. Sparda Gold Member Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Messages:
    513
    Likes Received:
    177
    Location:
    Beijing
    Fav Celtic Player:
    The King of Kings
    Fav Celtic Song:
    The Fields of Athenry
    Don't usually agree with OP because I think he's a fear monger BUT over surveillance, acquisition and retention of person information and a police state as an arm of an overbearing government are all VERY dangerous things worth worrying about in the current year, especially in the UK. If you can't see any warning signs, your head is in the sand.

    Sure the guy is a *, but since when has being a * been illegal? Even if he was fined for telling the officer to * off, the officer had no right telling pulling him up over covering his face in a public place anyway. "I don’t want me face showing on anything.". I don't see how this is an unreasonable demand. So we're just resigning our fingerprints, DNA, facial scan and all important details to our government now? Do you really trust them that much?

    People moan about gigantic corporations * people over all the time (and they do) but the government are the real potential threat to freedom here. Everyone should be worried about these type of things escalating and they WILL if people don't start pushing back now.
     
    Gyp Rosetti likes this.
  2. Seán Mac D Gold Member Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2014
    Messages:
    11,153
    Likes Received:
    18,024
    For those doubting the veracity and looking for another 'more credible' source there's an article on BBC this morning: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48315979


    'The first major legal challenge to police use of automated facial recognition surveillance begins in Cardiff later.

    Ed Bridges, whose image was taken while he was shopping, says weak regulation means AFR breaches human rights.

    The civil rights group Liberty says current use of the tool is equivalent to the unregulated taking of DNA or fingerprints without consent.

    South Wales Police defends the tool but has not commented on the case.

    In December 2017, Ed Bridges was having a perfectly normal day.

    "I popped out of the office to do a bit of Christmas shopping and on the main pedestrian shopping street in Cardiff, there was a police van," he told BBC News.

    "By the time I was close enough to see the words 'automatic facial recognition' on the van, I had already had my data captured by it.

    "That struck me as quite a fundamental invasion of my privacy."

    The case could provide crucial guidance on the lawful use of facial technology, which is a far more powerful policing tool than traditional CCTV - as the cameras take a biometric map, creating a numerical code of the faces of each person who passes the camera.

    These biometric maps are uniquely identifiable to the individual.

    "It is just like taking people's DNA or fingerprints, without their knowledge or their consent," said Megan Goulding, a lawyer from the civil liberties group Liberty which is supporting Ed Bridges.

    However, unlike DNA or fingerprints, there is no specific regulation governing how police use facial recognition or manage the data gathered.

    Liberty argues that even if there were regulations, facial recognition breaches human rights and should not be used.

    [​IMG]Image copyrightSOUTH WALES POLICE
    Image captionSouth Wales Police is the biggest user of facial recognition technology
    The tool allows the facial images of vast numbers of people to be scanned in public places such as streets, shopping centres, football crowds and music events.

    The captured images are then compared with images on police "watch lists" to see if they match.

    "If there are hundreds of people walking the streets who should be in prison because there are outstanding warrants for their arrest, or dangerous criminals bent on harming others in public places, the proper use of AFR has a vital policing role," said Chris Phillips, former head of the National Counter Terrorism Security Office.

    "The police need guidance to ensure this vital anti-crime tool is used lawfully."

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    Facial recognition's usefulness for spotting, for example, terrorist suspects and preventing atrocities is clear but Liberty says the technology is being used for much more mundane policing, such as catching pickpockets.

    Liberty also says:

    • images of people on watch lists can come from anywhere
    • police have not ruled out taking watch list images from social media
    • some lists include people not wanted for any crime
    • AFR has been used to look for people with mental health conditions
    Ed Bridges had his image captured by facial recognition for a second time at a peaceful protest against the arms trade.

    His legal challenge argues the use of the tool breached his human right to privacy as well as data protection and equality laws.

    Three UK police forces have used facial recognition in public spaces since June 2015:

    • South Wales Police
    • Metropolitan Police
    • Leicestershire Police
    Liberty believes South Wales Police has used facial recognition the most of the three forces, at about 50 deployments, including during the policing of the Champions League final in Cardiff in June 2017, where it emerged that, of the 2,470 potential matches made, 92% (2,297) were wrong.

    South Wales Police has gone to considerable lengths to explain its use of facial recognition and last year described it as "lawful and proportionate".

    'Misidentifying minorities'
    When the technology was tested recently in London, one man was fined for refusing to have his image captured.

    BBC News also reported that at least three chances to assess how well the systems dealt with ethnicity had been missed by police over five years.

    Civil liberties groups say studies have shown facial recognition discriminates against women and those from ethnic minorities, because it disproportionately misidentifies those people.

    "If you are a woman or from an ethnic minority and you walk past the camera, you are more likely to be identified as someone on a watch list, even if you are not," said Ms Goulding.

    "That means you are more likely to be stopped and interrogated by the police.

    "This is another tool by which social bias will be entrenched and communities who are already over-policed simply get over-policed further."

    Liberty says the risk of false-positive matches of women and ethnic minorities has the potential to change the nature of public spaces.

    Last week San Francisco became the first US city to ban the use of the technology, following fears about its reliability and infringement of people's liberty and privacy.

    The information commissioner and the surveillance camera commissioner have both become involved in Ed Bridges's case, as has the Home Office, indicating the high level of interest and concern about the parameters within which facial recognition can lawfully operate.

    The case is expected to last three days, with judgment reserved to a later time.
     
    StPauli1916 and Gyp Rosetti like this.
  3. Wee Jamesy Kristoffer ahh yeahh Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    8,100
    Likes Received:
    6,747
    Location:
    England
    Fav Celtic Player:
    Larsson
    Fav Celtic Song:
    Fields of Athenry
    I think we're beyond the tipping point. People are addicted to their smart phones and other technology, you try tell them it's sinister or that they shouldn't have their personal information on it they will deny it.

    It's only gonna get worse with the younger generations. My 3 year old cousins can work an iPad FFS.
     
  4. Tim-Time 1888 Winner UEFA Champs League Last 16 prediction comp Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2012
    Messages:
    26,569
    Likes Received:
    5,485
    Location:
    North East, Scotland
    Fav Celtic Player:
    Enrico Annoni
    Fav Celtic Song:
    Hail Hail
    Much of the data used is given freely by the individual when they are on - Amazon, FB, Fingerprint access on the phone, etc etc Although you have the right to opt out. GDPR also provides high levels of protection for the Individual and any use of their data - as evidenced by the Information commissioner becoming involved (EU providing much of the protection in law, see some of the fines they have issued).
    As for facial recognition, while its far from perfect, for liberty to complain it could be used for more mundane things like identifying pickpockets, as opposed to terrorists/more serious criminals, as a pish argument. I would just see identifying a pickpocket as a bonus. Well unless yer a pickpocket I suppose :giggle1:
     
  5. Seán Mac D Gold Member Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2014
    Messages:
    11,153
    Likes Received:
    18,024
    Surely increased funding for the Police to put officers on the street to detect lower level crimes (eg. pickpocketing) is a more prudent approach than blanket surveillance of everyone that happens to be popping down Topman for a pair of swim shorts for their holiday?
     
    StPauli1916 likes this.
  6. Tim-Time 1888 Winner UEFA Champs League Last 16 prediction comp Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2012
    Messages:
    26,569
    Likes Received:
    5,485
    Location:
    North East, Scotland
    Fav Celtic Player:
    Enrico Annoni
    Fav Celtic Song:
    Hail Hail

    Naw facial recognition will be far more efficient and effective in identifying those on watchlists. Those of us who need swim shorts will hardly, if at all, be affected. Plus the chances are when you go to pay for the swimshorts yer wallet will still be in yer back pocket as well :giggle1:
     
  7. Seán Mac D Gold Member Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2014
    Messages:
    11,153
    Likes Received:
    18,024
    Fair enough. We have polar opposite views there. I don't think mass surveillance of the population is justified to stop low-level crime such as pickpockets.

    Nor do I think it's the best way to keep track of the much more dangerous individuals in society, they'll likely to acutely aware of such tactics and change their methods accordingly.

    Investing in a Police force that has had it's budgets ravaged under austerity is a far better solution for me, both in the detection of crime and in the investigation & prosecution of it.

    The Met Police recently reported that they dropped over 30,000 within 24 hours of them being reported due to resourcing restraints: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...al-investigations-in-first-24-hours-last-year
     
    StPauli1916 and Gyp Rosetti like this.
  8. Tim-Time 1888 Winner UEFA Champs League Last 16 prediction comp Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2012
    Messages:
    26,569
    Likes Received:
    5,485
    Location:
    North East, Scotland
    Fav Celtic Player:
    Enrico Annoni
    Fav Celtic Song:
    Hail Hail

    I don't think we do have polar opposite views - you want to see the streets sfare as well do you not.
    It isn't just for low level crime, it's for the serious offenders with low level offenders being a bonus. I fail to see how that is a bad thing at all.

    No the best way to keep track of those most dangerous is to have 24/7 surveillance on them. However that wouldn't be possible/practical in all cases and if it was the likes of liberty would * the bed. You are right though offenders will try and avoid facial detection cameras and simple measures like covering your face would be what they would do, Hence why plod will want to speak to these individuals but folk are moaning about that.

    Facial recognition is obviously an investment in the police.

    I agree, more should be spent on the plod, didn't think there would be an agreement on here mind, but that can also be done in tandem with facial recognition - which might actually reduce the burden on the plod and allow them to not have dropped so many cases. The 2 together will probably see a reduction in crime/safer streets and that's what you/we all want isn't it.
     
  9. Seán Mac D Gold Member Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2014
    Messages:
    11,153
    Likes Received:
    18,024
    Would you be in favour of mandatory publication of tax returns for all individuals and any relevant banking/asset information?

    The majority won't be offending but it'll help catch the money launderers and tax evaders.
     
  10. Tim-Time 1888 Winner UEFA Champs League Last 16 prediction comp Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2012
    Messages:
    26,569
    Likes Received:
    5,485
    Location:
    North East, Scotland
    Fav Celtic Player:
    Enrico Annoni
    Fav Celtic Song:
    Hail Hail

    How that is related to walking down the street is beyond me. I wouldnt have a problem with it though.

    You'll need to tell me how that would help the revenue though, given they have it anyway.
     
  11. Seán Mac D Gold Member Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2014
    Messages:
    11,153
    Likes Received:
    18,024
    I mean the publication of the information online, freely accessible to other UK citizens.

    It's relevant as the premise is the same, an intrusion of privacy of everyone for the purpose of targeting a select minority. If you're all for that then there's no contradiction.
     
  12. Tim-Time 1888 Winner UEFA Champs League Last 16 prediction comp Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2012
    Messages:
    26,569
    Likes Received:
    5,485
    Location:
    North East, Scotland
    Fav Celtic Player:
    Enrico Annoni
    Fav Celtic Song:
    Hail Hail

    Whit.. A facial detection camera will not make the individuals personal details widely available and it certainly won't be publishing them on the internet, so there is no comparison at all.

    If targeting criminals is a bad thing I'll no be losing any sleep over that.
    I know there is no contradiction.
     
  13. Seán Mac D Gold Member Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2014
    Messages:
    11,153
    Likes Received:
    18,024
    An individual has the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Mass harvesting data in the off-chance that an extremely small minority may be offending is a ludicrous path to go down.

    How is this data retained and/or stored? There are data breaches on a regular basis, that information could be used by a 3rd party.

    For me it's completely unnecessary and unjustified. There's no evidence that suggests it will cut down offences such as terrorism.
     
    StPauli1916 and Gyp Rosetti like this.
  14. Tim-Time 1888 Winner UEFA Champs League Last 16 prediction comp Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2012
    Messages:
    26,569
    Likes Received:
    5,485
    Location:
    North East, Scotland
    Fav Celtic Player:
    Enrico Annoni
    Fav Celtic Song:
    Hail Hail

    No one is presuming any one Individual is guilty, all they are doing is looking for Individuals who are on a watchlist, whilst sitting in a public place. This wont affect 99% of the population only those who have something to worry about.
    Again these cameras are not expected to catch anyone in the act, so no idea why people keep saying that as if its a reason not to have them.

    You appear to be mixing facial detection with data storage now, 2 separate issues, and yes there are breaches however the plod have also secured some horrendous convictions yet no one uses that as a reason to bin/not use them.

    Whether there is or isn't any evidence it will cut down terrorism, I suspect it will but I cant be arsed looking just now tbh, but I would say at the very, very least it will be a safe enough assumption to make that it will make it harder for them and that's a good thing isn't it ? (you never answered that previously).

    You say it's ludicrous, yet you haven't made one valid argument against the use of these cameras.
     
  15. Seán Mac D Gold Member Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2014
    Messages:
    11,153
    Likes Received:
    18,024
    Okay Tim, we'll leave it there.
     
  16. smokie899 Gold Member Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2008
    Messages:
    3,401
    Likes Received:
    1,932
    Location:
    belfast
    Fav Celtic Player:
    s.brown
    I couldn't give a * tbh. And I'm from the North were the cops have been doing this for 20-30 years and handing lots of it over to loyalist death squads.
    I've * all to hide so if it prevents crime, fire away.
    I'm more worried about some of the political things I say online which could see me barred from certain countries in the future.
     
  17. Seán Mac D Gold Member Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2014
    Messages:
    11,153
    Likes Received:
    18,024
    Shareholders seeking to halt Amazon's sale of its facial recognition technology to US police forces have been defeated in two votes that sought to pressure the company into a rethink.

    Civil rights campaigners had said it was"perhaps the most dangerous surveillance technology ever developed".

    But investors rejected the proposals at the company's annual general meeting.

    That meant less than 50% voted for either of the measures.

    A breakdown of the results has yet to be disclosed.

    The first vote had proposed that the company should stop offering its Rekognition system to government agencies.

    The second had called on it to commission an independent study into whether the tech threatened people's civil rights.

    The ballot in Seattle would have been non-binding, meaning executives would not have had to take specific action had either been passed.

    Amazon had tried to block the votes but was told by the Securities and Exchange Commission that it did not have the right to do so.
     
  18. Tim-Time 1888 Winner UEFA Champs League Last 16 prediction comp Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2012
    Messages:
    26,569
    Likes Received:
    5,485
    Location:
    North East, Scotland
    Fav Celtic Player:
    Enrico Annoni
    Fav Celtic Song:
    Hail Hail

    No bother as there really wasn't much else you could dispute. Although answering the question would have been good but heyho.
     
  19. Seán Mac D Gold Member Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2014
    Messages:
    11,153
    Likes Received:
    18,024
    Can't really be bothered with an argument to be honest. We have different views on the topic, I'm accepting that.
     
  20. Tim-Time 1888 Winner UEFA Champs League Last 16 prediction comp Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2012
    Messages:
    26,569
    Likes Received:
    5,485
    Location:
    North East, Scotland
    Fav Celtic Player:
    Enrico Annoni
    Fav Celtic Song:
    Hail Hail
    Argument! settle down man :giggle1:

    @Seán Mac D dont know how I managed to not quote your post