return2ozma@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 5 hours agoLeak Shows ICE Planning to Use Facial Recognition Glasses to Identify Targets in Real Timefuturism.comexternal-linkmessage-square26fedilinkarrow-up1169arrow-down11
arrow-up1168arrow-down1external-linkLeak Shows ICE Planning to Use Facial Recognition Glasses to Identify Targets in Real Timefuturism.comreturn2ozma@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 5 hours agomessage-square26fedilink
minus-squareundrwater@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up46·5 hours agoWill they care / understand about false positives? Not likely.
minus-squareFlashMobOfOne@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·edit-233 minutes agoRemember 20 years ago when Wikileaks was telling us about all the false positives swept up in the War on Terror dragnet? Both Bush and Obama got reelected. No one at the federal level gives a shit.
minus-squareImgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·2 hours agoImagine they would at the very least have some sort of double check procedure like a skin color chart they could reference if there was any question.
minus-squarecrandlecan@mander.xyzlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up11arrow-down1·4 hours agoAs long as they kill p. of c., it’ll be deemed legal 🫡🤢
minus-squareempireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up12·4 hours agoTheir “facial recognition” ends up just being a binary switch on a light detector
minus-squareLost_My_Mind@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5arrow-down2·4 hours agoTook me waaaaay longer than it should have to realize “p. of c.” means “people of color”. Still haven’t figured out if you’re censoring it, or if you think p. of c. is a faster way to abbriviate it. Either way, that “shorthand” is stupid, and you should just write it out.
minus-squareturtlesareneat@piefed.calinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·3 hours agoFolks who work in social justice will know the acronym “POC” but “p. of c.” I don’t usually encounter. Are we sure it’s not “prince of caspian?”
minus-square🇦🇺𝕄𝕦𝕟𝕥𝕖𝕕𝕔𝕣𝕠𝕔𝕠𝕕𝕚𝕝𝕖@hilariouschaos.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down1·4 hours agoI’m pretty sure ice is more diverse than every single protest against them.
minus-squarefrongt@lemmy.ziplinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·4 hours agoYou don’t need to ask about likelihood. It’s already been shown they don’t: https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/more-than-a-dozen-wrongful-arrests-due-to-police-reliance-on-facial-recognition-technology
Will they care / understand about false positives?
Not likely.
Remember 20 years ago when Wikileaks was telling us about all the false positives swept up in the War on Terror dragnet?
Both Bush and Obama got reelected. No one at the federal level gives a shit.
Feature, not bug.
Imagine they would at the very least have some sort of double check procedure like a skin color chart they could reference if there was any question.
As long as they kill p. of c., it’ll be deemed legal 🫡🤢
Their “facial recognition” ends up just being a binary switch on a light detector
Took me waaaaay longer than it should have to realize “p. of c.” means “people of color”.
Still haven’t figured out if you’re censoring it, or if you think p. of c. is a faster way to abbriviate it.
Either way, that “shorthand” is stupid, and you should just write it out.
Folks who work in social justice will know the acronym “POC” but “p. of c.” I don’t usually encounter.
Are we sure it’s not “prince of caspian?”
I’m pretty sure ice is more diverse than every single protest against them.
You don’t need to ask about likelihood. It’s already been shown they don’t: https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/more-than-a-dozen-wrongful-arrests-due-to-police-reliance-on-facial-recognition-technology