Facial recognitian CCTV developed that can scan 36 million frames per second

Jonny7 wrote: »

Here's something that's much more intrusive (UK only)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17576745

"The government will be able to monitor the calls, emails, texts and website visits of everyone in the UK under new legislation set to be announced soon."

Sounds similar to the monitoring program Bush and Blair had going, I forget the name, bound to cause controversy anyway.

And when someone start a thread about it, I wonder who will be the first in line defending it. :rolleyes:

SNAKEDOC wrote: »

missing persons, ie maddie Mc Cain could have been found if she was in public

Now that's just prefect.

This is exactly they type of reason maddie went missing in the first place.

What I mean is... terrible things happen all the time, to pave the way for new laws. Children go missing every day, the media hardy blink an eyelid most of the time, unless they want to push an agenda (facial recognition cctv). And when they are pushing the agenda they say things like..


Will somebody please think of the children.....

SNAKEDOC wrote: »

, ie maddie Mc Cain could have been found if she was in public, missing children in large shops or cities.

first of i didnot say will somebody think of the children, stop exaggeration what i said. in my post i pointed out a few examples of how this system would be beneficial to society. you know god help you if something happens to one of your kids or a family member or friend where cctv could have been useful. watch the news and see how many stories of assaults or missing persons or shop lifters or bank robbers have cctv shots on screen, they are all crap shots but improve it and everybody goes mad. but if it your car stolen or your kid missing then its ok. there are so many hypocritical people on this forum its unbelievable.
did you ever hear the saying whats good for the goose is good for the gander. laws are there to protect everyone, and unfortunately the idiots on this forum are included in that.

SNAKEDOC wrote: »

take your tinfoil hat off and live your life for gods sake man.

No !!

Why shouldn't I talk about such things snakdoc...



You seem a little bit rowdy... I wonder what your brain scan tests will reveal...

i'm just trying to reason with anybody who sees this new system as wrong. if someone could give me just one reason why its wrong i'd be happy. saying it infringes on civil rights is a load of crap when you set foot out in public your in a public place so hence you have no civil liberty except your right to freedom. this system does not infringe on that. the law states that cctv operated by a private person or business must not view public property to stay within the law. the gardai operate cctv in public areas. now for this system to work obviously it needs to be networked to maybe the garda pulse or another such system which is beyond any private firm in this country so only gardai will be seeing the information and also for a face to be "recognized" it needs a base line and private bio metric info such as a passport which only gardai immigration have. so further on from my other posts about the positive notes of this the cctv view will improve while allowing gardai to identify culprits in crime by scanning the footage on the system but not allow the public access. this system could dramatically increase crime detection and prevention in the long run and remember, more people caught means more people in court more fines more money in the kitty and less need for outrageous taxing. it is a win win situation. i am shockedd that anybody could pick negatives out of it. surely somebody could back me up here

no i just don't use them. you find something wrong with everything i think that is whats wrong with you. you are a glass is half empty guy. i on the other hand am a glass is half full. there are a lot of things wrong with the world but if the world was perfect then that in itself would be wrong. we do in fact live in a balanced society. one where there is good vs evil, and in this world you are protesting against something to help prevent evil. that my boards buddy is a paradox, someone wanting good but preventing it by protesting and unknowingly helping evil.

boards .ie not boards.us right. i am a middle class irishman living and working in ireland. i have a small rented house that i share with my partner. I work as many hours as i can to provide for my partner and I. I pay my taxes and obide by the law. I do not care what goes on in another country that i may not even step foot in in my short life. I do care about my country (Ireland) where prisoners are not slaves. Our country has many problems that need to be fixed but on a whole this countries people live in peace if they so choose. there are people out there that insist that they know better, if so run for office and stop complaining about things that you could try and fix. yes using prisoners as slaves is wrong but its not our country. when people were starving and dieing in this country the USA did nothing for us.

now back to the thread about the implementation of face scanning capable cctv. good or bad. well my opinion is good. what is the point in having cctv that cannot distinguish between faces. it is a waist of money. which if you have not noticed is in short supply these days

I read this today and thought it was pretty relevant to this thread so i'll just drop it here.

Mistakes are often made, even by those with the best intention. The system can grind up innocent people in all sorts of ways. The more power you give to the system to do this, the more you increase the chance that mistakes will happen with increased frequency and severity.

Jeboa Safari wrote: »

What were you reading, a manual on how to operate a meat grinder?

Is a meat grinding manual relevant to this thread ?

I have deep concerns about the emergence of surveillance technology and the threat to privacy posed by such technology, as well as mass phenomena like Facebook and intrusive searches by the police, the TSA, and others. Yet it seems a substantial number of people (on ATS and elsewhere) have no problem with such things, and even go out of their way to argue heatedly in their favor. The general line of such arguments usually boils down to: “If you’ve done nothing wrong you have nothing to worry about.”

In this thread, hopefully I will convince you that you do have something to worry about due to the erosion of privacy and civil liberties, on both the governmental and private-business fronts, even if you live the unblemished life of a saint.



I believe there may be some cases where the “if you’ve done nothing wrong you have nothing to worry about” reasoning is justified. But in most cases, it is not. To be clear, in this thread I’m focusing on the following:


Surveillance, through cameras and other means in public, cell phones, and online. This includes data-mining, databases that store your personal information, and the like.
Intrusive searches by officials such as the TSA in America, “alphabet agencies,” and over-zealous policemen. (I do NOT criticize the very existence of these institutions, let it be known, and I have respect for the fine men and women who do their jobs they way they should.)
The challenges to privacy presented by social-networking systems like Facebook, services that deal with vast amounts of info like Google, online advertising protocols, data-mining for corporate reasons and advertising, and private-information-related issues.







The following is why I think that these phenomena should give even those who “have done nothing wrong” cause to worry. If you disagree, I ask that you at least read the list first before jumping to reply with something that is already covered. Thanks for your patience.


”You have nothing to worry about if you’ve done nothing wrong” sounds good on paper, but who defines what is “right” and what is “wrong”? A look at history – any history – shows how open to debate these concepts really are, and how truly easy it is to do wrong when trying with all your heart to do right.

Even if you trust the people in power now (both government and business), who knows what will come later ? Once these privacy-eroding systems are in place, they are very difficult to remove. You might trust the current government, or Google/Facebook as currently construed, but can you be so sure you will trust the same forces in ten or twenty years? By then it will be too late to remove these systems without massive struggle. Again, look to history – mankind’s track record is not encouraging and it shows us that good governance (both corporate and national) tends to be the exception rather than the rule.

Mistakes are often made, even by those with the best intentions. The system can grind up innocent people in all sorts of ways. The more power you give to the system to do this, the more you increase the chance that mistakes will happen with increased frequency and severity.

Malicious individuals exist within every organization. Even if you trust the government and big business as a whole, do you trust every individual working for them that handles your private info? The potential for abuse, stalking, blackmail, harassment, and other bad stuff exists and is real.

The “right to be forgotten:” We all do dumb things. I certainly have. But as they say, “the internet never forgets.” Information that exists in “the cloud” is difficult if not impossible to erase. Facebook never forgets and deletion is difficult – not only deletion of your own material, but material other people make about you. People who do something stupid online may be haunted by it for the rest of their life. We all chuckle at Youtube clips of people doing dumb things, but should those people have to wear their mistakes around their necks like a millstone for the rest of their life? A teenager making a stupid Youtube clip may find it hard to get a job ten or twenty years later. I say this is not fair.

Humiliation comes with lack of privacy and embarrassing rituals that can take place in the name of security. When a TSA worker gropes your genitals, forces you to strip, and tells you to bend over and cough, it is already a form of humiliation. We can observe similar behaviors used to assert dominance and superiority in the pecking order in our fellow primates, as well as other mammals, suggesting something deep and possibly hardwired into the human psyche.

The right to present different faces to different people at different times: This is an issue specifically regarding Facebook, Google, and social networks. Do you not act differently to your boss, your mother, your significant other, and your best buddy? Do you not show these people different faces and different sides of yourself? Do you really want your boss to be able to access information meant for your drinking pals? Until now, humans have enjoyed the flexibility to present themselves in different ways at different times. This flexibility is not “deceit;” on the contrary, it is an ancient human tool for survival, and a kind of natural right. When you give it up, you are giving up power to the info-managers like Facebook, and your life becomes like a poker game with transparent cards.

The right to shape your own narrative by yourself: This is connected to the point above, but slightly different. When you talk to somebody or write them a letter, you are telling your own story the way you want to. But when you surrender this function to Facebook, you are giving them the power to “define you” in multiple ways. I’d like to do that for myself, not outsource it to Zuckerberg and friends with their "timeline" that makes my whole life available at a glace to anyone, thank you very much.

Don’t you simply want to be left alone sometimes? Not to be bothered by your boss, your “friends,” advertisers, or your government when you relax in the evening in front of a roaring fire? I know I do, and it has nothing at all to do with doing anything that needs to be hidden. Think of “stage fright.” We feel stage fright (or milder versions of uptight-ness) when we know we are being watched. We behave differently when the eye is on us – no matter whose eye it is. It is psychologically stressful to have this feeling going all the time, twenty-four hours a day.

“If you don’t like it don’t use it” – This is another criticism made when people complain about Facebook or technology like smartphones. It is a fair point to make in many cases, but the truth is that when technology sets in, those that refuse to adapt get left behind. Often these tools are required for any decent job out there. And already friends look at me funny when they learn I’m not on Facebook. Even if, like me, you stubbornly refuse to use social networks, you can't control what other people who DO use them say and write about you. It’s easier to say “just opt out” than it is to actually do it. Never mind the issue of what the government does with such tech and systems – something that we cannot opt out of at all.



In an earlier era none of this would have had to be said at all. To me, it’s a sad comment on society that so many choose not to see what seems so obvious. If you agree with me, I encourage you to stand up against the “If you’ve done nothing wrong you have nothing to worry about” attitude wherever it manifests, both on ATS and in the wider world.

Thanks for reading and consdering.

Jeboa Safari wrote: »

Ah calm down, your quote could have been about anything
I read the same thread, you should probably credit the original author

Nah, f*ck him.:D