/r/ - Random


Mode: Reply

Max message length: 4096


Max file size: 20.00 MB

Max files: 3


(used to delete files and postings)


Remember to follow the rules

(175.95 KB 640x480 downloadfile-3.jpg)
Anonymous 05/15/2019 (Wed) 02:00:04 No. 11309
Here's some good news: California votes to ban facial recognition software by the city


What other regulations do you think are necessary to secure privacy in an ever more interlinked world?
I think it's more for show than to protect anybody.

Tech companies are selling facial recognition technology more and more each year. The government is allowed to access that information.

So cameras that incorporate Facebook facial recognition are sold to private business as a security measure. Insurance companies lower rates if you have A.I. cameras, because it makes it easier to recoup the stolen goods or criminals. The database now has a large amount of data from private companies, and the government is allowed to access that database for information.

This way the city doesn't foot the bill, people can pretend like they retained privacy (which they didn't), and business owners voluntarily provide the data. A win-win for the government. They get to track everyone with minimal cost or blowback from privacy watch dogs.
Agreed its just for show. Several cities have already installed LED street lights that double as cameras and microphones. They are already doing "machine learning" on phrases that people say near the street lights.
only because virtue signaling politicians are panhandling to spics that are scared of getting deported since there are so many filthy illegals in that state. that shithole is mexico now

t.former LA native


Captcha (required for reports and bans by board staff)

no cookies?