Skip to content

‘FuckLAPD.com’ Lets Anyone Use Facial Recognition to Instantly Identify Cops

Technology
128 85 0
  • OSTP Has a Choice to Make: Science or Politics?

    Technology technology
    7
    1
    29 Stimmen
    7 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    B
    Ye I expect so, I don't like the way this author just doesn't bother explaining her points. She just states that she disagrees and says they should be left to their own rules. Which is probably fine, but that's just lazy or she's not mentioning the difference for another reason
  • 122 Stimmen
    10 Beiträge
    3 Aufrufe
    G
    This was also tried in Canada and Australia. Here's the story in the EU: Germany made this kind of law in 2013. This was struck down in 2019 because of a formality. The EU had not been notified in advance, as would have been required in such a matter. (outdated and incomplete WP entry) Then the industry lobbied the EU and got such a law enacted EU wide in 2021. The press is still extremely influential in Europe and causes a lot of damage as it struggles against its inevitable decline. The problem with these laws, as others have pointed out, is that tech companies will simply follow them. Outrageous, no? Well, it is when you're a copyright head. The press made licensing deals, but they want much, much more money. The latest splash was a few months ago when Google made an experiment to better estimate the revenue they generate from news content. In France, the press went to court and got an injunction that stopped the experiment.
  • 'We're done with Teams': German state hits uninstall on Microsoft

    Technology technology
    102
    844 Stimmen
    102 Beiträge
    20 Aufrufe
    F
    You’ve been patient? Bye
  • Acute Leukemia Burden Trends and Future Predictions

    Technology technology
    5
    1
    5 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    8 Aufrufe
    G
    Looks like the delay in 2011 was so big the data became available after the 2017 one
  • 45 Stimmen
    7 Beiträge
    5 Aufrufe
    artocode404@lemmy.dbzer0.comA
    Googlebot sad when disallowed access to 18+ videos
  • 74 Stimmen
    10 Beiträge
    6 Aufrufe
    C
    Time to start chopping down flock cameras.
  • 463 Stimmen
    94 Beiträge
    11 Aufrufe
    L
    Make them publishers or whatever is required to have it be a legal requirement, have them ban people who share false information. The law doesn't magically make open discussions not open. By design, social media is open. If discussion from the public is closed, then it's no longer social media. ban people who share false information Banning people doesn't stop falsehoods. It's a broken solution promoting a false assurance. Authorities are still fallible & risk banning over unpopular/debatable expressions that may turn out true. There was unpopular dissent over covid lockdown policies in the US despite some dramatic differences with EU policies. Pro-palestinian protests get cracked down. Authorities are vulnerable to biases & swayed. Moreover, when people can just share their falsehoods offline, attempting to ban them online is hard to justify. If print media, through its decline, is being held legally responsible Print media is a controlled medium that controls it writers & approves everything before printing. It has a prepared, coordinated message. They can & do print books full of falsehoods if they want. Social media is open communication where anyone in the entire public can freely post anything before it is revoked. They aren't claiming to spread the truth, merely to enable communication.
  • 54 Stimmen
    18 Beiträge
    8 Aufrufe
    halcyon@discuss.tchncs.deH
    Though babble fish is a funny term, Douglas Adams named the creature "Babel fish", after the biblical story of the tower of Babel.