I know that because I do a lot of street photography and there is no law in the UK forbidding photography of people in public spaces, it’s quite easy for you to Google this but I can’t provide you with a law condoning it as that’s not how it works.

Again show me in GDPR where it expressly forbids marching a face to a public dataset.

You're free to choose the authoritarianism instead of the personal risk, but then you can't claim that you're resisting, because you're not; it's either or.

There's "personal risk" and then there's losing your livelihood.

These guys still really like their tonfas, don't they?

Should be at least streamed to a server not controlled by the police, including things like charge levels so they can't claim "oh whoops, it ran out of charge!". A specific organisation within the judiciary, perhaps?

This way they're gonna need to get far more creative in concealing video.

And if you're found to do something that is concealing evidence, well that's a crime by itself

first of all it's not lack of evidence, it is evidence itself. if the camera is not working that's tampering with evidence and is a good indication of guilt.

second of all if you can have laws like felony murder you can sure as shit have this. if you commit a felony (like a robbery), don't hurt anyone, and a cop murders a random person in response because they're trigger happy pigs, you can be held responsible for the murder as if you committed it yourself.

my suggestion is far more reasonable compared to that: if you kill someone you better have evidence that it wasn't foul play, because guess what, that's what everyone needs to do. we don't just allow people to kill and go free, and cops shouldn't be exempt.

This is nice. Use their own weapons against these fuckers.

Should be the ice agents too

Fuck you pig!

This reeks of a honey pot scheme for some reason.

You misunderstand how the system works.
They are all complicit.

Who is in power again? The protesters are not making anyone disappear. Goodbye, troll.

How is your flavor pallet after sucking so much leather?

Your point is moot.

For the people by the people or did you forget?

It is definitely not going to work on any cop. There are still cops who are working in countries where privacy laws exist.

Why the fuck would it need to be public? Especially in a country like the US where most of the annual reports of companies aren't public where people can actually benefit form.

If you work for a company that company is responsible for the actions you take while working there. If you discriminate somebody in the library it is your library which is being targeted and then they will target you as well.

At least that's now it generally works in the world, variations can exist depending on the area you live in.

No they don't need to know who is working where. The public just needs to know where the money goes through. Annual reports of a lot more companies should be public.

You don't need to know who works at the library, you need to know the financial statements of the company together with the base on which the salary is based on.

It always baffles me when I try to find annual reports of American companies and they are just not made public unless they are public. But for things like non-profits, or government owned companies it is especially important as well. Sadly it is easy to get a non-profit in the US, so people abuse that. Becoming a CPA in the US is also very easy compared to at least NL.

Privacy doesn't exist in the US unless we are talking about companies.

Privacy is the word you are looking for.

O wait ... the US doesn't know privacy for everything but companies

I agree with that the abusive cops and ice is insane in the US, and it should be stopped. I also believe that the US is a corrupt nation in nearly every place of the government and surrounding instances.

But a question surround this, what if the US wasn't corrupt and the judges would actually follow the law (juries wouldn't be able to exist for most cases) and hypothetical if the US had privacy laws for everything besides businesses wouldn't this be the same punishable offence that would protect citizens?

In GDPR countries (among others) nobody is allowed to do something like this with face recognition because the law works for everybody. (Some people are trying to destroy this in some countries, though).

At the same time, if the government is allowed to use facial recognition and other anti-privacy measures to identify people where there is no ground to, then why shouldn't the people be able to do that?

Edit: I am not from the US and my look on life and trias political situations is different than what the fuck is happening in the US

As I wrote, the UK does not have the AI Act. This is also a case where EU GDPR and UK GDPR diverge.

Finally, I never claimed it's automatically illegal.

Yeah, and some of it is even true.

Most of it, in my experience. I do not know why this community is so committed to disinformation.