‘FuckLAPD.com’ Lets Anyone Use Facial Recognition to Instantly Identify Cops
Technology
214
Beiträge
99
Kommentatoren
2.0k
Aufrufe
-
I get the impression that the cops are about to hate facial recognition all of the sudden, for no particular reason
Cameras. They fucking hate body cameras. When it clears them of wrongdoing, they have the video ready. When they 'accidentally' shoot a guy nine times in the back of the head, video seems to be missing.
-
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/31924287
Putting it out there for someone to do this for cops in the UK. I can't run infrastructure but the cops terrorise out local community and constantly refuse to identify themselves/turn off their badge cam.
-
I’d have to research 4, but I know for a fact taking a photo of someone in public is protected as you have no right to privacy in public, it’s also not the subjects business what I intend to do with it, so things like posting online might be subject to GDPR but if i wanted to build an app like the one in this post then I would do what they did and have it all on device so it technically isn’t uploaded anywhere.
I would need a law showing that matching a face against publicly available datasets of faces is illegal as that seems insane and difficult to police.
Yes, 3 I agree with as it would fall under GDPR as identifiable information.
I know for a fact
Do you remember why you "know" this? Just curious.
I would need a law showing that matching a face against publicly available datasets of faces is illegal as that seems insane and difficult to police.
Surely you have noticed that there is a lot of criticism of the GDPR and EU tech regulation.
-
If the Big Beautiful Bill passes it will be extremely hard to regulate.
Means we have all the time in the world to turn it against them, then!
-
Can't we just embrace adverbification and agree to write "suddenly"?
all of the suddenly?
-
That really sucks. But a lot of innocent people have the police break into their homes and murder them so it balances out.
Ahh yes of course, two wrongs have always made a right /s
-
but what if they glare at me very menacingly, surely I can then shoot tear gas, pepper shot, beat people, and shoot non-lethal rounds at them, right?
they're lookin at me Sarge. with their eyes.
-
A lot of masks only work in the visible light spectrum. It's entirely possible to "radar" images and remove them.
oh good my phone is set up for that?
-
I found this link on the internet and have no affiliation:
is that just user submitted or do they have some sort of verification process (don't ask me what it would be i can only think of stuff that works with nonfascist governments right now) because, well us and ours have fucked with similar forms too (e.g. that one texas abortion bounty hunter form comes to mind first)
-
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. But this shit will get sued so quick because “safety”
hail hydra?
-
Ahh yes of course, two wrongs have always made a right /s
It's not about being right anymore, that's never going to happen.
-
There's a reason ICE conceal their faces.
They know what they're doing is wrong and don't want to be held accountable if their fascist rule collapses.
They know what they're doing is wrong
Is that why the protestors wear them too?
-
It's just you. There were mass protests across the country just a couple of weeks ago.
Unless you meant the senseless destruction of property.
-
Can't we just embrace adverbification and agree to write "suddenly"?
Nothing wrong with "suddenly." I probably should have used it in my previous comment. It's just that sometimes you want to say "all of a sudden." Especially at storytime. The extra time helps build the suspense. "Suddenly" is more sudden in that it just jumps in there. With "all of a sudden," the subject isn't ready but the listeners are.
-
Cameras. They fucking hate body cameras. When it clears them of wrongdoing, they have the video ready. When they 'accidentally' shoot a guy nine times in the back of the head, video seems to be missing.
easily solvable problem: losing the footage is indication of guilt. you shoot someone, you better have it ready. it malfunctioned, better have a partner who has theirs ready. if no one has footage to clear you, it's used as evidence of guilt.
of course pussy ass lawmakers will never do that.
-
They know what they're doing is wrong
Is that why the protestors wear them too?
Protestors or vandals and rioters?
The former: to prevent government persecution and unfair retaliation. The latter: yes.
-
Protestors or vandals and rioters?
The former: to prevent government persecution and unfair retaliation. The latter: yes.
Protestors or vandals and rioters?
Yes.
The former: to prevent government persecution and unfair retaliation.
Why would they face persecution if they did nothing wrong!?
-
Protestors or vandals and rioters?
Yes.
The former: to prevent government persecution and unfair retaliation.
Why would they face persecution if they did nothing wrong!?
The government has always had it out for protestors, to the extent that they'll try and use agents provocateur to escalate the situation. They don't want people to protest, they just want people to life back and take it. C'mon, you seriously asking this?
-
The government has always had it out for protestors, to the extent that they'll try and use agents provocateur to escalate the situation. They don't want people to protest, they just want people to life back and take it. C'mon, you seriously asking this?
The point I'm trying to make is that everyone is wearing a mask for the same reason: to prevent retribution for their beliefs and according actions.
They don't "know what they're doing is wrong", they just know that other people think that and will target them for it, which is the exact same reason protestors wear them.
-
If only CSI enhancing worked in real life, we could out the asshole on the far left.
deleted by creator
