Man fined £90 for public order offences after dodging facial recognition

[steven36]

It's a novel way of raising funds in Brexit Britain

 

Good to know police won't be abusing new technology

 

GOOD NEWS! THE MET POLICE'S controversial facial recognition trial has earned the public purse £90 it wouldn't have otherwise had.

 

The bad news is that the way the money was earned should really make everyone stop and have a long hard think about where society is going.

 

This particular chilling anecdote comes from campaign group Big Brother Watch, and describes a man who saw the warning of automatic facial recognition cameras, and took steps to avoid them.

 

"He simply pulled up the top of his jumper over the bottom of his face, put his head down and walked past," explained Big Brother Watch director Silkie Carlo to The Independent.

 

"There was nothing suspicious about him at all … you have the right to avoid [the cameras], you have the right to cover your face. I think he was exercising his rights."

 

Carlo explained that this was enough to trigger suspicions, and the man was followed and eventually accosted by officers who "pulled him over to one side," and demanded to see his ID which he provided.

 

It became heated, and the man the officers them to "piss off" - we think, anyway, the Independent has prissily censored the word, so it might be "pony." Probably not, though, as said words landed the man a £90 fine as a public order offence for swearing. "He was really angry", Carlo added, although in the circumstances we think that's understandable.

 

The Metropolitan Police had previously put out a statement saying that "anyone who declines to be scanned will not necessarily be viewed as suspicious." It looks like the word "necessarily" is doing an awful lot of heavy lifting in that sentence.

 

Source

[Reefa]

Pointless post removed...

[straycat19]

Not so different from a couple of incidents in the US.  Here in San Francisco, whenever police setup a DWI/DUI checkpoint they have to post a sign at least 200 feet before the checkpoint that includes a side street that people can turn off of to avoid the checkpoint.  The military around San Francisco had to oblige by the same rule, however they put a second checkpoint on the turnoff, so there was no avoiding it.  There reason was the sign to all military installations that states entrance to the facility is consent to search, so they did not have to give anyone an out.

 

A local police department in Indiana got even craftier.  They put a sign on the interstate a couple miles before the state line stating there was a drug enforcement inspection ahead.  Fortunately there was an off ramp just past that notification.  So druggies took advantage of that and went off, right down the ramp, to the real drug enforcement inspection checkpoint.  They did this for a number of years until a judge ordered them to cease the operation.

 

Most police vehicles in the US now have license plate recognition capabilities.  Their cameras record every license plate as it comes in front of their vehicle, noting location, time and direction of travel.  Some of the more sophisticated systems can identify a stolen plate/vehicle within second of recording the plate, which has increase the recovery time from thefts.  Some people believe putting a certain piece of acetate over their plate will prevent the camera from recording the number.  These are probably the same idiots that believe this would also deflect radar so their speed couldn't be recorded.  However, every state in the nation has a law that prohibits any kind of covering over the license plate, so they were being stopped and ticketed for that.

 

So if you want to avoid facial recognition, just wear  the V for Vengeance mask that has been adopted by Anonymous.  I don't know of any law that prohibits that.  Yet.

[BimBamSmash]

Experienced this sense of discontent when CCTVs were on the rise. Though never expressed it - thought that would cause more harm to me than good.

 

While I can still relate, I doubt it should be a matter of concern for many. If people really cared,  they wouldn't be (happily) unloading their whole lives onto social media in detail. More can be done with that data than capturing your face in busy streets.

 

Anyway, right now I am picturing a decade from now where the same set of rules that promote facial recognition today mandate implanting chips into our bodies then.

[tivstip]

1 hour ago, straycat19 said:

 

 

A local police department in Indiana got even craftier.  They put a sign on the interstate a couple miles before the state line stating there was a drug enforcement inspection ahead.  Fortunately there was an off ramp just past that notification.  So druggies took advantage of that and went off, right down the ramp, to the real drug enforcement inspection checkpoint.  They did this for a number of years until a judge ordered them to cease the operation.

 

dope 😂

dope 😂