Privacy

4850 readers

360 users here now

Icon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

Ategon@programming.dev

danielintempesta@programming.dev

More than 170 arrests in Met's Croydon facial recognition trial (www.bbc.com)

submitted 2 months ago by Blaze@quokk.au to c/privacy@programming.dev

4 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Crime reduced by 10.5% during the pilot from October 2025 to March 2026, the Metropolitan Police says.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Mikina@programming.dev 13 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Of course it will lead to reduced crime, and allow them to solve more of them. That's kind of expected, when you can find and track where is anyone 24/7.

But then you inevitably get a far-right governemt, because that's the rapidly rising trend all over the world, and suddenly 'crime' also means being trans, or feeding homeless, or not being far-right enough, or speaking up about how maybe we shouldn't jail trans people.

10+ years ago, facial regonition like this would still be controversial, but you could maybe kind of have a benefit of the doubt that it might be worth the extremely reduced crime rate.

Now, when democracies are falling left and right and it's only a matter of time when your country starts their own version of concentration camps, it's a really stupid fucking idea.

So, fuck this bullshit propaganda piece.

[–] Senal@programming.dev 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

i agree with all of that.

Genuine question though, is it propaganda?

I mean it's essentially:

"Police install draconian system to to target the crimes of the peasants, while continuing to ignore the rich, system working as intended"

Edit: wait no, actually i just saw the 'Address fears' section, they are clearly pretending this is the only problem.

[–] Mikina@programming.dev 1 points 1 month ago

Yeah, that was my point. There's a whole part about them "taking privacy concerns seriously, but... [A lot of reasons why it's actually good]".

It doesn't adress the issues I've highlited, and downplays them, and the general vibe of the article is " look, it helps solve crime, this is actually good"