People shamed and ordered to leave shops after being misidentified then ‘given no help’ to investigate verdicts
I am not going to suggest, encourage, applaud and condone arson as a protest, because that is illegal.
Reminds me of the US No Fly List.
No idea how your name gets on there. Impossible to remove. Every attempt to fly is a humiliation
The list of people so dangerous they can’t be allowed to fly, but too innocent to arrest.
so, right after 9/11 i had to fly every 8 weeks for medical treatment. and somehow SLC put me on their Suspicious Travelers List because they’re creeps in Utah. They put a mark on my ticket that indicated me for extra searches every time i flew (until i yelled at the TSA and told them I was flying for medical treatment and threatened to sue them for harassment. i wasn’t, i didn’t want a lawsuit, but it got the searches to stop). they’d toss my bags and pat me down at security and sometimes also at the gate. every fucking time i flew, because i was too deathly ill to stand up for myself.
never got that treatment in SFO.
On the one hand, right to refuse business. On the other hand…
Funny how even the things “AI” is okay at (pattern matching within a certain margin of error) still can’t be used properly.
Those using it don’t care if they get false positives, so it’s working as far as they’re concerned.
To them it’s more trouble to actually double check or review hits then to just give people a blanket ban if they might could possibly be shoplifters.
deleted by creator
Camera surveillance is simply no longer compatible with use in spaces, structurally inviting the general public, due to advances in technology. You cannot physically limit what’s being captured by an image sensor: it captures everything, and filtering (including removable masking) is only able to happen after collection. Which could also mean the data itself, or derivatives thereof, may be stored indefinitely; and could, at any time in the future, be used as evidence against members of society.
The only meaningful strategy to prohibit this, is to physically remove these surveillance systems: so personal data isn’t collected to begin with. Don’t even get me started, about the GDPR supposedly protecting citizens against this type of surveillance: it pushed for modernization of the systems, legitimized the “collect but protect” approach, created physical backdoors for the government to get ahold personal data being collected, and incentivized member states to piggy bank off of it.
But I’m glad the cracks are beginning to surface, and ordinary folks starting to grow uncomfortable around modern camera surveillance too, because that’s the only reasonable response to it.
This means that due-process has to be made a constitutional-right, for criminal AND civil cases…
_ /\ _
