‘FuckLAPD.com’ Lets Anyone Use Facial Recognition to Instantly Identify Cops
-
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.
wrote last edited by [email protected]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.
-
Why don't you want to say what makes a protest effective?
I can't find the article now, but I read one yesterday about LA protesters doing things like blocking ICE vehicles, towing them away and making noise outside their hotels so they can't sleep. They're actually confronting ICE and LAPD, draining away their energy and reducing the pace of arrests. Here's an example. Do this on a national scale and Trump's little Gestapo won't stand a chance.
Good luck not getting fired.
They can't fire everyone, but more importantly look up the events of Euromaidan, the various Arab spring revolutions and the recent Serbian (or was it Slovakian?) protests. It's impossible to overthrow authoritarianism without personal risk; that's just not how that works. 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.
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.
-
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/31924287
These guys still really like their tonfas, don't they?
-
I believe having lack of evidence being the evidence for a crime is problematic, but it sure is evidence enough that they aren't fit for their job and they should immediately lose it. Everyone Including the supervisor who failed to run the team properly.
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
-
I believe having lack of evidence being the evidence for a crime is problematic, but it sure is evidence enough that they aren't fit for their job and they should immediately lose it. Everyone Including the supervisor who failed to run the team properly.
wrote last edited by [email protected]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.
-
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/31924287
This is nice. Use their own weapons against these fuckers.
-
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/31924287
Should be the ice agents too
-
I took a selfie and it told me I was an ice agent.... Wtf I'm such a piece of shit
Fuck you pig!
-
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/31924287
This reeks of a honey pot scheme for some reason.
-
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.
You misunderstand how the system works.
They are all complicit. -
Please post the entirety of your online history. Surely there's no reason to hide.
...we're talking about hiding though
Whether what you've done is entirely legal (or not) authoritariaism doesn't care.
That goes both ways. That was my entire point.
Who is in power again? The protesters are not making anyone disappear. Goodbye, troll.
-
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!?
How is your flavor pallet after sucking so much leather?
-
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.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Your point is moot.
For the people by the people or did you forget?
-
Also what about cops outside of the LAPD? This app only useful if it works on any cop.
It is definitely not going to work on any cop. There are still cops who are working in countries where privacy laws exist.
-
I'm a librarian. I also work with members of the public, some of whom do not share my understanding of reality. My information is still public because I'm a government employee.
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.
-
Why would a librarians info need to be public? Does America require a public database of public servants?
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.
-
It's a public servants thing--the public wants to know what they're paying for, so public servant salary records are public.
Various websites compile this information from the various state and federal sources. It's wicked easy to find information on, say, every public servant with the title "librarian" in Fake County, Kentucky.
Knowing their full name, you can look up their home ownership records in the county real estate or tax databases and ta-da, you know where they live. You also know if they work part-time at a different public library, so that's convenient for stalking purposes.
Edit: not that I think it's a good thing. It's creepy as all get out. If we have to post salaries, I'd much rather they be anonymized like on Glassdoor.
Edit2: and these lists do get used for political ickiness. There's an anti-union group that mails out helpful tips on how to save money--leave your union. They even provide a "I want to leave" postcard addressed to your union leadership for you to sign, pre-filled-in with your info.
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.
-
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. But this shit will get sued so quick because “safety”
Privacy is the word you are looking for.
O wait ... the US doesn't know privacy for everything but companies
-
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/31924287
wrote last edited by [email protected]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
-
Commercial versions of these systems exist in the UK.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/jun/06/shopper-facewatch-watchlist-39p-paracetamol-london
The Gdpr makes these things harder to do, but not automatically illegal.
Surely you have noticed that there is a lot of criticism of the GDPR and EU tech regulation.
Yeah, and some of it is even true.
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.
