,
8 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
Just a few points from my interview on facial recognition because of constant mis-characterization of my arguments and also a total denigration of my views as if I'm some tinfoil-wearing hermit.
1. The idea that just because the UK has good intentions regarding their facial recognition does not mean it won't be abused. History has proven that emerging technologies are consistently abused by law enforcement agencies.
2. That China's use of facial recognition has no baring on how it will be used in Western countries is again beyond foolish, considering the UK's GCHQ has abused their surveillance power just like China has.
3. My point that mass surveillance of general populations has never lead to preventing a terrorist attack still stands, his point that 19 terrorist attacks were prevented because of the system is patently untrue, and are instead coordinated operations on targeted individuals.
4. The fact is, there is zero evidence facial recognition systems actually prevent or solve crimes, and the constant clawing for power by law enforcement agencies should be heavily scrutinized and not trusted just because the organization has 'good intentions'.
5. Every oppressive system starts small and reasonable, which is why they should be criticized. At the end of the day, if we take my road of scrutinizing and perfecting the systems, no one loses. If we take their road and just blindly trust the most powerful members of society -
6. The normal citizens walking the streets are the ones who lose. I dearly hope men like that don't get power, as they are belittled by their lack of trust in people, and think we need to be micro-managed as humans to not kill and murder each other at every street corner.
7. Also the assumption that I am American despite clearly having an Irish accent classically show-cases the straw-manning that occurred, where I wasn't even being listened to and was instead a nutcase wall to smash down.
