So @MayorJohnDennis of West Lafayette, IN says that he will veto an ordinance to ban #facialrecognition despite widespread evidence it's ineffective & discriminatory. Then gives an interview to the local paper showing he has no clue how this tech works 🤦♀️eu.jconline.com/story/news/202…
Let's break this down a bit. @MayorJohnDennis says he'd veto the ordinance, which was brought forward by concerned residents, despite widespread concern from civil rights groups and experts about the ways this technology exacerbates discrimination & harm washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/…
Here's an actual Mayor of an actual city describing to @jconline what he thinks recognition does:
Notably, nearly twenty other cities across the US have already banned this technology.
Then @MayorJohnDennis starts to really show off his ... uh ... tech expertise, talking about the difference between "passive" and "aggressive" technological ... systems. No clue what he means, but here's some actual research on facial recognition accuracy: news.mit.edu/2018/study-fin…
You might think that after that @MayorJohnDennis would try to stop talking so as not to say anything else embarrassingly wrong about facial recognition.
But then he proceeds to basically blame people of color's facial characteristics for well documented issues of systemic bias.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Saying that decentralized tech like cryptocurrency is “inherently right wing” is like saying socialism is “inherently authoritarian” because you can point to examples of authoritarian governments that claim to be socialist. Yes, there are a lot of crypto bro scams and BS, but…
Decentralization is our best bet for having a future internet that’s not based on surveillance capitalism and where people have basic rights. Cryptocurrencies are just sort of the tip of the iceberg, messy (and often scammy) proofs of concept for something much more important
So go ahead and retweet the Dogecoin guy with an axe to grind because his thread confirms your biases or makes you feel righteous, but know that what you’re really dunking on is the potential to have a Spotify owned by artists, uncensorable private Twitter with no Jack Dorsey etc
Will be on the lookout for lawmakers parroting talking points fed to them by tech industry lobbyists and law enforcement shills. #BanFacialRecognition
Only a few minutes into the hearing and we've already heard a ton of excuses for why lawmakers aren't just moving quickly to ban this technology. The language they're using around "oversight" & "regulatory frameworks" fed to them directly from tech lobbyists opposing moratorium
THREAD: YouTube just banned Right Wing Watch, an organization working to expose and debunk hate groups.
This should be a wake-up call for the left: calling for more and faster social media censorship will always backfire on marginalized social movements. thedailybeast.com/youtube-perman…
As always with these cases, we're piecing together what actually happened, cuz Big Tech companies like YouTube have incredibly opaque moderation practices. But this is a perfect example of how pushing for companies to make moderation decisions based on news cycles is a bad idea.
From what's been reported, it seems likely that the Right Wing Watch channel was banned because of videos where they incorporate content from some of the far right assholes they are targeting, for the purposes of exposing / criticizing / debunking their racist disinformation.
This entire editorial is premised on the idea that facing professional consequences for being transphobic is a tyrannical violation of free expression. This is a Tucker Carlson segment with a posh British accent.
The mental gymnastics in this piece are just incredible. While defending free expression the Observer essentially says it’s wrong when trans people and our allies express our ourselves by speaking out against people who are spouting an ideology that’s getting trans kids killed
This piece is extra egregious because there are SO MANY actual threats to free expression rights, including speech rights of transphobes the Observer is defending, happening all over the world right now. Attacks on Sec 230 in the US censorship & social media shutdowns globally
NEW: after protests organized by @fightfortheftr and widespread backlash from civil rights groups, Amazon Ring is making some significant changes to the ways they allow law enforcement to request footage from their massive network of surveillance cameras gizmodo.com/amazons-ring-w…
Ring will no longer allow the cops to send requests privately to camera owners. Now they’ll have to do it publicly through the neighbors app. They’re also putting some limits on how often they can request footage, the geographical area covered, and for what purposes.
Let’s be extremely clear: Amazon is only doing this because of the tremendous work done by grassroots digital rights and racial justice activists (as well as journalists!) who helped expose the widespread discrimination & abuse enabled by these corporate surveillance partnerships
Happy Pride Month! Because I am a no fun trans femme buzzkill, here's a THREAD of tech related battles that directly affect LGBTQ+ folks, especially trans women of color and sex workers, that are largely being ignored by the mainstream gay rights movement.
1. FACIAL RECOGNITION: this uniquely dangerous form of surveillance supercharges government and corporate oppression, automates racist policing and social control, & could easily be used by hate groups to target and out queer people. LGBTQ+ groups should join the call for a ban.
2. ATTACKS ON SECTION 230: politicians from both major parties are increasing their misguided and disingenuous attacks on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a foundational law for free expression & human rights. The last major change, SESTA/FOSTA, got people killed.