Thread by @BaldingsWorld

I see lots of people gasping outloud at this "exclusive" when it is really a great big yawn though I know journos wouldn't know or understand the difference. Let me explain 1/ reuters.com/technology/exc…

First, we know that China has had facial recognition in cameras for many years. Second, we know China has had a vast network of surveillance cameras in urban areas and increasing into rural areas for years. Third, by the transitive property and by databases we have obtained 2/n

We know that China can watch targeted individuals in real time as they walk across a city for instance. Fourth, within these databases the facial recognition system not only links to individual information such as id number, passport number, facial measurements etc. 3/n

It also fills out an array of other observables for instance "scarf color" or "pant length" and whether they are "foreigner", "minority", or "criminal" as well as a variety of all kinds of other observables and implied information. Let me emphasize that I have never seen 4/n

A Chinese database with either a field name or category for journalist. However, based upon the range of other information that is present that information would be readily available to a security analyst watching an individual in real time or logging their movements. 5/n

We already know that China does this for all kinds of other targets in a variety of ways. Technically adding a category or field name "journalist" to a surveillance system is not complicated at all based upon the data capabilities they have. It isn't even entirely clear 6/n

why you would need a new project to accomplish this. The administrator of the database would be able to manage this in existing databases. My hunch would be this is likely padding some work or some other type of shenanigans because technically this capability already 7/n

Effectively exists in reality if not already in practice and has for many years. So why this is some "exclusive" seems more like a slow news day than anything else.