Pre-crime arrives in the UK: Are you ready to label someone "capable" of breaking the law?

a reply to: breakingbs

And I always wonder what the angle is on labeling someone potentially dangerous.

Thats a ruse, I think. They can't and don't stop terrs from doing their thing, thats literarily impossible. But it sounds good to tell us all this surveillance will keep us safe[r], when really it keeps them safer.

Not so much to pre crime people, but to have that record if something happens.

Whenever theres a robbery at a liquor store the first thing the cops do is go to the video. They want to know who did this. They want to know who was there, where they live, what role they played, etc.

All this increased surveillance will just help them to catch the bad guys better. As time goes on, more laws and stiffer sentences for lesser crimes will make it harder for people and easier for cops to get their man.

a reply to: intrptr

Im less concerned about a robbery getting caught and more what happens when you get looked at for just..."traits."

Not to rob or steal, or be out of control or any other old thing someone would get rightfully apprehended for, but in terms of perpetrating danger, simply deemed:

"capable"


What happens then??

a reply to: eisegesis

Here is my perspective. I have never been arrested, or even questioned in regard to a criminal act, save for the time that a friend of mine and I chased some jewel thieves, who had just done a smash and grab at the jewellers shop down the road.

All that in mind, and also taking into account that I have a well developed sense of justice, I call foul on this whole shebang.

My right not to be scanned at every street corner is greater than the importance of collaring criminals. If my rights go down the pan in order to make catching criminals possible, then the job is not worth doing. Let me be clear, freedom is more important than law, more important than every other pillar of life in a democratic and just society. If I get blown up by terroristic whack jobs, or mugged by some filthy criminal bastard because I had the freedom to walk down the street, then fair enough. If that is the cost of freedom, then it say put it on my damned tab. What I do not accept, is that any solution to criminal activity which involves a decline in freedoms, or the right of innocent people to go about their business untracked, unmonitored, and unmolested, can ever be considered the correct approach.

I hope the person who designed this system gets mistaken for a career criminal, and get black listed from his favourite bar, the ignorant swine.

a reply to: breakingbs

Nevermind

originally posted by: Mahler
a reply to: eisegesis

Yet I am under surveillance because I made a positive comment about Islam on a Catholic forum that was being incredibly Islamaphobic. The Pope has issued a fatwa against me dated 19.12 with orders to carry out the execution today. It will be publicly viewable on Catholic Answer Forums apparently.

They won't act on my impending execution by MI6.

I guess you are now dead, but if you are still with us, could you please:

Let us know who has you under surveillance.
Let us know how you know you are under surveillance.
Give us a link to the fatwa.
Explain why MI6 are going to execute you.

a reply to: breakingbs
Everyone is "capable" of crime at any time. Thats why crime exists. I was trying to make the point that notions of pre crime are a ruse to justify the big brother style surveillance. They want a record of your actions in case you do something. Figuring what you might do times billions of people is impossible.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Although I totally agree with your notions of freedom and liberty, you just exposed yourself on their surveillance as a person of interest for insisting on "being free", a sure sign to that system and the controllers that you are hiding something. Why else would you insist on remaining "private"?

The surveillance system doesn't have to monitor your activity all day to figure this out, you just freely stated your deepest thoughts on the matter. When it comes time to push and shove people into fenced compounds for wanting to remain "free" then your name will come up as a 'potential rabble rouser'.

I know, I don't care either. If thats the world we have to look forward to, who wants to be a willing participant?

If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about.

Increased surveillance is for your own good. Why resist the inevitable?

Because I want to be free.

Free to do what?

To do what I want.

You can't do what you want, if we let everyone do what they want it would be anarchy.

What are you hiding?

a reply to: intrptr

The Digital Panopticon is being built all around us.

The trick is in 'showing' us enough to make us believe its omniscient when it can't be.

originally posted by: Mahler
a reply to: eisegesis

It's worse than that. Every webcam on Windows 7 or above has a dual stack address meaning the image can be processed by two separate processes at the same time: one you know about, the other you don't. They have processes running that connect back to a server on port 80 or 443 (web and secure web) to see if there is a broadcast command and if there is, you're on candid camera. There is nothing you can do about it. Close the ports and you can't use the Internet. Find the command process and it re-spawns two more.

Yes there is....blue tac on the camera

a reply to: bonesymphony

Hi bonesymphony, welcome to ATS!

The trick is in 'showing' us enough to make us believe its omniscient when it can't be.

As long as they feel safe, it doesn't really matter if its secure or how we feel about it.

Like the French under King Louis and Marie Antoinette, they only felt secure lopping off heads of their perceived 'enemies'. They made so many people so angry they were grabbed and given the same punishment.

a reply to: intrptr

There is the crux of the issue.

I have no secrets, and I have the right to be treated as if I have no secrets, until such time as someone has reason to suspect otherwise, probable cause to suspect otherwise to boot, not just a vague and poorly defined suspicion based on my comments here, or my letters to parliament or my MP, but a confirmable, actionable probable cause to suspect me of a specific criminal offence.

And why do I demand either freedom or death? Because I am, as is every citizen, the authority here, and WE say how we are to be governed. We are governed and policed by consent, and unless the authorities provide us with a method to give, or take our consent for a given policy or method, they have no business encroaching on our rights in this manner.

I partake of my freedom because I love it, and because my grandfathers bled for it, and their friends died for it, and if I must, so will I. If my government threaten the freedom of this land, they will never have peace. The land itself will rise to smite them in disgust.

a reply to: SprocketUK

Yes i imagine it may indeed play hell with there cameras.

Need to also incorporate some sunglasses in to the outfit so the camera cannot see the eyes and bridge of the nose, because given the capability's and sophistication of there software, thats all that may be required for identification purposes.

a reply to: TrueBrit

If my government threaten the freedom of this land, they will never have peace. The land itself will rise to smite them in disgust.

Thats why they'll lock you up, because you are fomenting insurrection. Treason! Heresy!

(snicker)

a reply to: intrptr

Wherever tyranny rears its head, so must rebellion. All will fall to darkness otherwise, and while I am a fan of moonlight and shadow, the pitch of which a future free of rebellion would be made, is not a shade I wish to see draped across these isles.

a reply to: TrueBrit

I know, Like I said I agree with you, just playing devils advocate…

Whether you are right or wrong doesn't matter to tyrants, the only thing that matters to them is that you speak up.

a reply to: eisegesis

Great OP! Thanks for the info.
This goes a long way to explaining why I'd never travel to the UK. Way too creepy.

I haven't heard we have anything this comprehensive in the US...yet. Although it may be in operation in the major metro areas. But no one with a brain goes there anyway.

Do the UK population know about this? I wonder if people will start avoiding public spaces.

a reply to: TonyS

Of course we are aware of the situation and no it wont stop us from avoiding public places. LoL

It not just happening here, only difference is because we live on a relatively small island its a perfect test bed to implement and refine there surveillance capability's.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: SprocketUK
Burkhas won't protect your identity from the other biometric data collected. And let's face it in this pc society wearing such can and will simply draw attention.

They will simply outlaw "invisibility glasses", just like they did with License Plate foil sprays and reflective covers used to interfere with traffic cameras:

AVG Invisibility Glasses and other slick tactical tricks to fool face recognition

Also wearing weird make-up styles and/or hoodie/sunglasses combos will almost certainly tag an individual as a dissident that "needs further, UP CLOSE, investigation":

How to Beat Facial Recognition Software without Looking Like a Bank Robber


But lets rethink this further. What if people regularly used a nail file/board on their fingertips every morning? Not really much more time than clipping your nails:

The most prominent of those problems involve bricklayers—who wear down ridges on their prints handling heavy, rough materials frequently—or people who work with lime [calcium oxide], because it's really basic and dissolves the top layers of the skin.

Umm...what if I "broke my nose" PERMANENTLY and had to wear a "medical device" in public on a regular basis? What would be the "internal policy" for dealing with "medical devices" that obscure the programs ability to identify individuals?






Broken neck and sunglasses should work too:



Special effects make-up that relocates the brow-line, hair-line and cheeks should do the trick as well:

originally posted by: breakingbs
a reply to: intrptr

Im less concerned about a robbery getting caught and more what happens when you get looked at for just..."traits."

Not to rob or steal, or be out of control or any other old thing someone would get rightfully apprehended for, but in terms of perpetrating danger, simply deemed:

"capable"


What happens then??

If it comes to that then the majority of those #s in Westminster should start sweating. They are capable of, and commit pretty much every heinous act you can think of, from engaging in and covering up pedophilia, weapons trade, murder, corruption etc etc. Oh wait no. The law doesn't apply to them does it. Damn.

a reply to: boohoo

I totally agree that there will indeed be numerous different ways to spoof and fool there overtly totalitarian system of observation and identification(at least for a little while). The problem i have is the fact that "They" have us convinced that we need such a system in place. And all under the guise of maintaining our safety and security.

I really cannot see the point in being safe if the price is the removal of our basic freedoms on almost on a daily basis. That's not safety and security, if you ask me that's nothing more than living under the Jack boot of a totalitarian technocracy. And funnily enough that's pretty much what that swine Cameron hopes to accomplish.