Slashdot Mirror


Police Scanning Every Face At UK Download Festival

AmiMoJo writes: Leicestershire Police have announced that they will be scanning every face at the popular UK Download music festival. The announcement article on Police Oracle (paywalled) reads, "the strategically placed cameras will scan faces at the Download Festival site in Donington before comparing it with a database of custody images from across Europe." The stated goal is to catch mobile phone thieves. Last year only 91 of the 120,000 visitors to the festival were arrested, and it isn't clear if the data will be deleted once checked against the database. The linked article provides at least one image of a costume that would probably trip up any facial recognition technology yet devised.

134 comments

  1. Why would the festival cooperate? by EmperorOfCanada · · Score: 3, Informative

    Why would the festival cooperate? Basically they are saying to their customer that their privacy is of no value. Not only is this cruel but it also indicates that the festival will probably sell on any data they have gathered on the festival goers.

    It is this callous disregard for privacy that screams for laws that clamp down on any organization, including the police, from being able to gather data. Quite simply I want a law that prevents any organization from gathering data that isn't crucial for the transaction and to not be able to share that data without a warrant. Thus I want this reaching the point where the power company can only gather the minimum amount of data to send me a bill and deliver my service. I don't even want them noting my gender. Then I pretty much want them not to be able to share that data with their own marketing department, let alone "trusted third parties".

    1. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The festival have to spend money to deal with people who break the law, it costs them more to put on - and increases their policing levy. Its a private site where there rules apply - if you don't like it don't go.

    2. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by DrXym · · Score: 2

      They'd cooperate because any initiative which cuts down on criminal incidents is probably fine by them.

    3. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Quite simply I want a law that prevents any organization from gathering data...

      Absolutely impossible to enforce. You can never know what is being collected and stored. It is easier to prove the existence of your favorite deity.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    4. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by anmre · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Directly from their privacy policy on their website.

      Information on your preferences. We may collect information about events you like or products you buy or enquire about (e.g. as part of a survey or from your review of an event). We may also hold information on interests and demographic categories inferred from your interactions with us in order to provide you a better service and to provide you with more focused information. For example, if you buy tickets to a certain show and lots of people who went to that show also bought tickets for a different concert, we might send you information about that concert.

      Cashless payment wristband usage information. If you use a cashless payment wristband during one of our events, we may collect information relating to your use of the wristband such as check-in information and the purchases you make with your cashless payment wristband (i.e. purchase of products and merchandises).

      Understand that you are NOT the customer here. You're the product.

    5. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would the festival cooperate? Basically they are saying to their customer that their privacy is of no value. Not only is this cruel but it also indicates that the festival will probably sell on any data they have gathered on the festival goers.

      It is this callous disregard for privacy that screams for laws that clamp down on any organization, including the police, from being able to gather data. Quite simply I want a law that prevents any organization from gathering data that isn't crucial for the transaction and to not be able to share that data without a warrant. Thus I want this reaching the point where the power company can only gather the minimum amount of data to send me a bill and deliver my service. I don't even want them noting my gender. Then I pretty much want them not to be able to share that data with their own marketing department, let alone "trusted third parties".

      And you can have all of that privacy. And only pay twice as much as you pay today.

      Whether they actually do or not, companies will claim they are losing money by not being able to sell your online soul to the most bidders, so you will be charged more for this "luxury", which will be about as effective as a do-not-call registry.

    6. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by mrbester · · Score: 1

      Except a) it's not their rules and b) this is to (ostensibly) flag up known criminals, not those who actually commit crimes at the festival. That you might have been done for nicking phones in the past does not equate you going to a music festival with the intent to continue to do so. But, hey, fuck you forever if you have a criminal record, right? Want a job? Fuck you. Want a loan? Fuck you. Want to go to a music festival? Definitely fuck you.

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    7. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by amalcolm · · Score: 1

      Want to go to a music festival where the police ingore the presence of known thieves? FUCK YOU

      --
      Time for bed, said Zebedee - boing
    8. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by pev · · Score: 1

      If you don't do what the police ask you to, you will not be able to run your event, it's as simple as that. This is often a financial issue for example. :
          http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/crime/100-fewer-police-at-hogmanay-over-funding-row-1-3597735

      I could name several smaller independent festivals in the UK that have been made financially infeasible by large imposed policing costs and had to be subsequently cancelled. Many would argue that often the policing costs are un-warranted and that the police may use this as leverage to prevent events that they don't approve of but no one has demonstrated this successfully to date. Certainly however it's true that there is wild variation in the level to which different events are burdened by the police but of course this can also be attributed to other factors such as the quality of their pre-event planning / paperwork and the differences in approaches that different regional forces take.

      Personally however, as both and event professional and an engineer, I'd like to know whether this was imposed on Download as a condition of their license, and if so what their justification for requiring it was. Secondarily I'd like to know how it is that they have been allowed to do this on the quiet. Certainly I believe that storing images of peoples faces would be covered under the data protection act.

    9. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      It is a downloaded music festival. If it was some other sort of festival, it would seem like hypocrisy, but since it is about information being free, then it seems to fit. If music on the internet is supposed to be free because it is just data, then why should the likeness of a person be protected? It's just data.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    10. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by hlavac · · Score: 1

      The only way to ensure data is not misused for purposes other than intended is to make sure it does not exist.

    11. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by amias · · Score: 1

      its called download but thats just a name , it means nothing other than some marketing people though the target market would think it is cool

      --
      [site]
    12. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. I find that anytime people want to complain about what the police do, just ask if it would be legal for Bruce Wayne under the same circumstances. If Bruce Wayne can do it without even needing to use the Batman costume, then the police should be allowed to do it to. "Whether you like it or not." --Freedom

    13. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Very funny. How do you expect to do that?

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    14. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by dave420 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Stop with that tired meme. Seriously. It's not insightful, it doesn't explain anything, and it's usually flat-out wrong. It's clearly wrong in this case as the customers are purchasing a product. I'm surprised you didn't chime in with "1984 was not an instruction manual!" to finish it off.

    15. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by ruir · · Score: 1

      You have it backwards. The point is to ignore anything, but rather collecting private data about who was there. You may be comfy with it, I sure am not. And for the record, I am not a known thief.

    16. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they could get away with charging more, they'd do it today.

    17. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by amalcolm · · Score: 1

      How can your presence in a public place ever be 'private'? This seems like ANPR to me: if it catches a criminal before he/she hurts/steals from me or mine, it the lesser of two evils.

      --
      Time for bed, said Zebedee - boing
    18. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by anmre · · Score: 0, Troll

      No, actually it's quite apt to the subject. Nobody wants to be tracked by RFID, facial recognition, etc. Yet, these venues are incorporating them into their "products". They hide these policies in fine print wrapped in legalese for a reason. They're tracking you and harvesting every bit of information they can get so it can be sold to the highest bidder. Submitting to such practices makes us their product. That you don't particularly care about that fact is a moot point. And your ad hominem attack about 1984 was immature. Let's hear a real argument.

    19. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      Quite simply I want a law that prevents any organization from gathering data...

      Absolutely impossible to enforce. You can never know what is being collected and stored. It is easier to prove the existence of your favorite deity.

      It's a Comfort to me. Like a Big Brother watching over me wherever I go!

    20. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      Just because the customer purchases a product doesn't mean that he/she cannot simulatenously be a product. Which is manifestly what's going on here.

      And they apparently did use "1984" as an instruction manual.

    21. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by davydagger · · Score: 1
      Why wouldn't they co-operate? How many people are going to stay home or spend less money because of the cameras?

      How much financial damage can the police do through harrassment to ensure the cameras stay up, such as imposing fines, threatening to revoke permits, taking them through court systems, having uniformed and un-uniformed officers harrass festival goers until they don't want to come back or get them to leave before they spend too much money.

      Waiting for a financial incentive to get large companies to protect your rights for you is foolish. Unpopular opinion: you might as well trust the government to "protect your rights"

    22. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by davydagger · · Score: 1
      I'm used to going to punk shows with few bouncers, and oh, no cameras. You might have to be a little more cautious, but 90% of the problems you have will be started by the security. At rock shows, most of the time these are crew members and not shy of beating people for minor provocations. Usually bikers or three letter crews, but occationally some minority based "street social clubs".

      Next ask, "who is manning the cameras", and expect them to be just as sketchy. Oh the cops? So you trust the police to look for actual theft? Looking for petty theivery is very much on the low list of priorities, and on the top is enforcing strict moral code of looking for an excuse to bust people performing sexual acts or consuming intoxicants. If the music is the slightest bit "counterculture", its any excuse to arrest as many of the party goers as possible, generally making up a reason.

      There is never a good reason why you'd want cops at such an event. Unless you expect crews to show up for the show(motorcycle clubs, HC three letter crews, urban corner clubs, etc...), don't hire external security either. Get people who are closer to the music community to resolve disputes.

      The other known theif clause sounds too damn close to outlawry, where someone is subjected to being an outlaw and denied rights as a sentance for comitting a crime. This in history has never worked out well.

    23. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by davydagger · · Score: 2
      it is fairly insightful. I don't think you have a point besides "any other political opinion other than do what the government says is childish because I said so".

      You are the product, means that not only are these companies spying on you, they are proccessing information to sell to advertisers much in the way a spy agency would go after a mark. They find your psycological weak points to convince you that their product is awesome and then have you harrass the companies neigh sayers.

      At the end of the day, you loose your freedom to decide what products you want, and your opinions are owned by advertising corporations. Their clients pay for your opinion, and they manipulate you into believing.

      You are the product.

    24. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by davydagger · · Score: 1, Interesting
      I hate this. Just because someone gives you something for free, doesn't entitle them to take your rights away.

      Thats litterally how pimps control prostitutes.

    25. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > How many people are going to stay home or spend less money because of the cameras?

      The story indicates that this was going through on the quiet, which negated people's options to make an informed fucking decision.

    26. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by Ian+A.+Shill · · Score: 1

      I *am* a known thief, you insensitive clod!

      FUCK YOU

      Want to go to a music festival where the police ingore the presence of known thieves? FUCK YOU

      --
      For hire.
    27. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      Just because it is easy to get away with doesn't mean they can't actively enforce it. It is easy to get away with smoking Marijuana, but people get arrested for it all the time.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    28. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by sjames · · Score: 2

      If they only scanned the faces of known criminals, I might agree with you. But that's not even possible.

      Public places typically offer the privacy of being a face in the crowd. Nobody there sees YOU, they see "some person" they don't know. Tomorrow they won't remember you at all. Now, tomorrow you'll be part of a police database and who knows what they might do with the data.

    29. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by hawkinspeter · · Score: 1

      In my experience of music festivals in the UK, the police tend to have relatively low profile and are there to stop any major problems rather than hassling the people who are just there to enjoy themselves. They've even been known to turn a blind eye to the occasional illegal intoxicant (but you'd better not rub it in their faces).

      I'd prefer to have cops at music festivals as otherwise the criminal element get a bit gung-ho with stealing tents and stabbing rival drug gangs etc.

      I'd be more concerned about facial recognition used at a political rally rather than an innocent music festival as there's not much blackmail material therein.

      --
      You're a temporary arrangement of matter sliding towards oblivion in a cold, uncaring universe
    30. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... for the record, I am not a known thief.

      So you're a thief who hasn't been caught yet?

    31. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (For context, I just got back from Download today, and this is specifically regarding your objections to police being there.)

      I don't think concerts of one or two acts (or even a day's worth of music) is an apt comparison to a multi-day music festival. I believe I've seen there were about 85,000 people at Download, which isn't the busiest it's been. A significant number of these people are camping, some for 5 nights (I was only there for 3), and there's people up at all hours. By and large the people who attend seem to be decent people, and I've never seen any real trouble at the festival myself, but thieves are present and people may get drunk and aggressive, and so it makes sense to have the police there for people to go to if needed. In my experience, the police who attend Download don't give a shit if you're drunk (other than to help you if needed), and I doubt they particularly care much about anything else you're doing unless it's harming other people. It's a rock/metal festival, they know people are going to enjoy themselves in some peculiar ways, and they know it's not their job to stop that. (It is instead apparently their job to pose for pictures.)

      (Incidentally, the RFID-based payment system they mandated this year was quite nice for not having to have any money on site, although the privacy concerns are there).

    32. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if it catches a criminal before he/she hurts/steals from me or mine, it the lesser of two evils

      Ahhh ... the lament of a fucking coward.

      Fuck you, asshole. What you're saying is society should become a surveillance state so whiny little idiots like you can pretend that as long as it catches criminals it's fine.

      Cower in your home, and keep telling yourself that you have nothing to fear because you have nothing to hide.

      You worthless, simpering sack of animal dung, too scared and stupid to know that this shit impacts far more than your pathetic little law-abiding self.

      Worthless idiots like you should be the ones to find out the worst possible outcomes of a society like this.

      Make the world a better place, and kill yourself. Leave those of us who don't wish to live under fascism to not listen to your pointless drivel.

    33. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everybody could wear Guy Fawkes masks.

    34. Re: Why would the festival cooperate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your anger is funny. It's also pointless. Pro-surveillance people are the vast majority, and you privacy nerds are an irrelevant minority. You have a choice: either join the sane people in the real world or suicide. :)

    35. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, that didn't take long for the bootlickers and fascist shills to show up.

      More's the shame.

    36. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by davester666 · · Score: 1

      The article isn't about the cops looking for pickpockets working the crowd. They are using facial recognition to try to find people suspected of crimes.

      Of course, it is likely they didn't bother going to their last known address....too much work.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    37. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by amalcolm · · Score: 1

      I'll ignore the ranting tone and respond, enven though you are the anonymous coward. I'd repeat my ANPR anology: these cameras catch uninsured drivers, bail jumpers, drug dealers etc. On balance I see that as a plus and I'm OK with the fact that as a result of these the police in theory could track my movements. You reallly should try to learn to argue rationally, rather than resort to risible insults

      --
      Time for bed, said Zebedee - boing
    38. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by ruir · · Score: 1

      Are you a paid shill for politicians or polices, or just too damn stupid? I do not want for sure registered in a central database every place I have been, and the privacy implications of that are enormous. Look, we won't hire this guy because he is stupid enough to go to macdonalds every sunday, and eats discussing chink food; he is probably a criminal because he was in that communist party rally and in that BSDM event --- he is a fucking faggot that was in that Gay Prade parade. Gee, wake up, damn you.

    39. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a load of utter bollocks. Who says they're selling information to advertisers anyway? And even if they are, this means some information about me is a product. I don't actually give a fuck. I am not the product - that would imply some kind of slavery or being pimped out or something. This conflation of something a bit bad with something really really bad is just fucking childish, and means you're just preaching to the converted, because anyone who doesn't share your abject paranoia looks at you and thinks, well, he's a bit fucking paranoid, if he thinks someone having a bit of data about him is the same as being sold into slavery.

    40. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Look, we won't hire this guy because he is stupid enough to go to macdonalds every sunday, and eats discussing chink food; he is probably a criminal because he was in that communist party rally and in that BSDM event --- he is a fucking faggot that was in that Gay Prade parade.

      If you don't get a job because you go to macdonalds, eat chinese food, are a member of a legal political party or are gay - there's something very wrong with the company you're applying to in the first place.

      Besides, it's the police that have this information, it's not publicly available like posting on facebook that you smoke crack.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    41. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      I'd be more concerned about facial recognition used at a political rally rather than an innocent music festival as there's not much blackmail material therein.

      I assume facial recognition is already used at most political rallies/demos as they tend to be in public.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    42. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by tehcyder · · Score: 1
      I assumed he was joking.

      If not, he's hilariously stupid.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    43. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by hawkinspeter · · Score: 1

      I've seen reports of them filming demonstrations etc, but I think the facial recognition is relatively new to them. Reminds me, where did I leave my Scramble Suit?

      --
      You're a temporary arrangement of matter sliding towards oblivion in a cold, uncaring universe
    44. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by davydagger · · Score: 1

      I'd be more concerned about facial recognition used at a political rally rather than an innocent music festival as there's not much blackmail material therein.

      When you find me a form of music that doesn't have even the slightest political connotations, I've found the dullest music in existance.

    45. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by hawkinspeter · · Score: 1

      Yes, music typically does have a political slant, but it's very unlikely that you could blackmail someone for their taste in music. e.g. Someone running for political office and you try to bring them down by pointing out that they're fans of Chumbawamba or Billy Bragg? I can't see that it would be that effective.

      --
      You're a temporary arrangement of matter sliding towards oblivion in a cold, uncaring universe
    46. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by Dan1701 · · Score: 1

      ANPR in the UK works on a very heavily regulated target: UK vehicle licence plates. The size, font and spacing of the letters on these plates is legislated for, and non-standard plates are hunted down by the police.

      By contrast, a human face is a very much more difficult target to recognise. Generally speaking, most systems up to now (notable examples being purported terrorist-spotting systems at airports) have suffered from such huge false positive rates that they were useless. I would strongly suspect that the system that the police here are employing would suffer from similar levels of false positives.

      Repeatedly arresting a person on the basis of unproven technology would, if done frequently enough, count as harassment and it is for a court of law to decide (based on previous precedent) what frequency of false arrest would constitute such harassment. UK courts have not looked particularly kindly on police conducting trawls like this in the past, so I therefore suspect an ulterior motive for this surveillance.

      I think this is not intended to catch criminals, but rather to frighten them out of the area.

      UK criminals are typically rather stupid individuals in the main, and are also already used to pervasive CCTV and how to evade it (the standard chav uniform of baseball cap and hooded top is intended to conceal the face from overhead CCTV), and are well versed in what powers police have as well. As a result, I rather think that most criminals here would just go to the festival anyway, and trust police incompetence and the inherent uselessness of the technology to keep them unmolested.

    47. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by doccus · · Score: 1

      I would just BET the major labels have paid BIG time into this. Perhaps into the local coppers (coffee?) coffers too, by paying off the spying equipment. See, once this is done, the labels will have a face to attach to "suspected downloaders". So will the cops. "Mobile phone thieves"? Yeah, right.. last time I read a summary, it was for "European 'terrists' ". Time before that, it was to "Help interpol".. or something to that effect. In reality, the majors want a face to attach to any future IP addy..So a defense like "Yer honor sir.. this person claims it wasn't him that downloaded 365 copies of Miley 'twerking' , that it could have likely been the old biddies in the seniors facility using that IP address" might not work, if the prosecution points out "Mr Justice, we have a clear facial shot of the defendant at the 'downloading' festival, holding up a sign saying 'Steal everything' " ;-)

    48. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by Evtim · · Score: 1

      Like, the company will actually TELL you the real reasons for not hiring you....some years ago I once caught the HRM of my company when a bit drunk and she admitted to me that she would never hire anyone with a tattoo....I was shocked beyond believe, because we are talking about cutting edge semiconductor company with more than 50% of the staff with MSc. and 30% with PhD.

      The chance that you find any "normal" person in my company is close to zero...unless you go to the HR office, the finance or the administration. Everyone who actually does the job is weird....to say the least. To expect that creative hyper-thinkers would conform to common appearances is lunacy.

    49. Re:Why would the festival cooperate? by davydagger · · Score: 1

      from your consumption habbits they are able to piece together other bits of information such as sexual orientation, political leanings, perhaps hidden biases. What if you are having an affair. mistress shows up? Who's that next to you, did you happen to stand next to a future criminal/terrorist in a picture? You can make black mail out of anything.

  2. Alan Funt Would Be Proud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If he were alive!

    1. Re:Alan Funt Would Be Proud by mrbester · · Score: 1

      I prefer a nicely shaven... leg

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
  3. Unfortunately commonplace security by retroworks · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Walmart, Best Buy, and Staples are using this facial detection to "add value" to their ceiling based security cameras. I looked into it after receiving Facebook ads for things I never searched but only picked up and examined physically (like very specific models of camera). Unfortunately it's harder to camouflage your face than it is to camouflage cookies from website visits. It starts with security and then goes to marketing... Leicestershire Police will be able to sell a list of attendees to companies marketing hardware, for example (one of the more valuable commodities for conference advertisers... for now).

    --
    Gently reply
    1. Re:Unfortunately commonplace security by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 1

      Have you got a link to that, I hadn't heard shopping centres had started linking security camera footage to facebook accounts?

    2. Re:Unfortunately commonplace security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Have you got a link to that, I hadn't heard shopping centres had started linking security camera footage to facebook accounts?

      He wont because it is bullshit.

    3. Re:Unfortunately commonplace security by GTRacer · · Score: 1

      Well, what about the in-store tracking that has been reported in Forbes and elsewhere which uses your cell phone's MAC address, in-store location tracking and video feeds to assemble a profile on you? And ever wonder why stores are all hot to offer free WiFi? And encourage their apps' use? Because as soon as you link your identity to that profile they have you. They don't need facial recognition (which I wouldn't be surprised about anyways).

      --
      Defending IP by destroying access to it? That makes sense, RIAA/MPAA. Go to the corner until you can play nice!
    4. Re:Unfortunately commonplace security by linebackn · · Score: 1

      Additionally, what do you think the so-called loyalty/advantage/discount cards are for? They are used to track your purchases and market at you.

      The upshot is, once facial recognition comes to all of these stores, such tracking cards will become obsolete.

    5. Re:Unfortunately commonplace security by retroworks · · Score: 2
      Here are a few links.

      BBC http://www.bbc.com/news/busine...

      NYT http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02...

      Here is a video https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      http://adage.com/article/digital/facebook-walmart-write-rules-facial-recognition/245707/

      There are others but these stitch together the use of facial recognition in existing retail security systems (2011) and the later meetings (Walmart, Facebook) to establish "rules of conduct" for retail implementation, a video showing how it's done. It's certainly proven to be possible and tested, I suppose my experience finding an ad for a Sony AX6000 which I'd looked at for 3-4 minutes and put down, leaving a store without buying anything, could not be construed as proof. Or the ad for the HP Laser printer.

      --
      Gently reply
    6. Re:Unfortunately commonplace security by tehcyder · · Score: 1
      If I was really that worried about a supermarket knowing what I spend my money on, I'd pay in cash, never use the same shop twice in a row, and adopt a variety of simple disguises such as false beards or noses, and...oh wait. Of course I wouldn't because I really don't care.

      As it is, receiving money off vouchers for things that I have bought recently does not exactly feel like I'm being watched by Big Brother.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  4. trivial to circumvent by SkunkPussy · · Score: 2

    They're keeping it secret because its trivial to circumvent by wearing a hoody or a mask.

    It seems very likely that the prevalence of CCTV has driven the trend over the last 15 years towards hoodies - i.e. jumpers with a hood that may conceal a lot of your face.

    --
    SURELY NOT!!!!!
    1. Re:trivial to circumvent by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      ...its trivial to circumvent by wearing a hoody or a mask.

      Not at the gate. They can make you remove all disguises, dark glasses, etc and take a picture there.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    2. Re:trivial to circumvent by linebackn · · Score: 0

      Expect hoodies, masks, or anything else like that to be completely illegal soon.

      In fact, check your local bank. Mine already forbids wearing hats and sunglasses. Don't even think about wearing a mask in one.

      Don't pretend for one second that rules like this won't slowly continue to expand elsewhere.

    3. Re:trivial to circumvent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wearing a hat indoors is kinda idiotic to begin with.

    4. Re:trivial to circumvent by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

      Which is trivial to circumvent, just outlaw hoodies and masks. I would really love to watch you try to enter any festival while obscuring your face. You would be in police detention within 5 minutes.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    5. Re: trivial to circumvent by regnumirae · · Score: 1

      I went to download there were plenty of people wearing slipknot masks waiting to get in, and they never got asked to remove them. From the ticket 25. By attending the event, you give your express consent to your actual or simulated likeness to be included within any film, photograph, audio and/or audiovisual recording to be exploited in any and all media for any purpose at any time throughout the world. This includes filming by the police or security which may be carried out for the security of customers or the prevention of crime. The police said the database was an offline copy of an existing Europe wide database of known offenders and the data will not be kept for longer than the festival.

    6. Re: trivial to circumvent by regnumirae · · Score: 1

      I went to download there were plenty of people wearing slipknot masks waiting to get in, and they never got asked to remove them.

      From the ticket:-
      25. By attending the event, you give your express consent to your actual or simulated likeness to be included within any film, photograph, audio and/or audiovisual recording to be exploited in any and all media for any purpose at any time throughout the world. This includes filming by the police or security which may be carried out for the security of customers or the prevention of crime.

      The police said the database was an offline copy of an existing Europe wide database of known offenders and the data will not be kept for longer than the festival.

    7. Re:trivial to circumvent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then paint yourself up like a drag queen or an emo kid. Seriously, think harder man.

    8. Re:trivial to circumvent by dsmatthews9379 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps that is what they want, because then they don't have to really scan the crowd and can just have their personnel on the ground focus on people trying to hide their face?

    9. Re: trivial to circumvent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just wear a *word starting with b, ending in a* and claim something about religious freedom.

      (I never did understand why laws say "you can't do x unless you have a really irrational and silly reason for it", but in this case it might be a handy loophole only option to maintain your privacy)

  5. Why . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    . . . do they want to scan thousands of guy fawkes masks . . .

    1. Re: Why . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly what I was thinking!

    2. Re: Why . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you enjoy being pepper-sprayed and having your bones broken with batons, be my guest. The authorities will always be 100 steps ahead of you because, quite simply, they can do things you would go to jail forever for wven talking about them, and they know they will always get away with it. This is why they are "authorities". We live in the world they shape, not the other way round. We live in the Surveillance Age. Get used to it.

  6. The "stated" goal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wonder what the unstated goals are?

  7. They have no choice! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The festival needs a license, the last labour government made it condition of the license that the police agree, so the police use it to add any arbitrary law to the agreement.

    So here the police demanded mass surveillance as a condition of their approval and so the festival has no choice but to go along with it.

    This is how the UK is, the police drive the democracy, its heavily over-policed, and if you try to tackle them, they send out PR people to talk trash on TV.

    1. Re:They have no choice! by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Bingo. Whenever the police have to licence something, e.g. the sale of alcohol or an event, they tag on a load of extra conditions for their own benefit. You will probably find that the CCTV providing the images for facial recognition has been paid for by the festival organizers as part of the deal. Any shop or pub getting a licence these days will need to install CCTV and make it available to the police.

      The police love this. It costs them nothing and they can claim that much of the machinery of their oppression is privately owned, and thus not a threat or controlled by the laws governing their behaviour.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:They have no choice! by skegg · · Score: 0

      +5

    3. Re:They have no choice! by Guildor · · Score: 1

      George Orwell's 1984 in action. Any discussion to the contrary, is "counter-think".

    4. Re:They have no choice! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Government is clearly not your friend anymore.
      You need to overthrow it and start over.
      Just like the Americans did.
      And just like they need to do again.

    5. Re:They have no choice! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cancel the festival and sue the cops.

  8. justification? by v1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You'd think they would have to provide some sort of reason why this specific venue was chosen for this "dragnet" law enforcement. This isn't like license plate scanners where they're throwing them up all over the place on highways... this is a very specific deployment. If they're going to use the reason of "catching cell phone thieves" (which by itself seems to be a very trumped-up reason) you'd thing they would be expected to provide some justification, why they have any reasonable belief that any significant number of said theives are going to be there.

    That reason could actually probably be dismantled now that they've announced they intend to BE there, any said thief would be very likely to avoid the venue as a result. So just based on that alone, they should be packing up?

    It'd be like the police planning a raid on a local bar that had a track record of lots of underage drinkers. If news of the date/time of the raid gets out, it'd be pointless to go ahead as scheduled with the raid? If they went ahead with it even after being exposed, you'd have to assume that the "looking for undeage drinking" was just an excuse for the raid and there was some other specific reason that they didn't want to become public knowledge.

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    1. Re:justification? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      This specific venue because this is the only major UK festival held in the Leicestershire Constabulary. Leicestershire police have been trialling face recognition software for over a year now - they are merely extending their coverage to include festival goers as well as their regular surveillance of the local residents.

    2. Re:justification? by rizole · · Score: 1

      That's genius. Announce facial recognition deployment, put up a few dummy cameras which keep the theives away and with the time and money saved attend the festival and relax.

  9. you can be everywhere by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 5, Interesting

    so a fun anecdote i heard from a friend who works in the biometrics field is that in testing facial recognition software that would track people on a college campus, they found a strange anomaly that there was one person that had been spotted hundreds of times in multiple locations at the same time. after reviewing the footage he realized that the cameras were actually finding bob marley's face on t-shirts.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:you can be everywhere by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Ah hell, Bob Marley's nefarious evil plot is revealed, he's an unstoppable criminal now, he can do anything and yet he will have a complete alibi!

    2. Re:you can be everywhere by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      just goes to prove: "the raster, man, is vibrating!"

      can't get a steady signal with all that going on.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    3. Re:you can be everywhere by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oooh hey that gives me an idea for a series of t-shirts that are covered with random faces.

    4. Re:you can be everywhere by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, after taking a bunch of photos from churches in Italy, Jesus and his apostles make up a disturbingly high percentage of my iPhoto faces.

  10. Good! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    fuck the plebs

  11. All hail the democratic leaders of UK fascist stat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How far have we come :(

    They should sell those wide brimmed sombreros for 2 £ there.

  12. Not clear if the data is kept? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It should be pretty obvious by now.
    All your data r belong to us.

    Why do people keep allowing this bullshit?
    Cause they think cell phone theft will be lowered?

    Can you think of a more expensive and intrusive system for your "cell phone", security?

    They should boycot the event.

  13. Mandatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Here's the license condition used to force bars to install CCTV:
    http://londonist.com/2009/02/mandatory_cctv_cameras_in_pubs.php

    Quite simply if you refuse, the police object to the license and the festival would not be permitted. The police drive the law, and they're above any niceties like citizens rights.

    None of this has been agreed by Parliament, Police were given the right to object to festivals in cases of public danger or major crime, and they expanded that into "do as we say or we'll object and your festival will be cancelled".

    Download festival know this is unpopular, and it only leaked out because a police journal wrote a story on it, otherwise the police would have done it in secret.

    THE DATA WILL BE KEPT. The police kept DNA evidence voluntarily given to them to rule out people as rapists. The police promised to destroy that, they kept it anyway, the court ruled that was illegal, and they still kept it. It forms part of the DNA database they created now.

  14. Fuck everything by AndyKron · · Score: 1

    Absolutely, positively FUCK THIS WORLD!

    1. Re:Fuck everything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree, in concept. Fortunately there are places where one can avoid this kind of crap, but it is unfortunate that we have to bother.

  15. Seems bizarre more than anything else by 91degrees · · Score: 1

    It's already been reported that you need the wristband to do pretty much anything. They already know who you are. Facial recognition in addition seems pointless.

    1. Re:Seems bizarre more than anything else by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's already been reported that you need the wristband to do pretty much anything. They already know who you are. Facial recognition in addition seems pointless.

      Does this wristband have an RFID tag? Track those, plot to camera data and now they have a face to go with the name and method of payment you used.
      From there the data collection options just increase.
      Never assume that small pieces of a jigsaw can't give you a good idea of the whole picture.

    2. Re:Seems bizarre more than anything else by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      The RFID tags don't have the range for that sort of thing though. And I'm not sure a capture is good enough as a source for facial recognition. Plus, the police are still bound by data protection laws. This sort of random collection really wouldn't be legal.

    3. Re:Seems bizarre more than anything else by soccerisgod · · Score: 1

      Hahahahahahaha...

      You're so cute when you're naive :D

      --
      If a train station is a place where a train stops, what's a workstation?
    4. Re:Seems bizarre more than anything else by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      Which part of it? If the police are actively breaking the law, then I consider this to be pretty abstract stuff, and those responsible should be arrested and charged.

    5. Re:Seems bizarre more than anything else by soccerisgod · · Score: 1

      Emphasis on 'should'. Will it happen? Most likely the answer is 'no'.

      --
      If a train station is a place where a train stops, what's a workstation?
    6. Re:Seems bizarre more than anything else by ruir · · Score: 1

      Amazing. Finally some comment to understand what they are doing. Feeding their database with more than the crappy photos in the ID cards, and probably get people who does not upload personal pictures to facebook.

    7. Re:Seems bizarre more than anything else by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      Well, I guess it would help if the media actually reported the police flagrantly violating the law, rather than focusing on abstract trivialities.

      Since they're not, and it's only random comments that suggest they are, with nothing to back it up, I'm going to consider this conspiracy theorist nonsense for now.

    8. Re:Seems bizarre more than anything else by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's already been reported that you need the wristband to do pretty much anything. They already know who you are. Facial recognition in addition seems pointless.

      People can swap wristbands, but swapping faces is slightly to advanced for current technology.

    9. Re:Seems bizarre more than anything else by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      People can swap wristbands,

      Not very easily. They're designed to prevent this. That's the whole point in having them rather than a laminated badge or something.

  16. London Luton camera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Has anyone noticed new cameras on London Luton Airport? The ones with white LEDs pulsing in cylon-like circle pattern. Are those facial recognition cams?

    1. Re:London Luton camera by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 1

      Don't know about the Luton ones, but they are everywhere.

      Leeds rail station has cameras placed for face reco all over the place, particularly on the stairs. I imagine most of the UK transport hubs now have this.

    2. Re:London Luton camera by zdzichu · · Score: 1
      --
      :wq
    3. Re:London Luton camera by t551 · · Score: 1

      Wow, that's pretty devious/clever. The lights don't do anything except get you to look at the camera.

    4. Re:London Luton camera by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the horror of someone looking at your face in a public space like an airport. Next, they'll be saying you can't wank or shit in the departures lounge.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  17. Useless statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Last year only 91 of the 120,000 visitors to the festival were arrested"
    Great, I still have no idea if this is too much or not enough.

    It would have been much more informative to compare the 91 arrestations to the number of reported cellphone thefts.

    1. Re:Useless statistics by soccerisgod · · Score: 1

      ...not to mention actual convictions afterwards...

      --
      If a train station is a place where a train stops, what's a workstation?
    2. Re:Useless statistics by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      More to the point would be to compare this to the number of arrests for similar events with less intrusive measures.

    3. Re:Useless statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what they were convicted of. If they were all convicted murderers it might be appropriate, assuming proper safeguards were in place to delete information on innocent citizens (admittedly not likely). On the other hand if there were only a couple serious criminals amongst a bunch of parking ticket, child support, drug use and other non-violent crimes then not only would it be a violation of civil rights but a massive waste of time and money.

  18. And now it turned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    into a mask party.

  19. You realise of course this means war by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would like and prefer to show respect to any random venue by taking off headgear when entering. But if you then abuse that show of respect to store my likeness in databases for any length of time at all and run all sorts of automated whatnots on it, then that is less than no respect in return.

    I really don't care that it's about ferreting out (a very very few) bad apples. You just don't get to do that to everyone.

  20. I wonder if they would arrest you for wearing this by tomxor · · Score: 2, Insightful
  21. tshirts of terrorists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I say everyone should wear a tshirt with some famous terrorist on the front.... watch the fun

  22. download is a shit festival by amias · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've been involved in quite a few uk festivals and know several organisers and IMNSHO opinion this could have been rejected by the organisers.

    Download has a reputation in the festival scene for being one of the grimmest most corporate of festivals, think mainstream moshing meatheads on speed
    and lager , not hugging hippies on ecstasy. Its quite likely the police strong armed download about this because of their target audience but its just as
    likely download came up with this themselves to reduce policing bills. Having seen policing bills for other festivals its quite likely download were
    hit with something in the order of millions and hired someone (lots of ex-coppers consult on this ) to analyse how to mitigate it and they came up with this.
    Note the almost total lack of outcry from festival goers about this, downloaders just don't care, if this was tried with glastonbury there would be riots.

    The RFID purchasing thing is way more dangerous in my opinion , this has been tried as several festivals and has resulted in a lot of festival
    traders getting ripped off by organisers who simply loot their traders revenue if they fail to make enough money (which happens a lot because
    festival running is subject to a bewildering array of regulations that don't make sense and cause unpredictable expenditure). People who work
    at festivals know full well that accepting anything that isn't cash is a gamble on the skills of the organisers. It turns festival organisers into banks
    which is a terrible idea.

    the police strategy of applying more and more over the top requirements on festival organisers is driving festivals into smaller and smaller events,
    this is typically because the explosion of festivals is a direct response to similar controlling behaviour regarding events and venues in cities. Its a dangerous game to play , over zealous legislation drives events underground where they are potentially less safe (although often much more sensible), where they generate no tax revenue and have no access to sensible venues. This also dramatically increases the possible harms of drug use , contributes to a lot of post drug use psychosis and creates a vast revenue for criminals.

    Until the government and the police recognise and protect the right to have fun and gather socially as the vital part of our culture that it is we will continue to
    have all manner of baffeling social problems as people do it anyway in less than safe circumstances.

    --
    [site]
    1. Re:download is a shit festival by DanJ_UK · · Score: 1

      Couldn't have said it better myself.

      --
      - Dan
  23. Hot item for sale. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1
    Stickers with false eyes, lips and noses to be affixed to the faces to throw these recognition systems off balance!

    India is the world leader in these stickers, from traditional simple red/maroon circles, to really fancy pieces that are almost jewelry . They should be able to whip up a few million eyes, noses and lips in a jiffy.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  24. Re: Guy Fawkes would be proud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Three shots ring out. V's shape slumps to the ground, lifeless. The morning news report a terrorist shot and killed. Popular approval for the police rises. Norsefire remains in power. That's how things go in real life.

  25. Some more info by pev · · Score: 1

    News item from Leicestershire Police :
        https://www.leics.police.uk/news-appeals/news/2015/06/15/download-success-see-you-in-2016

    Interestingly apparently a 0.2% false positive rate. On attendance size of 90,000 that's 180 people mis-identified. This is apparently using NEC's NeoFace Watch system which they started trialling in the middle of 2014.
        http://www.necam.com/Docs/?id=c8a08fd5-e79c-4f00-9f37-9919318cc772

  26. Proxy Approval by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they asked people if they want to be recorded everywhere, they say no. So the UK created a 'data protection registrar' who approves these things on behalf of the people!

    That's how they get around the right to privacy, you consent to have your privacy invaded (well the data protection registrar does it for you!).

  27. Crafty disguise by MitchDev · · Score: 1

    "The linked article provides at least one image of a costume that would probably trip up any facial recognition technology yet devised. "

    Clark Kent's lenless glasses?

    Really need more people in disguise if the scum are going to be pulling this constantly...

  28. Dear Government by MrKaos · · Score: 3, Funny

    For FUCK sake LEAVE us ALONE. Your supposed to be the countries foundation, not our overloads - fuck off.

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  29. Is data deleted? NO!! by blackt0wer · · Score: 2

    There is no such thing as a temporary tax, or in this case, data collection. The UK is the shining example behind North Korea of an oppressive police state. These data will be used to further inhibit the lives of the citizenry.

  30. dear me, I have corrupted the Borg by Thud457 · · Score: 2

    Just make a monthly T-shirt drop of with the FBI's 10 most wanted poster a thing.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    1. Re:dear me, I have corrupted the Borg by Thud457 · · Score: 1

      With future automated scanning system upgrades, you could also pollute their known associates data a'la the Bert & Osama poster. FUN!

      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  31. Solutions.... by SinisterEVIL · · Score: 1

    Nothing a good ol' fashion bandanna can't fix.

  32. Extra bright INFRARED BULBS by evilrip · · Score: 1

    I suggest a few bright infrared bulbs and a battery in your cap, to the cameras you will likely look like jesus himself. could hurt your eyes so wear eye protection..

    --
    "To err is human, to forgive, beyond the scope of the Operating System"
  33. FUCK the UK and its police. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is just one more reason in a long list of reasons for spending my tourist money elsewhere.

  34. Music Download Festival! by CanEHdian · · Score: 1

    Maybe their paymasters thought it was a Music Download Festival and thought it'd be a good idea to have incriminating evidence complete with mugshots (nice for the world-wide facial recognition database) of the perpetrators of these heinous crimes against the hard-working, living-off-scraps music community.

    --
    When the copyright term is "forever minus a day", live every day like it's the last.
    1. Re:Music Download Festival! by K10W · · Score: 1

      Maybe their paymasters thought it was a Music Download Festival and thought it'd be a good idea to have incriminating evidence complete with mugshots (nice for the world-wide facial recognition database) of the perpetrators of these heinous crimes against the hard-working, living-off-scraps music community.

      joking aside some of the met really are that stupid