New York To Test Facial Recognition Cameras At 'Crossing Points' (vocativ.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Vocativ: In a 35-minute speech detailing a landmark $100 billion investment into state infrastructure, largely focused on New York City and Long Island, Governor Andrew Cuomo made a number of promises that would thrill New Yorkers, like the promise of a renovated Penn Station, called Penn-Farley, a direct train from there to LaGuardia Airport, and the completion of the long-awaited Second Avenue Line. Oh, and facial recognition cameras around the city, he said: "At each crossing, and at structurally sensitive points on bridges and tunnels, advanced cameras and sensors will be installed to read license plates and test emerging facial recognition software and equipment." "We're going to be using this in Penn-Farley and we also want to be testing it in bridges and crossings system," he added. On the matter of facial recognition cameras, Cuomo was shy on details. It's unclear how many cameras will be deployed, which agencies will have access to them, what defines a crossing, how citizens' photos will be stored, and what photo databases will be used to compare against the faces of the millions of people who drive into the city. In his speech, Cuomo referenced the cameras as necessary for New York to adapt to 21st century security threats. "In this age of terrorist activity and lone wolves, if you look at points of vulnerability you'll go to our tunnels and to our bridges. So really they have to be reimagined for a new reality," he said.
"It was terribly dangerous to let your thoughts wander when you were in any public place or within range of a telescreen. The smallest thing could give you away. A nervous tic, an unconscious look of anxiety, a habit of muttering to yourself -- anything that carried with it the suggestion of abnormality, of having something to hide. In any case, to wear an improper expression on your face (to look incredulous when a victory was announced, for example) was itself a punishable offence. There was even a word for it in Newyorkspeak: facecrime, it was called."
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Could you perhaps burn-out the CCD's/CMOS sensors with a powerful-enough laser?
It will be used for more than fighting terrorism.
Real lawyers write in C++
My father taught me to always wear a hat, so you'll almost never see me without a fedora or trilby, brim low enough that I doubt any cameras above eye height will ever catch my face.
Where I go is my business. Registering where everyone goes with facial recognition is just a variety of Papieren, bitte.
If we are to call it what it is.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
Makes sense but we're a nation of cowards now so we'll let them grab more power without so much as a whimper.
On the Oregon Cost born and raised, On the beach is where I spent most of my days
look for the camera
For ski masks year round from everybody just to say Fuck you very much.
Digital is, by definition, imperfect. Analog is the way to go.
The question is "why"? - you have a higher chance of dying from a bee sting or a lightning strike, why not address the higher risks first?
This is so easily foiled, anyone who wants to hide can just rest under a blanket, lie down, hide in the trunk, etc. Not a good use of money.
80's disco fashions look to be headed back in a big way
That's fine, if it's only at "crossing points"... it'll only end up tracking tourists, since New Yorkers are about half as bad as San Franciscans, when it comes to just walking anywhere they feel like it, rather than in crosswalks.