I find it alarming that to “protect” women, men have to be surveilled secretly in all public places. This is way beyond dystopian.
AI and remote security personnel get to decide if someone is “a predator” and take 'em down preemptively if they look suspicious.
What could possibly go wrong?
Rosie Richardson is working to develop a technology to help keep women and girls safe in public spaces
Not another Elizabeth Holmes clone, ffs.
Just stop with the black turtleneck She-E-O bullshit. What a maroon you’d have to be to invest in this
She does have the empty eyes of a soulless narcissist.
Insane the sort of shit people propose. At this rate they’ll ask to install cameras in our homes to “detect domestic violence events” or to detect “terrorist activities”
Hah! They don’t have to. Many have “assistants” listening constantly, door cameras linked to central surveillance hubs, security cameras also linked to those hubs. It’s too late for most people - they took the bait. Hell, even the televisions record audio and send it back to the hub, and I’ve heard now that cameras are the new rage for them so we can “control the TV with motion”. Yeah, most are already cooked. I had to replace my old LG, bought a new one. I didn’t give it access to the internet. Even so, who knows if it’s still secretly doing it? And then there are our phones in which they swear they’re not tracking us. Yet, plenty of proof they are in fact recording our conversations and tracking our locations.
Her company does work for the defense industry. There’s no way this technology will be misused for spying and surveillance.
It always starts with the excuse of terrorism, protect the children,etc…Wow - I didn’t even know about that part. That pretty much clinches it, doesn’t it?
Vetting, checking sources etc… is the first thing I do.
Especially when alarm bells go off.
first one BBC, second one tracking tech.
Everyone should do it, would prevent a lot of misinformed opinions.I checked out the link, and noticed that the “we use cookies” obscuring pop-up does not disappear when one chooses to not accept “unnecessary” cookies. I guess we just have to power through the 20% screen loss unless we accept those cookies. Hard pass.
I have a 5% screen loss only.
Didn’t even need to decline cookies to read it.
There is absolutely no clarity on how this laser based system monitors people on the ground. Is it like a radar? How does the system determine from a laser that the target is a woman, man or non binary?
More needs to be done to protect women but mass surveillance with iffy claims about privacy ain’t the way
It seeds nanoparticles at the quantum level to generate a molecular positronic array. Think of it like putting too much air into a balloon. There will be no more technical questions.
absolutely no clarity on how this laser based system monitors people on the ground
Re: Theranos
It’s Elizabeth Holmes bullshit all over again lol
Surely a society that has shown little care for women’s safety would never pretend to care about women’s safety to justify pushing their surveillance state forward.
Except those most likely to victimize women LOVE projection and taking undeserved credit
The idea is, on that deserted railway platform, the lasers would spot the unnecessarily close choice of seat, registering it as unusual and a potential threat. Security teams would then be alerted and could either direct CCTV for a closer look or send staff in person if needed.
Me when I get arrested for sitting down in public. This is definitely not going to drive young men towards figures like andrew tate
Do you remember the social media panic over ‘man spreading’ or whatever? This whole thesis that men sit with their legs spread in public spaces to specifically deny women a place to sit?
It was so wild. And everyone ate it up. And if you pointed out how many women dump their bags on seats and take up 2-3 extra seats… you were a misogynist attacking hard working women who were just trying to bring their shopping home.
It can’t just be that people who take up extra space are the jerks.
that was the only video that women ever appeared in to talk about that I’m fairly certain, or maybe I’m thinking about the woman that’s talking about gaming and male gaming fantasies.
yeah sorry about that I was thinking about this woman
Yep. Same with man vs bear discourse. It’s all scissor statements, and people eat it the fuck up because we all need an enemy
Thanks for the link. I never heard that term before. Super interesting. But very common rhetorical device these days.
deleted by creator
Almost all assaults are done by people the victim knows, in private. This does nothing to prevent that.
What the fuck‽
Edit: this was meant as a firm and horrified disagreement as a feminist, not as actual confusion or surprise. The UK has been finding whatever justification they can pull out of their ass to increase surveillance and control
key premise of identify politics is that you are guilty of the sins of the group you belong to.
in this case, if you are a man, you are guilty of the crime of potentially raping women.
You are going to see al to more of this kind of crap, from ‘progressive’ people in the next decade.
A man arrives and sits right beside her, making her feel uncomfortable and unsafe.
It’s time to patent public bench with gender taser.
[PENIS DETECTED]
bzzzzzap!
Pretty transphobic!
Their wet dream is a pay to use bench that has pointy spikes keeping you from sitting down until you pay, and it also verifies your identity by scanning your face or government issue ID so it knows what gender you are regardless of your genital status or if you are homeless so it can deny you even after paying.
When talking about surveilling society at large, as this person is suggesting, it’s important to remember that there is no such thing as surveilling a subset of the population.
Everyone who crosses the boundaries of surveillance, without exception, gets surveilled.
When you point a camera at a crowd, it does not selectively exclude everyone but your chosen subject: a camera photographs all. People and systems behind the camera then manipulate and match that data to suit their objectives, and that’s where it becomes completely unaccountable, because the data has already been collected on all.
Today, supposedly, it’s dastardly men, the suggestion being that all others will be excluded and thus this extended surveillance of all public spaces must be benign for everyone who is not a dastardly man. But in other places and times, it was runaway slaves, or homosexuals. Recently it has been women seeking abortions and trans people and immigrants. Tomorrow it will be those guilty of wrongthink.
And all are surveilled, because everyone is surveilled.
This surveillance WILL be used to the maximum of its capability, and very quickly, regardless of whatever guidelines or original purpose or its stated goals are said to be in the beginning.
These are nothing but lines in the sand that will be washed away almost immediately, because there’s just no way to exclude specific groups from widespread surveillance, and our collective governments are far too corrupt and unstable and greedy for power to ever cut off their own access to it.
CCTV operator here. One thing people misunderstand is that cameras don’t tell a story, they corroborate a narrative. In other words the footage is often open to multiple interpretations, not just one side of the story. (We’ve seen this play out with the recent ICE shootings)
One big difference between CCTV and these “smart lasers” is that CCTV is retroactive; Meanwhile this system appears to aim to prevent crimes. Anyone who has seen the movie Minority Report, knows where I’m going with this.
“It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.” - William Blackstone ~1760
Basically this system, if not transparent, could easily be used to falsely accuse and oppress people. Not just men either. I’m sure Jim Crow would have installed lasers on the water fountains if they had them.
Exactly. This is a privacy issue, not a “men’s” issue, otherwise I’d have found a “manosphere” forum for it (don’t know if one actually exists on Lemmy). As you say, this is equivalent to “we must protect the children” as motivation for pretty much everything that takes away liberty, except it’s the women who are the “children” in this version. It’s just a means to getting the controls in place so it can be used freely to everybody’s detriment.
Oh, yeah, it absolutely does belong here. And the “reasons” we absolutely need this or that new incursion on our privacy are always something that ends up being inflated to cartoonish proportions, while everyone else is supposed to feel reassured.
Lol, no. What surveillance ends up being used for primarily – not even as an exception but as its primary goal – is backwards criminalization, where a person or organization in power has someone in front of them now that they wish to see rendered powerless, or disregarded, or silenced, so they just go back through the data looking for the points where that troublesome person stepped over some invisible line, charge them retroactively for their “crime”, and are done with them.
Even in the example of the article, surveillance doesn’t prevent anything. It only ever looks back. In a world (especially in the UK) where cameras already abound but crime rates stay the same or go higher, and regular police forces that supposedly exist to serve the community remain strapped, understaffed and underfunded, it is unrealistic to believe there will be some magical space where this collected surveillance data is processed, rings some alarm as designed, and the good guys come pouring out of a nearby substation to save the damsel in distress.
And we know this because there are already countless criminal alarms, and data, and specific cries for help that get ignored as a matter of routine. This new alarm will simply be added to the pile of those already ignored, while the people in power – who really want to just pre-emptively collect surveillance data on a supposedly free society – use it at-will and unseen to create and keep their own power by any means possible.
deleted by creator
This article is using every trick in the dystopian playbook to try to emotionally appeal to people. Protecting women, especially the young girls!
“I think we have to develop solutions that put the responsibility back into other places like public authorities, owners of spaces, police forces,” she says.
But she still comes out and says what she really wants: more power vested into private, wealthy owners of spaces, to the state, and to the police.
Surely nothing can go wrong. Surely this is about equality for everyone and it definitely won’t disproportionately impact men of color. Surely this won’t run afoul of any tricky edge cases like trans people. Surely this won’t be used to deliscriminate against the poors while still allowing anyone in an expensive suit to do whatever the fuck they want.
This article is using every trick in the dystopian playbook to try to emotionally appeal to people. Protecting women, especially the young girls!
Oh man, PhilosophyTube has an character-devoted bit to this lol
If unusual behaviours are detected, for example a large group of people moves suddenly or in an unexpected way, security teams on the ground are alerted and can check if there is a problem.
Yes this will definitely be used only for its intended purpose
The UK is a dystopian shithole. They took 1984 and used it as an instruction manual.
Not really, it’s just one wanna-be entrepeneur and a handful of knobheads wanting to implement it.
You wanna see dystopian shithole then check US news lmao
This is global. My town is installing Flock cameras to “stop dangerous speeding and red-light running”. Never mind that it also is networked with every single other camera, reads license plates, and use AI to track people everywhere they go. There’s no danger, though. That’s just coincidence…
If it helps, a lot of these stories don’t go anywhere in the end.
CCTV cameras are a lot more accepted, but it’s not as extreme as the media often makes it out to be.
The article shows how this tech is already in use in places like King’s Cross.
lol
We’re talking the same AI systems that protect children from lethal bags of chips, and the same kind of premise that lead to vulnerable women getting their info stolen?
Wow, the Baltimore one I didn’t know about and that’s also beyond dystopian. Jeez, the response by authorities being “sorry, but it did the right thing, move along” reminds me of the movie “Brazil”. If you read the article, you already know that yes, it’s like that one, but in England, and every public place. Worse though, because it’s judgment of where you stand, sit, walk or cast your eyes in relation to any woman in the area.
If students have to use AI in order to make it look like they’re not using AI — what on earth will a system like this do to people? Quite how it will be able to read the intent of people’s actions without throwing up a huge number of false-positives is something that I don’t understand.
And quite what workers are supposed to do when they receive an ‘alert’ of this nature, I’m not sure. Go up to the individual and tell them that their behaviour has been flagged as suspicious? Way to make me feel more anxious in public.
No, it already does. Facial-ID stuff already throws hundreds of false positives.
