politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Personally I think that these tools are only as good as their user and also they aren't nearly as capable as they want us to think they are, be it due to weird gaps in their coverage, insufficient photo or video resolution, or simply too much parsable days I think these surveillance networks have notable holes in them. That's not even getting into how the software side of things may be insufficient, biased, or simply broken.
The guy in charge of spying on you is typically drunk or polygraphing what’s left of his staff that wasn’t replaced with AI to see who stole his booze (which he drank and forgot about). They want you to believe Santa is always watching, and while we shouldn’t doubt they’re trying to get to Minority Report level, I agree that there’s too much info and too little skill. Even the most effective tyrannical bureaucracies are bureaucracies, filled with red tape, miscommunication, and petty tyrants willing to sabotage a rival to make themselves look good. They know they don’t have the Batcomputer, but if they can convince you to act like they do they don’t need it.
Based on nothing but vibes alone I wouldn’t be surprised if police and federal agents still use the incomplete or even false data to “solve” crimes. Wether or not they could use it on mangonie or the kid that shot Charlie Kirk, one of the like 10 people that have tried to shoot Trump, or even wether it’s even useable at all is where the real speculation starts. As far as I know, human beings are training these things to find a “match”, any match, even if it’s not a match and the person they are looking for isn’t in their searches whatsoever, it’ll find someone to convict
Agreed, just didn't want to speculate all that much on back end shit that I can't see. But yeah the match regardless of accuracy thing is almost certainly happening on statistics alone, I know damned well I've met folks with faces very similar to my own since I don't facially differ all that much from the rest of the North American Scottish diaspora and that's just from personal experience though funny enough I don't get mistaken for other people because I am shorter than most other folks with similar faces to my own.
When I was a teenager I had cops straight up ask me if I was someone else that had warrants for his arrest, and once they stopped me it was on ME to prove that I wasn’t this person that I am not. I was in highschool with the guy ant the time and I don’t think I look anything like him.
Regardless, I was walking down the sidewalk with weed in my backpack and a cop literally drove up on the sidewalk in front of me and radioed in that they got me, only it wasn’t me because I’m not who they were looking for.
About shit my pants. Cops are dumb as fuck, it took them a solid 15 minutes to let me go even after I showed them my ID. Kid they were looking for was a literal rapist btw so I didn’t take very kindly to the implication I could just “be him” to them, never been mistaken like that before in my life. For non-white people it’s literally proven to be 1000x worse, they’ll photoshop your mugshot to make it look more like who they’re looking for.