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?
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
The UK is a dystopian shithole. They took 1984 and used it as an instruction manual.
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
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
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.
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
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
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 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
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
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.
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
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.
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
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
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.
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!
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.
We’ll do anything but force men to take accountability for their actions and to change our culture.
You can’t force anyone to take accountability for their actions. Either they voluntarily take accountability for their actions, or you police their actions.
So your take-away from this article about a surveillance tool that seeks patterns of behavior and movement amongst hundreds of random people in a public space is “those privileged men will do anything to remain unaccountable” for… minding their business on in the tube, mall, or sidewalk? This is waaaayyy bigger than that level of bigotry, and in fact pandering to that very bigotry is exactly the tool used to get 51% of the population on board with implementing it without considering the very real consequences for them.
I misread the situation. Ignore what I said.
I think their point is that this technology will continue the trend of not making men take accountability for their actions. Expanding surveillance and preemptively arresting guys for being awkward does nothing to put guys like Brock Allen Turner (aka Brock Turner) (aka Allen Turner) in jail for raping people.
Definitely better ways to phrase it though. A lot of people think that “forcing men to take accountability for their actions” means “forcing all men to take accountability for all other men’s actions,” but that’s not really what they said
