You may not. I don't want my government spying on me.
What if I was gay and was seen leaving a gay club? Now what if I ended up in the Kingdom of Saud and that data was shared or leaked?
What if I was gay and was seen leaving a gay club? Now what if I ended up in the Kingdom of Saud and that data was shared or leaked?
Because computers were used for something evil once so it must be the inanimate objects that are themselves inherently evil and not, you know, the people using them. What a weird, reactionary, alarmist stance to be so prevalent on a supposedly technology based forum.
I also recommend a reading of the history behind the "bill of rights."
If your position is that this is the equivalent of SS soldiers breaking down your door and hauling you away to a concentration camp, then I honestly don't know why you aren't in the street rioting right now.
We could have a useful discussion about realistic pros and cons of things that are actually happening if people would leave off of the nonsensical hyperbole for like, a fucking second.
The most effective way to fix abuses is to prevent them in the first place. We restrict govts and police by design, a need recognized for centuries. If a capability can be abused, it will be abused. Not if, when. That's the last reply such a shortsighted argument will get.
(Also, am not restricted to other's problematic examples upthread.)
No one voted for this or gave their permission. This is what happens when you don't keep law enforcement on a short leash.
The whole "if you don't want to go to jail, don't commit crimes" line of thinking really falls apart when you realize that the legal system is well beyond the ability for a layman to navigate on a day to day basis and gets even worse when you have a perfect surveillance state capable of seeing and storing massive amounts of data.
When the government can trivially make the case that a citizen is a criminal just by looking deep enough in the archive it's time to start considering that maybe your government isn't protecting/serving you anymore.
Instead of Saudi Arabia, how about the United States 100 years ago? It is not as though there are no more harmless activities for people to participate in that they will suffer for.
A comparatively trivial but important example: how about tracking your employees movements to punish them for talking to other companies? Is that a 'you should know your risks' situation too?
Data getting deleted is a good thing.
1. That someone going to a gay club in NYC later decides to go to Saudi Arabia, knowing full well that the government there is actively hostile to them.
2. That the government of Saudi Arabia somehow has access to facial recognition data from the NYPD.
3. This data for some reason includes not only mugshots directly collected by the NYPD (which was what TFA was actually about) but also private survellience footage from gay clubs, and this footage is clear enough to make a match (remember people tend to go to clubs at night)
4. The government of Saudi Arabia decides that they need to expend a tremendous amount of computing resources to run facial recognition of all of their survellience footage of every face in their country against this fictional database that they somehow obtained.
5. Further they conclude that a single facial recognition match, which is known the flawed, of a person in the vicinity of a gay club is sufficient to convict someone.
There are real privacy concerns yes, but this is absurdist fearmongering and deserves to be ridiculed.