On: 500k facial scans at UK stations yield no arrests, 1 false positive

[pasc1878]

In the UK it has worked at other places

"He said 103 arrests has been made so far and there was one false alert which did not result in an arrest.

Supt Luke Dillon said overall crime figures in the Fairfield ward, where the pilot has been held, fell by 12% per cent.

"We're seeing reductions in almost all crime types, certainly in shoplifting and robbery," he said. "

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2056r07rjlo

[jagged-chisel → pasc1878]

I’m more interested in whether these arrests were appropriate, the suspects convicted of a crime by a jury of their peers.

[pasc1878 → jagged-chisel]

I am not certain that is relevant for this particular use of cameras.

People are being matched against an existing watchlist so the people arrested are those the Police would arrest anyway if they found them.

[jagged-chisel → pasc1878]

Is that the case? Or is it the case that because the computer said so, the arrest was made?

[izacus → pasc1878]

What are you on about? Arresting innocent people with face scanning is absolutely relevant - critical to this.

Locking you up in a cage for days when you did nothing wrong, dragging you into court where you need to defend your life is pretty much almost the worst thing a modern western state can do to you.

So it's kind of relevant if they're doing that.

[pasc1878 → izacus]

No it is not so much for these particular cameras – the people spotted would have been arrested if seen before.

There are two types of cameras – the Flock type of which there are many more in the UK which record all the time and spot people committing a crime where the video is kept and these which do not retain video but are used in real time by police to see if there is anyone who they already have put on a list to be arrested.

There is a case of a flase positive - detained for 30 minutes

[trashb → pasc1878]

Honestly I find the correlations that LFR has worked in other places very weak.

For example the falling of the crime figures could be just because there where more officers around attending the camera's. Or actually that just there being a camera already has a deterring effect, I assume the perpetrators didn't know it was LFR.

I also wonder if the resources spend in a traditional way would have been more effective. I think 3 month trail to make 103 arrests seems a bit low, but I am not familiar with the normal "arrest rate" in that area.

[pasc1878 → trashb]

In Croydon shoplifting occurs in many places not covered by these cameras.

Most shops do have cameras and they do not seem to be a deterrant.

Also the cameras were not in constant use for 3 months. I don't think we know for how long and when they were actually used.