• ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    3 days ago

    Correct but Flock’s own system, if their public statements can be trusted, doesn’t do facial recognition itself. The main use is tracking vehicles using license plates and all kinds of visual cues, and Bluetooth/Wi-Fi devices by their MAC address and properties, and linking this huge swath of data together. Still, faces are recorded as video that can be checked manually or processed by third-party tools, including “AI” facial-recognition ones. Therefore, if a pedestrian destroys all Flock cameras and has Bluetooth earpods on them, there will be an easy way to link the events, and then the police will check if their face is visible in surviving footage and check the country-wide database if the person ever used the earphones in a vehicle near the cameras.

    • 0x0@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 days ago

      Flock’s own system, if their public statements can be trusted,

      They can’t.

      • nomy@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yeah that’s weasel shit, “our systems don’t do facial recognition” can just mean the cameras don’t have facial recognition built in and that’s all done off-cam on the backend systems.

        Facial recognition is still happening, but they can weasel out of admitting it by stipulating the camera isn’t capable of it.