‘FuckLAPD.com’ Lets Anyone Use Facial Recognition to Instantly Identify Cops
‘FuckLAPD.com’ Lets Anyone Use Facial Recognition to Instantly Identify Cops
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/31924287
If only CSI enhancing worked in real life, we could out the asshole on the far left.
far left
From his PoV, he's actually standing on the far-right. Fitting lol
This is ILLEGAL when Working Class people Do It!
-Chuck Schumer at Some Point probably!
Is it me or is LA the only part of America doing anything resembling resistance?
I think it's mainly LA that is seeing a large invasion of federal forces
For the moment
No, it’s happening everywhere. But I’ve also seen some significant resistance happening in other cities like NYC, Newark, Portland, Chicago, Seattle, SF, etc.
No. There probably isn't more violence anywhere else yet though.
"You hear them boys?! We are not to humiliate those idiots! LIVE ROUNDS BOYS!"
but what if they glare at me very menacingly, surely I can then shoot tear gas, pepper shot, beat people, and shoot non-lethal rounds at them, right?
they're lookin at me Sarge. with their eyes.
I don’t think the people you’re asking to not be a power tripping asshole understand that combination of words.
So, shoot live rounds, then?
nice.
Is there one for ice too?
Also what about cops outside of the LAPD? This app only useful if it works on any cop.
It is definitely not going to work on any cop. There are still cops who are working in countries where privacy laws exist.
No. Those are gravy Seal wannabees. Ice isn't doing anything on the streets. They are doing the behind the scenes stuff. Deputized bounty hunters are the ones in the streets. No badge, no authority, and as you know instantly disavowed.
From the article https://icespy.org/
Lmao let's see how long it takes them to shut this down
All they have to do is close the public sources of photo IDs. The tool itself isn't anything special, anybody familiar with the tech can code something like this up in less than a day, hell ChatGPT can probably vibe code it for you.
What are they so afraid of? They're public servants, so they should be publicly identifiable. If they don't like it, get off the government payroll
What are they so afraid of?
The drug lord or mafia boss that sends killers to eliminate their families ?
Because criminals get out of jail and can go after their families. We had someone leave a bomb on the doorstep of a judge in our neighborhood.
I'm a librarian. I also work with members of the public, some of whom do not share my understanding of reality. My information is still public because I'm a government employee.
That really sucks. But a lot of innocent people have the police break into their homes and murder them so it balances out.
Such a shame. Anyway, I guess we'll have to live with the consequences of technology.
That’s a fair concern to a degree of course even the most fair sentences might have a disgruntled person on the other end of it but a fair justice system that serves and protects its community equally has little to fear overall. When a justice system is unfair, unequal, does not serve or protects its community that risk goes way up however they only have themselves to blame for the increased risk. An occasional crazy is just the price of being a human but if the public in general is against you, you’ve done that to yourself through your own actions
Am I the only one who thinks police should be held to a higher standard of accountabilities?
I wasn’t expecting crims to go after their own families, but I’m here for it….
Was the judge a dick head?
Police the police
Putting it out there for someone to do this for cops in the UK. I can't run infrastructure but the cops terrorise out local community and constantly refuse to identify themselves/turn off their badge cam.
I agree with that the abusive cops and ice is insane in the US, and it should be stopped. I also believe that the US is a corrupt nation in nearly every place of the government and surrounding instances.
But a question surround this, what if the US wasn't corrupt and the judges would actually follow the law (juries wouldn't be able to exist for most cases) and hypothetical if the US had privacy laws for everything besides businesses wouldn't this be the same punishable offence that would protect citizens?
In GDPR countries (among others) nobody is allowed to do something like this with face recognition because the law works for everybody. (Some people are trying to destroy this in some countries, though).
At the same time, if the government is allowed to use facial recognition and other anti-privacy measures to identify people where there is no ground to, then why shouldn't the people be able to do that?
Edit: I am not from the US and my look on life and trias political situations is different than what the fuck is happening in the US
In GDPR countries (among others) nobody is allowed to do something like this with face recognition because the law works for everybody.
IDK the specifics of GDPR (and GDPR is relatively new, so it will continue to evolve for some time...)
In my view: the police are public servants, salaries and pensions paid by taxes. They have voluntarily chosen to serve as public servants. Whole hosts of studies show that police who are actively involved with the communities they police, seeing, being seen, being known by the neighborhoods they work in, those police are more effective at preventing crime, defusing domestic disputes, etc. than faceless thugs with batons and guns who only show up when they are going to use their arrest powers to shut down whatever is going on.
If I were to write "my version" of the GDPR that I think the US should enact, there would be clear exceptions for public servants, including police and politicians. Now, you can get into the whole issue of "undercover cops" which is clearly analogous to "secret police" which may be a necessary evil for some circumstances, but that's not what is going on with OP's website. OP is providing a tool to compare photos to a public database of photographs of public servants - not undercover cops. By the way: performance is spec'ed at 1 to 3 seconds per photo comparison, so 9000 photos might take 9000-27000 seconds to compare, that's 2.5 to 7.5 hours to run one photo search.
Considering people all across the world tend to generalise I don't think it's a good idea to share all the personal details of a cop. I would rather prefer we just having transparency in the general administration (annual reports) and their salary.
I also dislike that the law should have exceptions. The more exceptions a law has the complexer it gets and the more some people can abuse it.
Fining a complaint about a police office can also be done on their badge number, and that should be enough. If a police is just bad at their job, but a good person (so they fuck up some other way), then they shouldn't be at risk of being attacked/stalked or whatever by the people they arrested, which is what a public database of the people doing their job allows for. People should be held accountable for their actions and everybody should be held accountable in the same manner.
Just because a photo is made in public doesn't mean it is a public photo, or at least it shouldn't mean that. Again, to protect civilians.
Well, the US Supreme court did explicitely say cops have no expectation of anonymity while doing their job. This is completely legal. Its premised on the idea that cops arent there to be abusive but to uphold the law, which is not always actually true. The root of the problem is cops behavior themselves rather than the recording or identifying of them. Up until very recently cops at least had their names visible and were required to show ID upon request.
I believe you that it is legal and maybe it should be in the US.
I am just saying that it would be a weird thing if the US ever added more privacy laws since this kinda contradicts this. I believe that the badge number should be enough for some other party to punish cops when needed. But I do not live in the US so my point of view is already a bit different on this entire situation
The answer is that I don't think it matters because the US or any other society will never reach some utopic standard of privacy. So long as we live in a world where facial recognition is possible - it is better to regulate it strongly than attempt to prohibit it.
In a modern globalized world the old privacy is dead, no matter how you look at it. Going forward something new will need to be built out of the ashes, be it a new privacy or something better/worse.
the judges would actually follow the law (juries wouldn’t be able to exist for most cases)
A core tenet of the law is the right to trial by a jury of your peers.
Jury trials have a very similar flaw to democracy.
Think of an average person you know, how stupid are they? Now, realize that half the people out there are stupider than that.
An average randomly selected jury is going to be composed of 50% below average intelligence people.
Of the US law yes, but that's not the case everywhere.
I personally don't think juries should do more than give extra input to the judge. The judge should follow the law exactly and tif they don't, the average person should be able to file a complaint about them not doing their job and they should be investigated.
(I also work in a field (accountancy) where you can file complaints to be for very cheap if I don't do my job correctly)
If the police weren't unaccountable invaders, and just, liked, issued annoying tickets or whatever instead of murdering children and doing to crowds of peaceful civilians things that would be war crimes if done to uniformed enemy soldiers literally any tike they assemble, or even if the obes who actually did that stuff were punished literally at all when they did, i don't think anyone would have even thought to do this.
They are abd they do and they don't, though.
In GDPR countries (among others) nobody is allowed to do something like this with face recognition because the law works for everybody.
Lmao, in france facial recognition is being rolled out all over and we got laws explicitly prohibiting the filming of cops (ofcourse, the only reasonable action to take against the documented brutality of the pigs /s)
(juries wouldn't be able to exist for most cases)
What does this mean?
Edit: read further down that you're in a country that doesn't guarantee jury trials so I'm guessing you're referring to some kind of criteria not being met to trigger a trial by jury
In my opinion you should look at the law objectively, a group of people who aren't fully educated on the law and aren't trained in being objective will not form an objective opinion.
Juries would be fine to give advice to the judge on how the public sees it, but they shouldn't have a real impact on the outcome of the situation. That should be a question of executing the law.
We have no trial by jury in The Netherlands and the international court of law doesn't have a jury either. The just have 15 judges to decide the outcome.
The plebs and the regime never have the same rights, in any country
FR is definitely used in GDPR countries.
For police it's so- called 'tightly regulated'.
For private use forbidden but 'there are exeptions'
I'm not from the U.S. either, so a lot of that is coming from a place of ignorance, so bear with me please. But the way I understand it, is that the website just lets you look up name and badge number - things that police officers (at least in most jurisdictions) are obliged to provide upon request, but often fail to do so in recent U.S. developments. So one could argue that this is more about access to information that should be available anyway, rather than doxxing people for the fun of it, right?
You don't want the name of the piece of shit that fuck us a traffic stop and shoots your neurodivergent teenager daughter in the face to stay anonymous; not you, or your community, nor anyone wants that.
Yeah I guess, I didn't know that the name was public information. It doesn't really make sense to me why that is needed. Imo the badge number should be enough to file a formal complaint somewhere and get somebody to act according to that complaint.
A good time to ask this question after it's used for good and we have politicians in office who aren't against the will of the people, not before
Should be the ice agents too
Now do ICE!
Since they're typically masked, I'd like to see gait recognition serve the working class for once.
I was thinking this too! Gait recognition can completely bypass facial coverings as a means of identification, but I also don't think it'll be much help here.
Gait recognition can be bypassed by things as simple as putting a rock in your shoe so you walk differently, so when you think about how much extra heavy gear, different shoes, and different overall movement patterns ICE agents will possibly be engaging in, it might not hold up well at tracking them down, especially since to recognize someone by gait, you'd need footage of them that you can already identify them in, to then train the model on.
In the case of fucklapd.com, this was easy because they could just get public record data for headshot photos, but there isn't a comparable database with names directly tied to it for gait. I will say though, a lot of these undercover agents might be easier to track by gait since they'll still generally be wearing more normal attire, and it might be more possible to associate them with who they are outside of work since it's easier to slip up when you're just wearing normal clothes.
A lot of masks only work in the visible light spectrum. It's entirely possible to "radar" images and remove them.
I found this link on the internet and have no affiliation:
is that just user submitted or do they have some sort of verification process (don't ask me what it would be i can only think of stuff that works with nonfascist governments right now) because, well us and ours have fucked with similar forms too (e.g. that one texas abortion bounty hunter form comes to mind first)
Good. ACAB.
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. But this shit will get sued so quick because “safety”
hail hydra?
Privacy is the word you are looking for.
O wait ... the US doesn't know privacy for everything but companies
This is nice. Use their own weapons against these fuckers.
Is there ski mask recognition software that will work on ICE?
Breaking news!
First animal facial recognition tool invented!
Soon you'll be able to prove another rancher stole some of your cattle,chickens,etc...
For now only works for pigs.
👏
legends
TIL I look quite a bit like 2 LA cops in particular
Maybe this will actually make politicians flip their opinion on AI... lmao
If the Big Beautiful Bill passes it will be extremely hard to regulate.
Means we have all the time in the world to turn it against them, then!
Next we'll see all US cops wearing masks in their regular day to day activities, like in the Watchmen series.
Love it
This reeks of a honey pot scheme for some reason.
You're doing nothing to fix it.
fix what. You have some expectation that everything is actionable and merely a matter of nattering at people to go do it?
We cant know its a honey pot and its not even remotely realistic to say a citizen can fix it or investigate it. Even an arm of the state would be unable to investigate an intention. So you're trolling.
Highly illegal in Europe, obvs. Looking forward to finding out how this will go in the US.
What’s highly illegal in Europe? Taking a photo or using publicly available images to match that photo to?
As far as I know those things are not illegal, although as a Brit I wouldn’t be surprised if they label this terrorism lol
What’s highly illegal in Europe? Taking a photo or using publicly available images to match that photo to?
Some of this is because of the GDPR. So it's likely to be illegal in the UK, as well. And some is because of the AI Act (in particular 4. but also 3. to some degree). That's not something that needs to concern Brits.
Sounds like fascism to me.
These guys still really like their tonfas, don't they?
This isn't working for me. It's just stuck on 'Processing...'. It also has a Javascript error.
I get the impression that the cops are about to hate facial recognition all of the sudden, for no particular reason
There's a reason ICE conceal their faces.
They know what they're doing is wrong and don't want to be held accountable if their fascist rule collapses.
So just use one too and blend in. Put on a stupid Trump or racist hat, and if you are not white, put on gloves. Then surround them.
So which cameras can be used to overcome normal face coverings? https://piped.video/watch?v=yRFeS72IM6M
Is that why the protestors wear them too?
Cameras. They fucking hate body cameras. When it clears them of wrongdoing, they have the video ready. When they 'accidentally' shoot a guy nine times in the back of the head, video seems to be missing.
easily solvable problem: losing the footage is indication of guilt. you shoot someone, you better have it ready. it malfunctioned, better have a partner who has theirs ready. if no one has footage to clear you, it's used as evidence of guilt.
of course pussy ass lawmakers will never do that.
I heard a bit on NPR over the weekend talking about copaganda. Turns out body cams are beneficial to cops, because they can take that footage and selectively edit and release it to push a certain narrative.
If you've ever seen a clip on social media, it often starts a few seconds before the cop hits someone, rarely showing the full sequence of events that led up to that point.
And if they can't edit the footage to make them look good? "Oops, we didn't retrieve that footage in time so it was overwritten."
Ever wonder why the uh, default cop idle stance, the at ease stance.... is each hand up at it's shoulder, elbows bent, in front of chest?
Because that way they can very, very easily, and casually, bump their chestcam, obsure its view, muffle the sound.
Upvoted and agreed, not least because I just learned that "all of the sudden," while at present a nonstandard variant of "all of a sudden," has valid history.
And of course it doesn't matter in this casual context!
But in formal writing, in this era, using "a" will avoid distracting the reader from your main point.
"All of the sudden" is only valid because it's so commonly (incorrectly) used. Much as it annoys me, that's just how language works.
Non-Anglo here.
Totally not distracted bcs my brain autocorrected it to “all of a sudden” without even noticing.
A bit like "It deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are"
Also never seen/heard the "the" variant. (Well consciously that is).