Quote:
Originally Posted by Redux
It has everything to do with religion...which is why Sarkozy is now backing away from the outright ban which has not yet been enacted, because... it "would be unworkable and likely to backfire" and would "stigmatise Muslims and fall foul of constitutional guarantees in individual liberties."
|
He is backing away for political reasons. Srsly. Is it enforceable - no, but is it something that "has everything to do with religion"? not in my mind - its purely a safety/security issue. On that you have not argued. Can I assume we agree on that point?
If they said a christian could not wear a cross or a Jew could not wear Kippah or Yarmulke, I would agree 100%. To me this is a completely different issue.
Quote:
|
It would also most certainly fail a constitutional test in the US.
|
It would ABSOLUTELY fail here. There is no doubt. Still not the point we are discussing - please try and stay on track here.
Quote:
|
Facial recognition software has come a long way, but works best in passive situations with the cooperation of the individual. It is still relatively easy to fool the software in a large crowd if one wants to, including with sunglasses.
|
What we have here is apparently rudimentary compared to that in the UK. I saw a show on it months ago. I was amazed at what they could so with simply a partial view of a persons face. Their database is massive. Talk about big brother... OMG.
ETA: perhaps it was Three-dimensional face recognition that the show was on. I am not positive.
Also, you never responded to this:
Quote:
|
Intel informs YOU that this is happening. Men AND women who are known terrorists are using this means to get around the very sophisticated video and other surveillance equipment and personnel used to keep track of them or restrict their movement.
|