Facial Recognition Is Here | Trending Ep322

This morning Jaymie discusses the announcement that facial recognition to be 'rolled out' across UK after human rights challenge fails. Trump goes from saying he 'expects to be bombing again' after Iranian ceasefire expires to extending the ceasefire hours later. Meanwhile, insider trading suspicions loom over Trump's presidency, and Meta to track workers' clicks and keystrokes to train AI.

You can watch the full episode FOR FREE over on https://ickonic.com/Watch/3812

You can also subscribe to Ickonic to receive…

-  New Content Daily
-  Feature-Length Documentaries
-  Exclusive Original Series

Start your journey today for just £1.99 for the first month

Transcript

SPEAKER_00 0:05

Good morning. In a very predictable move, facial recognition technology is to be rolled out across the UK after human rights groups fail a legal challenge, supposedly. Ministers have said it's fine though, because law-abiding citizens will have nothing to fear. As a judge rules in favor of the police for use of live facial recognition technology in London to begin with, but we know if it's starting in London, then it's going to be rolled out across the rest of the country because these things are not trials, these things are not tests, these things are not, you know, careful, they're very carefully planned. And just like with this social media ban, the trial is nothing but a basically a test to see how public react, how public perception reacts. And the decision to roll it out to everybody is made already before the trial has even begun. So goodbye freedom. They will now know every single thing that you do, every single thing that you say, everywhere that you go, everything you eat, every time you leave your house in your car, every time you go to the toilet, probably everyone you meet. What level of abuse of power does this come under then? Because digital ID received a huge pushback. Huge pushback. And as a result, we feel like a bit of a moral victory in some ways, in the fact that the technology has not been rolled out to the extent that they wanted to roll it out. Whether they knew that in the first place and they just went so far ahead so that when people push back, they can looked like they conceded a bit of ground and got where they've expected to get anyway, and they'll come back around at some point in the future with a more extreme version of it. Quite probable. Quite probable. As many people will understand, when you negotiate, you usually ask for a lot more than you think you're gonna, uh a lot more than you think you're gonna get, or you ask for an offer a lot lower than you're expected to pay, and you usually meet somewhere in the middle. Well, I think the government reached for something so extreme on purpose, knowing that they would get pushback and knowing that people would go, I'm not doing that. And then when they concede that ground and go, okay, I get it, I get it, we went a bit too far. Then people go, see, we've won. Well done. We've we forced them to push back. And maybe that gave people a little bit of a feeling of achievement. And we should feel that because that push without that pushback, they would have certainly gone as far as they wanted to get. But really, are they where they expected to be anyway? I guess time will tell when they come back around and how quickly they come back around with something more extreme. For me, facial recognition technology is just as important as digital ID. Because again, it's a massive imposition on freedom. Because where does it end? One, why is there a need for it? Because there wasn't facial recognition technology in the 40s and 50s, and life was pretty good in this country, as far as I'm concerned, as far as I'm told. Certainly a lot better than it is today, certainly a lot less violence, a lot less violent crime, a lot less theft, a lot less kids running around with knives. So why not solve that problem rather than try and police a problem that has been created? Why not understand why all of those things have changed so much and deal with that? Well, because that's not the idea, is it? So this technology will be rolled out. People that are pushing back against it have said that it will now be impossible for Londoners to travel without their biometric data being taken. And the case of a youth worker who's opposing this called Sean Thompson has said that they were misidentified and arrested by the technology for a crime which they didn't do in some kind of trial. So but no one cares. No one cares. The Mets lawyer told the court that 801 arrests have been made last year, specifically as a result of this technology, and that the risk of privacy, so risk of uh loss of privacy was only minimal because it's already there in certain areas of London, but now this has allowed it to be rolled out right across the boroughs as a as a point of legal, a legal right, and obviously then it will roll out to the rest of the country in time. There's been dozens of misidentifications, which has resulted in various different arrests. Live facial recognition technology apparently is only used to locate specifically wanted people. Law-abiding citizens have nothing to offer. Obviously, this is the sales pitch. This technology puts dangerous rapists and murderers behind bars, and I question any group who call it uncivil. We're rolling out facial recognition technology across the country with record investment to keep communities safe. Why not I can think of ten things you could do before that to keep communities safe. Firstly, control your borders. Number one. So you know exactly who's coming in and out of your country. So therefore, if someone's coming into your country that has, let's say, a checkered past, you know about it. Number one. Don't have the media create hysteria when someone that's committed a crime is the wrong colour and doesn't fit a narrative that you want to create. Don't allow speculation. All of that that followed the Southport atrocities, all of those riots were created by the government and created by the media by the fact that they didn't say anything. And they gaslit people by posting a picture of a little boy saying it was him. It's just they are creating these issues. There's so many ways you could deal with safety on the streets. Improving communities, improving the relationship between the police and people, where people actually feel like the police work for them, which they obviously don't, but they should feel like the police work for them. They are civil servants. I feel like the governments and the institutions and the local councils actually work for the people that elected them to be there. All of those things would help. Stop making people feel disengaged and disenfranchised. And people are turning to crime because some feel they have no other option. A lot do it because they're idiots. But some feel they literally have no other option. And they also don't care about keeping streets and communities safe because division equals control. They want people polarized, they don't want people living in harmony. Because people living in harmony might actually look out for one another and fight back against the system and fight back against things that don't actually affect them, but might affect somebody they care about because there's a harmony, there's a unity there. They want that gone. And this technology is potentially going to be used for so much control, so much abuse of power, where you can't do anything without the state knowing about it. And you know the state doesn't care about you. You know the state does what it wants. You know the state looks out for number one and the people that are behind it. So why all of a sudden would you think that this technology they're rolling out would be anything other than another power grab? The state doesn't care about you, doesn't care about us. It's a sad realization, but it's a very obvious realization when you just take two steps back and look at it. So why all of a sudden would they want this technology that's going to keep us all safe? Well, they wouldn't. They want it for very different reasons. And those different reasons include a massive, massive power grab, massive manipulation and control, ability to abuse power. So to police things like 15 minute cities and so on. All of this technology will be used to do that. Control crowds, control who people are meeting, where people are going. Sorry, you took two steps outside your district, mate. Here's a fine. Sounds far-fetched, and you might laugh, but these things are real. Very, very real. And they're unfortunately coming to a town not too far away from you very soon, apparently. And I, for one, am not somebody that's going to take this quietly because this is a hill to die on, just as important for me as digital ID. Because it's part and one of the it's one and part of the same. It's a power grab, it's a technological power grab. That once it's there, it's going to be very, very difficult to roll back from.

SPEAKER_01 8:30

Don't mention the reptiles, Dave. Even less is said about the Grey Pope, who some believe to be the true ruling power in the Vatican.

SPEAKER_00 8:37

Humans are missing a macadress.

SPEAKER_01 8:39

All of them had little signals. I've never seen it before. This is the ultimate suicide cult. What if the symbols around us every day aren't just ornamental? We must have the years of these things. What if they're instruction?

SPEAKER_00 8:56

State of awareness is not manipulatable.