Facial Recognition Smartwatches To Be Used To Monitor Foreign Offenders in UK (theguardian.com) 51
Migrants who have been convicted of a criminal offence will be required to scan their faces up to five times a day using smartwatches installed with facial recognition technology under plans from the Home Office and the Ministry of Justice. From a report: In May, the government awarded a contract to the British technology company Buddi Limited to deliver "non-fitted devices" to monitor "specific cohorts" as part of the Home Office Satellite Tracking Service. The scheme is due to be introduced from the autumn across the UK, at an initial cost of $7.24m.
A Home Office data protection impact assessment (DPIA) from August 2021, obtained by the charity Privacy International through a freedom of information request, assessed the impact of the smartwatch technology before contracting a supplier. In the documents, seen by the Guardian, the Home Office says the scheme will involve "daily monitoring of individuals subject to immigration control," with the requirement to wear either a fitted ankle tag or a smartwatch, carried with them at all times. Those obliged to wear the devices will need to complete periodic monitoring checks throughout the day by taking a photograph of themselves on a smartwatch, with information including their names, date of birth, nationality and photographs stored for up to six years. Locations will be tracked "24/7, allowing trail monitoring data to be recorded."
A Home Office data protection impact assessment (DPIA) from August 2021, obtained by the charity Privacy International through a freedom of information request, assessed the impact of the smartwatch technology before contracting a supplier. In the documents, seen by the Guardian, the Home Office says the scheme will involve "daily monitoring of individuals subject to immigration control," with the requirement to wear either a fitted ankle tag or a smartwatch, carried with them at all times. Those obliged to wear the devices will need to complete periodic monitoring checks throughout the day by taking a photograph of themselves on a smartwatch, with information including their names, date of birth, nationality and photographs stored for up to six years. Locations will be tracked "24/7, allowing trail monitoring data to be recorded."
If they can do it to foreigners (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You're next
You carry a smart phone. They already know where you are.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. That is why they are running this trial.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
What has that to do with improving tracking of people? Or are you under the illusion that they are _not_ lying about why they are doing this?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
After thinking it over for a bit....you may be right.
I mean, why go to the trouble and expense to do all this when they could save money and time and just send the offenders back the fuck home?
Re: (Score:2)
Never understood this stupid "send them home" argument. Do you think they will not be criminals at home somehow? Punishment should be were the crime happens.
Re: (Score:2)
At that point, they are no longer MY problem.
Their country of origin should be the ones dealing with the problems generated there.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
People will be praising the tory party for their tough stance on immigration and crims right up to the point that where they're forced to have their own big brother tracking smartwatch with facial recognition, and then they'll praise the government some more!
Re: (Score:2)
Well their police already arrest people for sharing or retweet’s. So I don’t think they will meet much resistance.
"Because someone has been caused obviously anxiety based on your social media posts," the officer responded. "That’s why you’ve been arrested."
Re: (Score:2)
Replying to undo misclicked moderation.
Re: (Score:2)
>"Re:If they can do it to foreigners You're next"
I don't plan on being an illegal alien, or after committing THAT crime, committing yet another crime.
What is your alternative to this monitoring? Throwing them in jail? Wearing an ankle monitor? House arrest? Explain how this is worse... Or do you think they should be let go/free to disappear into the populous to commit more crimes?
I don't like it but the alternatives are worse (Score:1)
We either have a law enforcement system with laws, surveillance and forces necessary to search them out and arrest them, or we do something like the smartwatch system proposed, or we just accept that we've lost them and create/perpetuate an underclass that is easily exploited.
Of those three choices the smartwatch, assuming it works, sounds better to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Of those three choices the smartwatch, assuming it works, sounds better to me.
Yeah, because Visa-skippers could never drop a smartwatch in a canal then vanish.
Re: (Score:2)
you must have missed the surgically implanted collar with bomb bit, that goes off when you ditch the watch.
or maybe that was a movie
Re: (Score:1)
If they already broke several laws getting there why on earth would you expect them to comply with this stupid smartwatch thing?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I fail to see why you'd not just sent the "legal" migrant back home too if they commit crimes?
They are there on your good graces anyway, but fuck up, do criminal stuff and *whisk*...you get a free flight back home.
Re: (Score:2)
I fail to see why you'd not just sent the "legal" migrant back home too if they commit crimes?
You mean besides the UK has laws and that if a migrant is being monitored instead of sent home it is because they cannot do so because of UK laws?
Re: (Score:2)
>"No the proposal is for legal migrants (visa holders) "
Did you get that from the article? I didn't. The words "legal migrant" and "visa" do not appear anywhere.
The word "migrant" is used, which, at least in the USA, almost always means "illegal alien." They do say "foreign-national offenders" which certainly doesn't mean legal visitors or visa-holders. They also use the words "asylum seekers" which is overwhelmingly those who have no grounds for such and often also entered illegally.
Thus the proble
Re: (Score:2)
Did you get that from the article? I didn't. The words "legal migrant" and "visa" do not appear anywhere.
How about common sense? If someone is caught in the UK committing a crime and is there illegally, do you really think the UK is going to just monitor them and not deport them?
The word "migrant" is used, which, at least in the USA, almost always means "illegal alien."
That is the dumbest thing I've heard. That's why the terms "illegal" is used in front of "imMIGRANT" to separate those that are there illegally and those that are legally as migrant does not equal "illegal".
They also use the words "asylum seekers" which is overwhelmingly those who have no grounds for such and often also entered illegally.
Wow your ignorance of "asylum seekers" is astounding. In the UK to apply for asylum, they recommend that you apply when you arrive [www.gov.uk]
Re: (Score:3)
The UK has always had a problem with people arriving in the country and skipping out of their visas and becoming illegal immigrants.
And how would this help? The proposal is for legal migrants who commit crimes while still on their visas. If someone is found to exceeded their visa then caught committing a crime, should they not be deported? How would this proposal do anything for that situation?
welcome to 1984 papers please! (Score:2)
welcome to 1984 papers please!
The devices are nasty. (Score:5, Insightful)
While they can sound like a good idea compared to other tech, they are psychological nightmares. At random times of the day and night they will demand you check in.
* Middle of a work meeting, it buzzes and they must immediately scan their face.
* On the toilet or in the shower, it buzzes and they must immediately scan their face.
* Enjoying an intimate night with a friend, it buzzes and they must immediately scan their face.
* Middle of the night while sleeping, it buzzes and they must immediately wake up and scan their face.
Failure to check in immediately or (your phone being dead or having no reception) and it triggers all kinds of alarms and procedures designed to exclude the person from society.
They are praised for being cheaper than other methods, but in practice cause severe emotional trauma and anxiety. If given the choice stick to the ankle bracelet.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't even need to open the lid to notice!
But you open it anyway, then stick your face right down inside and inhale deeply, am I right?
Re: (Score:2)
Note that this system is only to be used for convicted foreign nationals subject to Immigration control. That means people who are in the country but not considered resident, who have then been convicted of a crime. Criminal courts do not have the power to directly remove someone from the country, that requires a separate immigration hearing in a different jurisdiction. Serious crimes will affect the outcome of that hearing just as they do in the USA and many other places. Who would have thought?: If yo
Re: (Score:2)
They actually get to ... have intimate moments with friends... The alternative is to jail them...
I concede that they might still get intimate moments with their "friends" in jail.
Re: (Score:2)
How we choose to treat the dregs of society, the prisoners, the destitute, the beggars, the poor, says quite a lot about us and what we tolerate from public officials.
There are some people who want to treat criminals (and even those accused of crimes, sometimes even petty crimes) as less than human, as not deserving of basic human dignity or basic human rights. It is quite telling when someone is willing to inflict trauma and even torture for someone for any reason, especially when that reason is retributi
Re: (Score:2)
Don't call it "torture" when it blatantly isn't. TORTURE is torture. Things that Not Torture are not, though I think the UN might have a resolution on treating country music as such. Hyperbole is a pretty good indicator of dishonesty, and it still makes you look stupid even if someone is feeling kind enough not to judge you harshly for it.
That aside your:
> How we choose to treat
line doesn't even make sense in the first place. Having RTFM, this can barely be called *punishment*, unless the criminal is so
Re: (Score:2)
You're still not addressing the trauma caused to their victims, whilst seemingly inferring that I support torture. It's quite telling when someone deflects from an argument with an ad hominem.
If you're trying to make the case that jailing someone where they are; caged for much of the day, have no say in their daily routines, have to crap in full view of fellow inmates and guards, watch out for Bubba in the showers, etc.; somehow allows them to retain more human dignity than taking a selfie a few times a da
Re: (Score:2)
Failure to check in immediately or (your phone being dead or having no reception) and it triggers all kinds of alarms and procedures designed to exclude the person from society.
That's the entire purpose of such checks. To remind them that they are not a full fledged member of society. It doesn't matter if they are migrants, criminals, or plebs. If they must endure such checks, they are not members of society. Period.
They are praised for being cheaper than other methods, but in practice cause severe emotional trauma and anxiety. If given the choice stick to the ankle bracelet.
Working better than intended then. Once this passes, look forward to the ankle bracelet being axed as a choice due to "costs", "security", or "aging infrastructure." In reality it will be due to not having the same psychological impact as them constantly pleading tha
Re: (Score:2)
Signal Coverage (Score:2)
Just wondering how this would work if the person being tracked was based in an area with poor to no signal coverage of which there are many in some of the nicer parts of the UK.
Re: Signal Coverage (Score:2)
Why? (Score:2)
It's a joke (Score:2)
The UK has no population bureau, nobody in the government knows where anybody lives.
Refugees entering, illegally or not, just disappear into the mass of people.
This is a sorry attempt to be able to locate them, just cut it off and off you go to your extended family that nobody can find either.
Or, maybe... (Score:2)
Deport criminals? There's no need to placate Tony Blair when you have a criminal you can help home.
Loss of privacy is a punishment (Score:1)
Of course we should worry about the slippery slope here. But as long as this is viewed and used as a punishment, I think it is excellent use of digital surveillance. If you commit a crime, you lose some privacy as you are put under extensive surveillance which also detters from committing more crimes.
When looking at violent crimes (in Sweden), 1% of the population committed nearly 2/3rds of all violent crimes. I would be happy to put that 1% in a digital police state to protect the more lawâabiding 99%
Re: (Score:2)
Just like 3 years of prison: Why not do that, the infrastructure is already there? Remind me again, how throwing a ex-felon onto the street with no home, no car, no job, no marketable skills and no friends, ends?
While this version of day-release prevents most of those problems, it is about keeping the labour market full of people willing to do crap-work. This cyber-torture proves they don't have rights or a choice.