←back to thread

291 points dataflow | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.026s | source
Show context
gruez ◴[] No.44604843[source]
>A city fire marshal used FDNY’s access to a facial recognition software to help NYPD detectives identify a pro-Palestinian protester at Columbia University, circumventing policies that tightly restrict the Police Department’s use of the technology.

Why does the fire department need access to run facial recognition?

replies(4): >>44604976 #>>44605387 #>>44605709 #>>44605831 #
neilv ◴[] No.44605831[source]
> Why does the fire department need access to run facial recognition?

Arson investigation, identifying the people at the scene of a suspicious fire?

replies(3): >>44605889 #>>44606781 #>>44608889 #
krapp ◴[] No.44605889[source]
The job of the fire department should be to fight fires, not to investigate crimes.

The police should be the ones investigating crimes, under extremely strict and limited guidelines (eg. 4th amendment) which in this case include not being allowed to use facial recognition software.

replies(3): >>44606334 #>>44606484 #>>44606527 #
1. Anechoic ◴[] No.44606334[source]
The job of the fire department should be to fight fires, not to investigate crimes.

Part of the investigation is determining whether the event is actually a crime. I'd much rather have subject matter experts make the determination of arson vs. act-of-god rather than "every nail needs a hammer" police force.

replies(1): >>44606559 #
2. Detrytus ◴[] No.44606559[source]
Determining if it was an arson vs act-of-god should be mostly lab work, analyzing how the fire spread, whether there are any traces of flammable substances that should not be there, etc. That's what fire department should do, because they have expertise here. Analyzing security footage for potential suspects should be done by police.
replies(1): >>44607372 #
3. Anechoic ◴[] No.44607372[source]
Analyzing security footage for potential suspects should be done by police.

Again, it's not just "potential suspects" it's potential witnesses, or identification of potential casualties. I don't feel great about state actors of any type using facial ID, but I can think of any number of reasons why a FD might use it in the course of their duties, and I would much prefer they have it over the PD.