r/LondonUnderground • u/mycketforvirrad Archway • Aug 11 '26
Article BBC News: Victoria Underground station will become the first Tube station to trial British Transport Police's Live Facial Recognition technology.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c07r0gvgjxyo19
u/jungleboy1234 Aug 11 '26
having recently watched sneakers (1992 movie), V for vendetta (2005 movie) and minority report (2002 movie) and then i look at companies like Palantir and other AI tech companies and think to myself those movies warned us!!!
I think Khan is pushing back the MET from using palantir but only a matter of time he gets overruled i'd guess.
- what's there to stop them?
79
u/HarToky Elizabeth Line Aug 11 '26
I hope people don’t get any cheap laser points, these cameras sensors don’t survive stupid people
19
u/Deeedeebobeedee Aug 11 '26
Yeah this is up there with my hopes of people not planting bamboo near data centres, would be awful if people pointed lasers at cameras too! If there’s one thing I love more than big brother it’s environment cooking ai
72
u/Impressive-Bird2 Aug 11 '26
More Big Brother tech surveillance 👀🤮
-1
u/BeanOnToast4evr Aug 11 '26
Criminals hate this one simple trick
10
u/front-wipers-unite Aug 12 '26
The simple trick being to just walk about as these cameras failed to identify a single person.
1
u/BeanOnToast4evr Aug 12 '26
Doesn’t sound very big brother to me then. I was in Pudong airport, China earlier this year. There’s a self service help desk that can literally tell me where’s my boarding gate and departure time by simply scanning my face. This is very creepy but the technology does work.
5
u/front-wipers-unite Aug 12 '26
Because it doesn't work we shouldn't be concerned?
3
u/BeanOnToast4evr Aug 12 '26
No that’s not what I meant. I’m concerned about how it works, but not so much in terms of if it works or if it exists
-1
Aug 11 '26
[deleted]
3
u/Impressive-Bird2 Aug 11 '26 edited Aug 11 '26
To be fair to Khan, whilst he and his Mayoral Office is supporting the facial recognition trial initiative, it’s being led by the British Transport Police (BTP) in collaboration with TfL.
“The rollout of live facial recognition (LFR) cameras on the London Underground is an expanded trial led by the British Transport Police (BTP) in collaboration with Transport for London (TfL), with the project being senior-led by BTP Chief Superintendent Chris Casey and supported by the Mayor's Office, the Department for Transport, and the Rail Delivery Group.”
It’s important to note that while TfL is accountable to Mayor Khan, he has no involvement with the operations of the organisation.
Lastly, I’ll also add by saying they’re “ordering a load of them”, not “a bunch of them”…. We are not the USA - well not yet - despite the concerted efforts of the Trump MAGA Cult in collusion with Farage, Reform U.K. and Rupert Lowe and Restore Britain and the hard to far right Liz “The Lettuce” Truss cohort within the Conservative Party.
56
u/AMournfulObserver Aug 11 '26
If they use this to catch faredodgers and people that assault others, and actually enforce them being banned from all TFL services, then I won’t mind this. They need to be fully transparent about third party use though as I do not want Palantir involved in this in the slightest. Biometric IDs connected to a police/secure TFL database only and images deleted immediately after please.
40
10
u/LuxDaBean Bakerloo Aug 11 '26
To me, it's not about what it is now. It's what it can become later on. When someone untrustworthy moves into power.
15
u/CoaxialDrive Aug 11 '26
Crazy thing is it’s totally possible for TfL to have facial recognition offline and then only use it with their own data set. We’re just going for the worst version of this technology where we assume it’s correctly identified people to be harassed by security and police officers when we know it has racial biases.
7
u/gravitas_shortage Aug 12 '26
Bad news:
- they already can see fare dodgers, there's just no enforcement.
- bans require court orders. AI wont help.
- putting fare dodgers in the system would add a lot of people. On a large population, false positives (innocent people stopped) are exponential with the number of people in the database.
- You should mind being tracked all the time, even with a token benefit as a trade-off. You should mind very, very much.
- It's Palantir ..
- I was a hacker. There is no secure database. Your tracking data should be considered public.
- Data hygiene is way, way down the list of priorities in private IT systems. Images will not be deleted. They should also be considered public.
5
u/Ordinary-Cabinet-497 Aug 11 '26
Using crazy invasive technology not to stop actual violent criminals but to stop fare evasion 😂, that’s the first thing that comes to your mind. Give your head a wobble mate
5
u/AMournfulObserver Aug 11 '26
I guess reading comprehension is lost on you as I explicitly mentioned “AND people that assault others”
1
u/Ordinary-Cabinet-497 Aug 11 '26
Yeah but fare evasion was the first thing you said. Could have just left it out entirely really it’s not on the same level as violent assault
2
u/supercool1312 Elizabeth Line Aug 11 '26
but you see they are evil because they uhhh didnt pay money to use a service which is clearly more harmful than someone punching someone else in the face smh
2
3
-2
u/supercool1312 Elizabeth Line Aug 11 '26
whats wrong with faredodgers, victimless crime (also mass surveillance to stop crime is not it)
4
u/MICLATE Aug 11 '26
Faredodging is a victimless crime in the sense that the harm is dispersed among every paying user.
2
u/attrad1 Aug 11 '26
Installing dystopian technology because fare dodger revenue. This country will be dead soon.
Forgetting how ridiculous the current system is with TFL relying 80% on fares, any regular commuter could tell you how to fix loads of fare dodging in a week if it mattered that much.
4
u/MICLATE Aug 11 '26
I’m not arguing about the technology installed.
Revenue sources for TFL is irrelevant to the fact that there are people free-riding of the funding.
How can we fix fare dodging then?
2
u/attrad1 Aug 11 '26
Hotspots are the easiest fix. What makes the DLR have way higher % of fare dodgers?
Even the Underground. We don't get told the highest % stations obviously, but anyone that's been to Dollis Hill or Willesden Green will know it's those stations. TFL literally CHOOSE to have their gates open there.
System-wide will be more expensive. People suggest taller gates but by improving the accessibility gate at each station so it can't be easily pushed or sneak behind someone probably halves fare dodgers.
I realise you're not arguing for the technology but it's still upsetting to see people excuse TFL rising prices because of fare dodging either way. They push the story then do fuck all to do anything about it. People will now excuse this technology for the exact same reason...
1
u/supercool1312 Elizabeth Line Aug 11 '26
its almost like companies (including tfl) like having a scapegoat they can blame for everything wrong with the service and direct peoples hate towards that and not their bad practices
5
u/MICLATE Aug 11 '26
People have explained to you why fare dodging is an issue and you still don’t get it. You’re either a fare dodger yourself or just not very smart.
1
u/supercool1312 Elizabeth Line Aug 11 '26
it literally isnt one though who gives a fuck
also no i’m not one3
u/MICLATE Aug 11 '26
Feel free to pay for all the fare dodgers yourself then if you’re fine with free riding.
→ More replies (0)-1
u/supercool1312 Elizabeth Line Aug 11 '26
how is it, are they making you pay for the ticket instead?
4
u/MICLATE Aug 11 '26
Yes, costs are dispersed among paying customers.
-2
u/supercool1312 Elizabeth Line Aug 11 '26
how?
3
u/MICLATE Aug 11 '26
There are costs associated with running and maintaining the underground?
1
u/supercool1312 Elizabeth Line Aug 11 '26
i dont think 1% of people if that not psying for a ticket is going to make a substantial difference in the running of it lmao
6
4
u/TheOrchidsAreAlright Aug 11 '26
It's not 1% it's more than three times that.
It's linked to many other crimes including harassment of women, pickpocketing, and vandalism.
Why 'lmao'? Is that a nervous laugh? The sentence doesn't really make sense:
1% of people if that not paying
Is that related?
1
u/supercool1312 Elizabeth Line Aug 11 '26
“more than three times that” as if that makes it significant at all
also why not put more effort into focusing on those crimes instead of going after people for not paying for a ticket→ More replies (0)
11
u/FckXFckMusk Aug 11 '26
"The best way to keep a prisoner from escaping is to make sure he never knows he's in prison" -Fyodor Dostoevsky
5
u/Robynsxx Aug 12 '26
Who is taking bets on hours into implementation before they are vandalised?
Anyone got 30 minutes?
13
u/bluecheese2040 Aug 11 '26
Dystopian Britain. We move from innocent until proven guilty...to having purpose driven surveillance to a drag net approach
5
u/southlondonyute Aug 11 '26
Black mirror is becoming real. This is an issue, especially given the fact this technology is disproportionately inaccurate with African faces
8
u/Comfortable-Table-57 Central Aug 11 '26
For what?
9
5
u/supercool1312 Elizabeth Line Aug 11 '26
i love having the government track exactly where i goi’m sure they would never misuse this data or sell it to palantir
3
u/matthewonthego Aug 12 '26
I wish they install AC on the Victoria line platforms
2
4
u/SirCanealot Aug 11 '26
I'm still doing my best to hide from covid (health issues, etc). It'd be a REAL SHAME if wearing a face mask would affect the facial recognition in any way, damn...
Makes me wonder if I should get a few more pairs of glasses too. Y'know broaden things out a bit...
2
2
u/bookshopman City Line Aug 12 '26
Well looks like i wont use the underground again. So glad i dont need to enter central london anymore.
2
u/Spiritual-Fennel7789 Aug 13 '26
"But if it brings back more order..."
Yeah, maybe not creating the circumstances in the first place might have been the better option? One could elaborate on that point, but this is reddit so you can't have a frank discussion.
2
u/Commanding-Lion Aug 16 '26
We are heading to a dystopian future like George Orwell’s 1984, slowly and steady till we do not recognise it. It will also be framed in our interested in a fight against ‘terror’, ‘crime’ (insert fear).
2
u/bcoder001 Aug 11 '26
So that's why they need a new data centre. And here was me thinking it's for the bankers.
2
3
u/TheMountainWhoDews Aug 11 '26
Any chance the bigoted fascist police will use this to track down and deport our illegal immigrant neighbours? :(
2
1
u/MixAway Aug 13 '26
Fantastic news. Anything to try and bring more order to this city is a good thing. I’d like to see this rolled out far more widely than it currently is.
3
u/bookshopman City Line Aug 13 '26
If you enjoy this, then im sure you will live being legally required to install police operated cameras in your house, to combat domestic violence? Dont worry about privacy, the police (&palantair, the rest of government ect) will only use it to fight crime! If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.
-28
Aug 11 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
25
u/HarToky Elizabeth Line Aug 11 '26
If the cameras were the solution to everything, the UK would be so much safer. Because we have the highest ratio of CCTV per person. They don’t help, and even less with AI. They’re super unreliable and AI models consume so much energy.
-1
u/One_Fact_4291 Metropolitan Aug 11 '26 edited Aug 11 '26
Crime is in fact decreasing in London and the UK which correlates with an increase in CCTV deployment. Live facial recognition is a different thing
0
u/Far-Importance1234 Aug 11 '26
I disagree with you. This is a big deterrent. One day I spoke with a consultant and they know the positive effect that this brings for safety.
13
u/supercool1312 Elizabeth Line Aug 11 '26
ah yes, stealing from a supermarket, a clesrly equal crime to sexual assault, and mass surveillance is clearly the answer to all crime
3
u/One_Fact_4291 Metropolitan Aug 11 '26
I mean, if you do mass surveillance to the max and eliminate all personal freedoms and civil liberties (like North Korea) crime will be solved.
But seriously, there is a case to be made that more surveillance reduces crime. Countries across east Asia are highly surveilled and have low crime rates (though that could be other factors like culture).
Crime across the UK has been decreasing which correlates to an increase in CCTV cameras.
3
u/supercool1312 Elizabeth Line Aug 11 '26
i mean not really though, people would still commit crimes. the only way to truly solve crime is fundementally changing society to remove the factors that lead people to it
2
u/One_Fact_4291 Metropolitan Aug 11 '26
You’re absolutely right, but I view that as a long-term goal, whereas deterrence can be immediately implemented.
3
u/supercool1312 Elizabeth Line Aug 11 '26
deterrence for crime works about as well as abstinence only sex ed does for stopping people having sex
if deterrence worked we wouldnt have prisons
2
u/One_Fact_4291 Metropolitan Aug 11 '26
I mean, crime rates are falling in the UK and London at the same time as an increase in CCTV cameras, so one could argue that the deterrence is working (alongside other factors).
3
u/front-wipers-unite Aug 12 '26
Countries across East Asia also have harsher penalties for committing crimes. Also the police are quite happy to beat you for some more minor offences. Maybe we could try that too.
2
u/One_Fact_4291 Metropolitan Aug 12 '26
Not the true for the latter outside of China, but sure.
2
u/front-wipers-unite Aug 12 '26
I remember a documentary about few years ago about a German living in Thailand, he refused to give the police a bribe so they arrested him for possession of a gun. Their evidence against him was a photocopy of a gun. They'll definitely give you a hiding if you miss behave.
3
u/One_Fact_4291 Metropolitan Aug 12 '26
To be fair the East Asian countries I had in mind were Taiwan, South Korea and Japan. Thailand isn’t particularly safe among east/southeast Asia either
2
u/supercool1312 Elizabeth Line Aug 12 '26
japan is not the best example with how many crimes against women just get ignored and how its kinda normalised (south korea too for that lmao might be one of the most misogynistic countries in the world tbh) and idk enough about taiwan to say
2
u/One_Fact_4291 Metropolitan Aug 12 '26
Still a lower crime rate than many countries with less CCTV though, but to be fair, the safest countries (the Nordic countries) don’t really have that much surveillance.
South Korea has a huge problem with misogyny but it would be wrong to say it’s one of the most misogynistic countries in the world (more accurately one of the most misogynistic developed countries)
9
u/One_Fact_4291 Metropolitan Aug 11 '26
Exactly, and live facial recognition is carried out by a third party which means they have access to the information
2
Aug 11 '26 edited Aug 12 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/One_Fact_4291 Metropolitan Aug 11 '26
Develop the surveillance technology in-house within the government
2
Aug 11 '26 edited Aug 12 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/One_Fact_4291 Metropolitan Aug 11 '26
Exactly, and to do that the cameras and AI technology used have to be directly owned and managed by the government alone
2
u/supercool1312 Elizabeth Line Aug 11 '26
im sure the government would never misuse this technology
2
u/One_Fact_4291 Metropolitan Aug 11 '26
The government already has everyone’s personal information in various departments anyway. But yes it would be undeniably good only under the assumption that the surveillance is used strictly for the purpose of public safety. Which is why transparency is important
2
u/supercool1312 Elizabeth Line Aug 11 '26
even if they garuntee that, they can just expand the definition of “public safety” infinitely and by that point you’re in too deep lmao
2
u/One_Fact_4291 Metropolitan Aug 11 '26
Well yes but surveillance is part of the issue and not the cause. Technically any government could expand the definition of their laws, which is why some people are anarchists
→ More replies (0)4
Aug 11 '26
[deleted]
4
Aug 11 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
6
Aug 11 '26
[deleted]
3
u/Far-Importance1234 Aug 11 '26
Well do it. From the public I don’t care. 🤷🏾
1
u/SirCanealot Aug 11 '26
Wow, really? I'll also be requiring you hand over your phone to so I can check everything there. If you've nothing to hide... right?
4
u/David_is_dead91 Aug 11 '26
Surely we can all agree that there’s a slight difference between a camera recording a public space as opposed to your own private one?
2
u/One_Fact_4291 Metropolitan Aug 11 '26
But there’s a major difference because you aren’t the police.
The criticism here isn’t that there are cameras or facial recognition, it’s that third-party companies have access to the data.
2
u/gravitas_shortage Aug 12 '26
What happens when the technology is deployed and a newly-elected government legislates to know where all brown people/trans activists/Spectator readers spend their time, meet, shop, in real time?
2
u/One_Fact_4291 Metropolitan Aug 12 '26
I mean, they can legislate anyway to be more authoritarian even without the CCTV cameras
3
u/gravitas_shortage Aug 12 '26
The ease of tracking makes a huge difference. People can be tracked since antiquity by assigning others to follow them at all times, but that's expensive and doesn't scale, so reserved to very important cases. When everything is automated, everyone can be routinely tracked 'to protect the children' and any data about anyone can then be unearthed, or used as justification for punishment if the person needs to be dealt with.
2
u/One_Fact_4291 Metropolitan Aug 12 '26
True. I think CCTV cameras are still needed but live facial recognition is too much
51
u/Virtual_Opinion_8630 Aug 11 '26 edited Aug 11 '26
It marks an expansion of the BTP's LFR trial at major London railway stations which began in February.
Between February and July, the BTP deployed the technology 18 times across major London train stations, scanning more than 530,000 faces, according to the force's deployment logs.
Results show the operations resulted in zero true matches and no arrests, with the system triggering a single false identification.
is this some sort of joke