zlacker

>>amarch+(OP)
The UK has been a surveillance state for a long time.

I've been the victim of property crime 4x in the UK, and 3 of those times the entire thing was caught on multiple CCTVs. But that didn't help me get my stuff back or prosecute criminals. The one time I did get my computer back was when the police raided a stash house (due to an anonymous tip, not surveillance) and found a treasure trove of stolen electronics, which included my computer.

But having cameras everywhere in London didn't help at all, so AFAICT they only exist to surveil you.

>>fastba+Rx2
This is untrue? Cameras in the UK are not "just used for surveillance". The facial recognition used recently has led to arrest of many offenders.

> The Met reported that in 12 months they made 580 arrests using LFR for offences including, rape, domestic abuse, knife crime, GBH and robbery, including 52 registered sex offenders arrested for breaching their conditions.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/live-facial-recognition-t...

That's statistics for London, not the rest of the UK.

>>Freedo+LH2
> The facial recognition used recently has led to arrest of many offenders.

I'm confused as to how that isn't also "surveillance".

Being able to know where someone is on your city sure seems like it fits the bill to me, unless you're considering it "enforcement" (and different from surveillance)?