Cumbria firm develops predator-spotting tech to keep women safe
www.bbc.co.uk
Rosie Richardson wants to shift the onus to self protect away from women and on to the authorities.

I find it alarming that to “protect” women, men have to be surveilled secretly in all public places. This is way beyond dystopian.

AI and remote security personnel get to decide if someone is “a predator” and take 'em down preemptively if they look suspicious.

What could possibly go wrong?

  • Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    0·
    3 days ago

    But the system she is developing does not use cameras and, instead, monitors crowds as anonymous dots on a map. Only when it spots a potential issue are CCTV cameras directed on the individuals, or security personnel sent to the scene.

    “Our aim there is to respect public privacy - so really understand that people don’t want to be continually monitored when there’s no need to be - but also make spaces safe,” she says. The process has undergone simulated trials and will soon move to tests in real-life scenarios.

    Either none of the commenters read the article or they’re all the type confused by women choosing the bear.

    Nothing but fragile male egos on display.

    Collecting data to allocate limited resources and you’re all acting like it’s a personal attack on your manhood with some are as an reason to lean in on their toxic masculinity.

      • Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        0·
        2 days ago

        I knew it would. These systems are needed because of the men making these comments. The irony is lost on them but I find it quite hilarious.

          • Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
            0·
            2 days ago

            What I see is a complete lack of sympathy for why women feel this is needing. Instead it’s men feeling attacked and it’s done with a level of hysteria that prevents a rational discussion.

            We can get to a decentralized system by ignoring why people feel they need a centralized system. But we’re not able to talk about that because male fragile egos dominate the conversations.

            • horn_e4_beaver@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
              0·
              2 days ago

              What I see is a complete lack of sympathy for why women feel this is needing. Instead it’s men feeling attacked and it’s done with a level of hysteria that prevents a rational discussion.

              It could be argued that you’re demonstrating the mirror of what you’re describing.

              When you come to a discussion with notions of how people are going to respond to you, it can be quite easy to trigger exactly the behaviour that you’re expecting to see. Come expecting rancour, and rancour may well be what you find.

              But we’re not able to talk about that because male fragile egos dominate the conversations.

              You know I would take a different perspective on this. It’s common for men to believe that expressing emotional vulnerability is a weakness; it’s something that should be stamped out. Think of the Stoic male stereotype. And I think your idea of ‘male fragile egos’ plays into this trope; to me, it’s only a step removed from telling all these men to stop whining because their feelings don’t matter. I personally don’t think you can be a legitimate feminist and reinforce toxic gender stereotypes like this at the same time.

              What I see in this thread is men, sometimes indirectly, expressing feelings of vulnerability. To tell these people that what they’re feeling doesn’t matter because women have it worse, and worse tell them that they should have show sympathy, means that everyone sees a degree of hypocrisy.

              So why would they be likely to take you arguments seriously?

    • horn_e4_beaver@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
      0·
      3 days ago

      Either none of the commenters read the article or they’re all the type confused by women choosing the bear.

      Nothing but fragile male egos on display.

      Take your lazy gendered stereotypes away with you please.