General Discussion

SamuelTheThird

(706 posts) Wed Jan 28, 2026, 01:05 AM Yesterday

UK isn't doing much better

They are going towards 1984

https://boingboing.net/2026/01/26/panopticon.html

Shabana Mahmood, Britain's Home Secretary, dreams the dream of the interior minister: total surveillance of everyone, everywhere, at every moment of their lives. Evoking the Panopticon-the circular prison devised by philosopher Jeremy Bentham to allow a single observer to see into every prisoner's cell-she said she hopes for an "AI version" so that "the eyes of the state can be on you at all times."

"When I was in justice, my ultimate vision for that part of the criminal justice system was to achieve, by means of AI and technology, what Jeremy Bentham tried to do with his Panopticon. That is that the eyes of the state can be on you at all times. Similarly, in the world of policing, in particular, we've already been rolling out live facial recognition technology, but I think there's big space here for being able to harness the power of AI and tech to get ahead of the criminals, frankly, which is what we're trying to do."

Mahmood's dystopian fantasy was offered in a conversation with former prime minister Tony Blair, himself a longtime advocate of surveillance technology. The "AI" angle is that "AI" would not only let them focus on the criminals, but people the "AI" is trained to predict will become criminals.

22 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

UK isn't doing much better (Original Post) SamuelTheThird Yesterday OP

Everyone in the UK knows.. róisín_dubh Yesterday #1

Imagine if nobody had witnessed or filmed the killing of Alex Pretti. That is why camera Doodley Yesterday #2

She is talking about going far beyond that SamuelTheThird Yesterday #3

She is not talking about: "surveillance of everyone, everywhere, at every moment of their lives." Doodley Yesterday #4

Hey, every article needs its clickbait/hook AZJonnie Yesterday #5

She is. Layzeebeaver Yesterday #7

In their houses too? Polybius Yesterday #13

Yes. Layzeebeaver Yesterday #15

Nobody is proposing that. Doodley 21 hrs ago #18

That is that the eyes of the state can be on you at all times. SamuelTheThird Yesterday #10

It is obvious she doesn't mean cameras in bedrooms. Doodley Yesterday #11

Cameras? OK, probably not. Listening devices though? Seeking Serenity Yesterday #14

Possible, but nobody is proposing that! Doodley 21 hrs ago #19

Yet.... Seeking Serenity 20 hrs ago #20

I asked you what she does mean SamuelTheThird 17 hrs ago #21

This message was self-deleted by its author Polybius Yesterday #12

Not even close. BannonsLiver Yesterday #6

Maybe you're unaware SamuelTheThird Yesterday #9

The Bourne Ultimatum. ColoringFool Yesterday #8

Sounds serious Torchlight Yesterday #16

AI + surveillance IS a serious threat to civil liberties SamuelTheThird 17 hrs ago #22

Live facial recognition vans to increase from 10 to 50; the Met alone scanned 4 million faces in 2025 muriel_volestrangler 23 hrs ago #17

róisín_dubh

(12,248 posts)

1. Everyone in the UK knows..

Reply to SamuelTheThird (Original post)

Wed Jan 28, 2026, 01:12 AM

Yesterday

And has known for ages, that CCTV is watching. I despise Mahmood (and most of the Labour Party tbh).

Doodley

(11,730 posts)

2. Imagine if nobody had witnessed or filmed the killing of Alex Pretti. That is why camera

Reply to SamuelTheThird (Original post)

Wed Jan 28, 2026, 01:32 AM

Yesterday

surveillance is needed, and I agree that as much of the public space in London should be covered. Why? The very knowledge of cameras present reduces crime and saves lives. Police know they can be held to account. Criminals can be tracked, and crimes can be solved more easily. This is very different to what is happening in America.

SamuelTheThird

(706 posts)

3. She is talking about going far beyond that

Reply to Doodley (Reply #2)

Wed Jan 28, 2026, 01:35 AM

Yesterday

London already has camera coverage

Doodley

(11,730 posts)

4. She is not talking about: "surveillance of everyone, everywhere, at every moment of their lives."

Reply to SamuelTheThird (Reply #3)

Wed Jan 28, 2026, 01:54 AM

Yesterday

AZJonnie

(3,025 posts)

5. Hey, every article needs its clickbait/hook

Reply to Doodley (Reply #4)

Wed Jan 28, 2026, 02:13 AM

Yesterday

It's like a divine right these days

Layzeebeaver

(2,195 posts)

7. She is.

Reply to Doodley (Reply #4)

Wed Jan 28, 2026, 03:42 AM

Yesterday

Polybius

(21,596 posts)

13. In their houses too?

Reply to Layzeebeaver (Reply #7)

Wed Jan 28, 2026, 05:15 AM

Yesterday

Layzeebeaver

(2,195 posts)

15. Yes.

Reply to Polybius (Reply #13)

Wed Jan 28, 2026, 09:03 AM

Yesterday

If what you do in your house has a footprint that extends into the info-sphere, then yes.

Everything you do, plan, research, communicate via the internet and other electronic means would be fair game. Every payment, purchase, travel ticket, delivery would be digested by the AI panopticon and be used to track and predict your behaviour.

Just because they don't have a camera in your bedroom doesnt make it OK.

Doodley

(11,730 posts)

18. Nobody is proposing that.

Reply to Layzeebeaver (Reply #15)

Wed Jan 28, 2026, 12:03 PM

21 hrs ago

SamuelTheThird

(706 posts)

10. That is that the eyes of the state can be on you at all times.

Reply to Doodley (Reply #4)

Wed Jan 28, 2026, 04:35 AM

Yesterday

Her words. Not mine.

What does 'at all times' mean to you?

Doodley

(11,730 posts)

11. It is obvious she doesn't mean cameras in bedrooms.

Reply to SamuelTheThird (Reply #10)

Wed Jan 28, 2026, 05:12 AM

Yesterday

Seeking Serenity

(3,287 posts)

14. Cameras? OK, probably not. Listening devices though?

Reply to Doodley (Reply #11)

Wed Jan 28, 2026, 06:25 AM

Yesterday

I definitely think that's within the realm of probability.

Doodley

(11,730 posts)

19. Possible, but nobody is proposing that!

Reply to Seeking Serenity (Reply #14)

Wed Jan 28, 2026, 12:06 PM

21 hrs ago

Seeking Serenity

(3,287 posts)

20. Yet....

Reply to Doodley (Reply #19)

Wed Jan 28, 2026, 01:24 PM

20 hrs ago

SamuelTheThird

(706 posts)

21. I asked you what she does mean

Reply to Doodley (Reply #11)

Wed Jan 28, 2026, 04:01 PM

17 hrs ago

'at all times', what does that mean? You're sure (based on what?) you know what it doesn't entail. Then what does it entail?

Response to SamuelTheThird (Reply #10)

Polybius This message was self-deleted by its author.

BannonsLiver

(20,313 posts)

6. Not even close.

Reply to SamuelTheThird (Original post)

Wed Jan 28, 2026, 02:57 AM

Yesterday

Some folks don’t seem to comprehend what a mess this country is right now.

SamuelTheThird

(706 posts)

9. Maybe you're unaware

Reply to BannonsLiver (Reply #6)

Wed Jan 28, 2026, 04:34 AM

Yesterday

The Panopticon was a strong influence on Orwell in writing 1984. And there's one of the most powerful people in the UK government saying she wants to fully institute it, and go beyond it.

ColoringFool

(390 posts)

8. The Bourne Ultimatum.

Reply to SamuelTheThird (Original post)

Wed Jan 28, 2026, 04:19 AM

Yesterday

Torchlight

(6,424 posts)

16. Sounds serious

Reply to SamuelTheThird (Original post)

Wed Jan 28, 2026, 09:05 AM

Yesterday

Good luck!

SamuelTheThird

(706 posts)

22. AI + surveillance IS a serious threat to civil liberties

Reply to Torchlight (Reply #16)

Wed Jan 28, 2026, 04:07 PM

17 hrs ago

Is your snark a psychological defense mechanism against realizing that?

muriel_volestrangler

(105,736 posts)

17. Live facial recognition vans to increase from 10 to 50; the Met alone scanned 4 million faces in 2025

Reply to SamuelTheThird (Original post)

Wed Jan 28, 2026, 09:49 AM

23 hrs ago

Court told police facial recognition needs limits

The Met Police is facing a legal challenge over its use of live facial recognition (LFR) from two campaigners who say the technology is expanding without adequate safeguards.
...
Under the proposals, the number of facial recognition vans would be increased from 10 to 50, and be made available nationwide.

Shaun Thompson, a youth worker, was wrongly flagged by LFR, and Silkie Carlo, is the director of privacy campaigning organisation Big Brother Watch.
...
He said the Met deployed the technology 231 times in 2025 and scanned about four million faces. On 17 December alone, LFR cameras at Oxford Circus scanned more than 50,000 people in four and a half hours, he said.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c07x21jlnndo

'Facial recognition tech mistook me for wanted man'

As he passed a white van, he said police approached him and told him he was a wanted man.

"When I asked what I was wanted for, they said, 'that's what we're here to find out'."

He said officers asked him for his fingerprints, but he refused, and he was let go only after about 30 minutes, after showing them a photo of his passport.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cqxg8v74d8jo

At the end of January [2019], the Metropolitan Police held the latest trials of facial recognition technology that is intended to pick out suspects from crowds, using cameras that scan faces to see whether they match images on a database of targets.

A mobile unit was parked outside Romford station on 31 January. Campaigners from Big Brother Watch, who have highlighted how 98% of automated facial recognition ‘matches’ by the Met have actually identified the wrong people, were present and handing out leaflets.

One man, who had pulled his jumper up over the lower part of his face as he walked past the mobile unit, was subsequently stopped by police who claimed he was acting suspiciously. He was issued with a “penalty notice for disorder” — an on-the-spot fine of £90 — after officers alleged he “became aggressive and made threats towards officers.”
...
Can I legally cover my face?
The short answer is yes. There are very limited circumstances where the police can insist that you remove a face covering and normally this is in situations where they believe there is a serious risk of violence.

https://netpol.org/2019/02/12/your-rights-during-police-trials-of-facial-recognition-technology/

Reply to this discussion