95% false positive rate is extremely good for surveillance, as the cost of false positive is low (wasted efforts by the police). That means for every 20 people the police investigate, one is a target.
They didn't mention arrests but I think the database used was much larger. Probably all persons of interest. The Met (London Police) has been using experts in face recognition for years and their hit rate is much higher. Those people can also identify a high number of suspects on random CCTV while the software was used in stadiums where people tend to remain at one place for most of the time.
So 95% false positive can be better than nothing but it's nowhere near what trained policemen can do.
So 95% false positive can be better than nothing but it's nowhere near what trained policemen can do.