[tejaswiy]

> Beijing has been developing a nationwide facial recognition system using surveillance cameras capable of identifying any person, anywhere, around the clock within seconds.

So before all the privacy activists are up in arms, this is pretty incredible and it looks like they're getting pretty close to eliminating all violent crime. I think that's an incredible achievement if they can pull it off. In an even broader historical context, individualism and capitalism have had their run for 100+ years, maybe this is the rise of a new ideological movement.

[kbenson]

There are many theoretical ways to eliminate violent crime that would be to most people's eyes vastly worse than letting crime continue, so it's dangerous to elevate one metric above all others.

Here are some theoretical ways to eliminate all crime which would likely be worse for everyone:

- Eliminate all people

- Keep all people physically separated from each other.

- Remove all freedom of expression or free will from people.

Those are, obviously, some of the most extreme possible ways to accomplish that goal, but it does illustrate that there's an obvious trade off being made, and that even in cases where it might not be as obvious as these, we should identify and think about the consequences of that trade.

[thaumasiotes]

> So before all the privacy activists are up in arms, this is pretty incredible and it looks like they're getting pretty close to eliminating all violent crime.

To be fair, Chinese people anywhere in the world have exceptionally low rates of committing violent crime, and this has been true since long before anyone started a facial recognition program.

[yters]

Since nothing a government does is a crime, by definition, then by consolidating all crimes, violent and otherwise, to the government then we have eliminated all evil! Brilliant!

[PlasticTank]

> getting pretty close to eliminating all violent crime

Clearly you haven't been on YouTube lately, China must be the world capital of getting stabbed on CCTV.

[ardy42]

> So before all the privacy activists are up in arms, this is pretty incredible and it looks like they're getting pretty close to eliminating all violent crime.

Even if it's successful, it will only be used to eliminate the crimes committed by people without connections. Powerful and connected people will be allowed to get away with crimes.

[georgyo]

"There is no murder in paradise."

[jjcc]

Violent crime rate is very low because of another reason: Security cameras everywhere. Criminals are either already in jail because of more efficient policing, or stop doing stupid things after watching the real stories on TV about how criminals were caught.

[lettergram]

> eliminating all violent crime

You mean, if it’s real and even if it does work that well, besides the state sponsored kind?

China has millions of people in internment and retraining camps...

Regarding your “new ideological movement” comment. It’s not really... we saw the same ideology (to a less effective level) in all dictatorships and communist countries. Secret police, thought police, etc.

[chrischen]

We have millions of black people incarcerated, the result of systematic discrimination over generations.

I'd also like to point out your statement doesn't really add to the conversation as any people in prison, or considered an enemy of the state can be spun politically.

[adventured]

> We have millions of black people incarcerated

Give how important this subject is, it's important to not invent facts.

Your core statement is false and off by at least four fold. There are roughly half a million black people in prison at all levels, not millions. That destroys your setup by debunking the extreme exaggeration. However given it is an important subject, we shouldn't stop there, let's examine the situation.

There are around 1.2m-1.3m people in state prisons, 500k-600k in local jails and 200k in federal prisons. Roughly 1.9-2.1m total across all jails and prisons at all levels. Several hundred thousand of those people are processing through the system, awaiting trial, etc. at any given time.

Roughly one million of those people are there due to rape / sexual assault, murder, assault or robbery.

As of 2016, 339,000 hispanics were sentenced to either federal or state prison; 439,000 whites; 486,000 blacks. That's from the Bureau of Justice Statistics (no figures for local jails). Over the last decade black people saw a decline of roughly 120k people in prison at those levels, white people saw a decline of about 60-70k, hispanic figures were steady.

Can you explain what part of society forces people to rape and murder - whether hispanic, white, or black? I grew up poor, most of the people I knew growing up were relatively poor or very poor, many with broken homes and absent parents, I'd like an education on this. I never saw anything related to social oppression forcing people to rape and murder.

There are a lot of societies with enormous oppression, corruption and poverty, which lack high murder rates and high violent crime rates. China is one example of that and there are several others in Asia. Eastern Europe has also had many examples of that over the last several decades.

Russia has a murder rate about ~8-12x worse than China along with far higher violent crime rates, despite the two countries being at similar levels economically per capita and both having oppressive political systems. What's the difference? Russia has a much worse culture of tolerating and encouraging violence and murder.

I've known a lot of poor people, the only difference I've ever seen between poor people that were violent and poor people that were not, is culture and it was always a choice.

[qball]

>China is one example of that and there are several others in Asia.

Keep in mind that China has a heavy incentive to lie about their prison population and/or play games with the definition of "prison population"; after all, it's important that a harmonious society has few people who break laws (implying a low prison population). Eastern Europe under Communism faced a similar cost/benefit structure.

Therefore, as they have an incentive to cover that up, it's safe to make the assumption that the real numbers are likely significantly higher.

[chrischen]

https://www.naacp.org/criminal-justice-fact-sheet/

If you grow up in the ghetto you don't have the time to think about college prep, violin lessons, or things like that traditionally needed to get to college.

Maybe your parents were incarcerated, and maybe your parents were incarcerated because of a lack of opportunity. These things stack up over generations until the point where it becomes normal for that part of the population.

Yes, many may be incarcerated for good reason, but you need to understand why. For this you'll either believe that black people are simply more likely to be murderers and rapists or there's another reason why.

[anonthos3261]

I’d assume it’s because he’s also replying to an exaggeration. The GP claimed “millions of people,” but the US State department says it’s around 800,000 that are in these de-radicalization centers.

[robkop]

You need to stop spreading incorrect information. The state department estimates that there is between 800,000 and 2,000,000 prisoners in these camps.

Also the conditions inside these camps have been reported to be far worse than those you may see inside us prisons.

[lettergram]

My point is criminal behavior is defined by the ruling class. So this pervasive 24/7 monitoring doesn’t necessarily reduce the overall harm to a society - in fact it may make it worse.

Also:

> We have millions of black people incarcerated, the result of systematic discrimination over generations.

Not even close to the extent China is persecuting - today. I won’t speak for generations past, clearly not ideal. But I think that’s kind of the point, we agree it’s not ideal.

[Fricken]

>Not even Close to the extent China is persecuting today

You might want to look that up. America has the highest incarceration rate in the world, even after you factor in the worst estimates for the Uyghur reeducation camps.

[lettergram]

Incarcerations are not persecutions. Arguably a negligible number of percecutions occur in the U.S., as most of the incarcerations are due to violent crimes. Most of the Uyghur re-education camps (which is just one of many examples known and unknown) are not due to violent crimes, but ethnic or political backgrounds (I.e. persecutions)

[chrischen]

There is a strong legacy component to African Americans and violent crime. You either believe that they are simply more inclined to violent crimes, or there's societal factors out of their control that push them towards that, such as denial of opportunities or institutionalized discrimination.

A great example is the fact that Nixon started the drug war with specifically designed laws to target black people: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/nixon-drug-war-racist_u...

These types of things have long lasting effects to this day, that affect the African American population. Saying that they are now committing violent crimes so that it's justified is a copout on the factors that lead to it.

For example prestigious universities have strong bias towards legacy applicants. If your forefathers were incarcerated by discriminatory laws in the past, you're unlikely to be a legacy admission, or benefit from any legacy policies in society.

[hyeonwho4]

In America activists can potentially sue/appeal for to free those wrongly imprisoned, and the incarceration rate is about 0.75%. The Uyghurs, by contrast, are currently imprisoned at a rate of minimum 6% (calculated via lower estimate of concentration camp size and upper estimate of Ughur population in China), another 6% of their population is matched by live-in Han Chinese family monitors, and no one is even pretending that they broke any laws.

[chrischen]

Yes but African Americans make up 34% of the 6.8 million that are incarcerated. Maybe the rules causing this disparity are not written down anywhere like in China, but it's certainly ingrained into American society in practice.

https://www.naacp.org/criminal-justice-fact-sheet/

[smolder]

I think you might be a little less than objective when comparing your home team against the rest.

[anonthos3261]

The US State department says at most 800,000 are in these de-radicalization centers. Where are you getting the “millions of people” from?

[Myrth]

Watch "Person of Interest" show

[Waterluvian]

One good reason for having many countries is we can run lots of different experiments on how to govern.

Totally ignoring all the humans rights fears, this sure is fascinating.

[randall]

I mean that's the thing, China is going to implement it, we get to see what happens, and I don't think there's much we can do to stop it. I'm interested in seeing how historians look at this period of human history since it will theoretically be so objectively (? maybe? At least plentifully.) documented.

[yters]

If there is one thing the Chinese government is known for, it is objectively documenting everything it does and making such records available to all.

[chrischen]

Either it's documented and the opposition can make educated criticisms, or it's not documented and the oppositions is politically motivated. You can't have both.

[selimthegrim]

Uh, by records do you mean terra cotta soldiers?