[frenger]

> "While this sort of technology may have benefits for law enforcement (recall that the suspects in the Boston Marathon bombings were identified with help from camera footage), it also invites abuse."

1. Yes /without/ this technology, and

2. How would that have prevented the Boston tragedy if it were in use?

What exactly does NYT mean here.

[dougmccune]

When they identified the first blurred images of the suspects' faces they put out the images hoping people could help identify the faces they were interested in. I assume they're saying that with better technology they'd be able to instantly identify those faces, instead of relying on putting them up on TV (where the suspects can see them and know they're on to them). So it wouldn't have prevented the attack, but it theoretically would have made the identification easier, and the arrests faster/less deadly I suppose.

[frenger]

Perhaps, but they were caught pretty fast already, to be honest. The insinuation is that somehow this technology would have prevented the attacks in the first place, which is highly improbable.