Just put it back on the pole when youâre done.
Theyâll be perfect for getting right into the looms.
There should be enough for each goalpost and the flags.
Itâs a revolutionary design.
(gift link)
In the EU wouldnât this be banned?
It would be illegal so that means it is in the UK also. Iâm pretty sure they use it in my local UK based chain store in Ireland though. Illegal doesnât mean it isnât used.
Why is most use of AI prima facie illegal in the EU? Because it lacks a meaningful right to deletion.
Obviously in this case it also falls foul of proportionality, fairness, transparency, minimisation, limitation, accuracy, storage, integrity, confidentiality, and accountability.
Mass use of facial recognition is an obvious utter clusterfuck at variance with GDPR and ALL the principles of data protection.
Iâd expect them to claim legitimate interest, just as they are doing for conventional video surveillance already.
Businesses always claim necessity as consent is such a bother to maintain (even if people would) but this is multiply failing and, with the addition of AI, there really is no way to actually do this in accordance with the law. You cannot have your personal data meaningfully deleted.
If they were training one big amorphous bad guy recognition model, then sure. But I donât think thatâs a given when they are trying to ban specific individuals.
Rwanda policy: Government to ask Supreme Court to take Rwanda ruling.
Thereâs no appeal as of right to the Supreme Court, and a cursory reading of the opinion doesnât suggest that the Court of Appeal gave leave to appeal (they normally leave it up to the Supreme Court which cases they take). If I were one of the Justices I would take some pleasure in refusing leave. I suspect a 2:1 split with the Lord Chief Justice in the minority increases the chance theyâll take it up though, sadly.
As a result, The Sun has been instructed to publish a summary of the regulatorâs findings in the spot where Clarksonâs column regularly appears in the print edition, and reference the decision on its front page and website homepage for 24 hours â something the tabloid hasnât been forced to do since 2016, when its front-page âQueen Backs Brexitâ splash was found to have breached press regulations.
He claimed [insert some bollocks or other], without producing any evidence for the allegation.
Yup. Thatâs our Nigel!
And if heâs really leaving Britain - we donât want him.
He can go live anywhere he wants in the EU.
Oops, my bad.
Donât let the door hit you where the good lord split you, Nigel.
