Wednesday, June 5, 2013

PUTS A NEW MEANING TO GETTING LOST IN THE CROWD …


NSA, FBI, CIA, ETC. HAVE HAD THIS TECHNOLOGY FOR OVER 25 YEARS (BASED ON FRACTAL MATH) … WHAT DO YOU THINK THE UAV'S (THE TIN MEN) ARE DOING?

Looks like "Getting lost in the crowd" is a thing of the past. Face Recognition in a Crowd …
 The crowd in the link below was taken before a riot in Vancouver , BC , Canada .
PRIVACY IS NOT HIDING BEHIND THE FLAG NOR IS IT IN THE CONSTITUTION

Where is the right to privacy found in the US Constitution?

The right to privacy isn't directly mentioned in the Constitution, but the US Supreme Court has held that it is a fundamental liberty deserving protection because privacy is implied in the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments (Due Process Clause).

The judicial concept of "Substantive Due Process," holds that the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause is intended to protect all unenumerated rights considered fundamental and "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty," among these the right to privacy. Use of Substantive Due Process is considered judicial activism, in that it seeks to limit the scope of laws that undermine personal liberty, even if the law doesn't address a right specifically mentioned in the Constitution.

In the past, (Lochner Era: c.1897-1937, second industrial revolution) Courts used Substantive Due Process in a way that reduced individual protection from exploitation by businesses and the government, such as protecting the "right" of the individual to negotiate contracts with an employer by holding minimum wage and work conditions laws

Today, Substantive Due Process is used to protect the individual against exploitation or legislation that creates an undue burden on individuals, or on an identifiable group or class of citizens.

The Supreme Court first declared an individual's right to privacy in the case Griswold v. Connecticut, (1965), which overturned a Connecticut law prohibiting doctors from counseling married couples on the use of birth control. The Court held the state had no legitimate interest interfering in communication between a doctor and patient, that the nature of the discussion was private.

Griswold set the precedent used to legalize abortion in Roe v. Wade, (1973) and to decriminalize intimate sexual practices between consenting adults in Lawrence v. Texas, (2003).

In order to determine whether the government has valid cause to interfere in people's lives, the Court applies a "rational basis test" to determine whether the legislation is related to a legitimate government interest.

If the law passes the rational basis test, the Court next applies "strict scrutiny" to determine whether there is a compelling state interest that justifies violating the groups' or individuals' fundamental rights, and whether the law is applied as narrowly as possible to infringe those rights as little possible.



Put your cursor anywhere in the image of the crowd in the link below and double-click a few times and then use the scroll button in the center of your mouse.



You can zero in on one single face, or scan among the crowd. The clarity is unbelievable.

This is actually scary. You can see - perfectly - the faces of every single individual - and there were thousands!
Privacy? With facial-recognition software just think what the police and the feds have at their disposal.  The camera's at the toll booth's on the highways and bridges also have similar capability 
… their always watching!!!

CLICK ON THE LINK BELOW