For the love of god can we please just ban facial recognition? Why is no one even talking about this?
this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2026
330 points (99.7% liked)
News
39245 readers
2197 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Remember something like 200,000,000 IDs were found leaked online from the U.S. and Canada. Meaning exactly what happened to her could now happen to any of those people..
The article states the false match came off the fake ID used, not even the surveillance footage showing she was there.
The article states the false match came off the fake ID used, not even the surveillance footage showing she was there
No it does not. The false match was from fscial recognition
Here is the relevant part of the article:
Detectives reportedly reviewed video of a woman using a fake US army ID to withdraw tens of thousands of dollars.
By using facial recognition software, the investigators identified Lipps as a possible match
"As reported by Valley News Live, the complaint also alleges that Heck failed to disclose that the facial recognition result came from a photo on the suspect's fake ID rather than surveillance footage."
The facial recognition compared the fake ID to the person they arrested apparently. Not faceid on surveillance footage to the woman.
WTF. They didn't even use footage of the suspect to falsely ID the TN woman, they used the picture on a fake ID used by the suspect !?!?!?!! That's so mind-bogglingly stupid. How was this charge not thrown out immediately?
The source of the facial recognition was a fake ID used by a female suspect who was captured on surveillance footage in incidents involving multiple Fargo-area banks, according to the complaint. Lipps did not look like the suspect captured on surveillance video, according to the complaint, which noted their difference in build, facial features and tattoos. Prior to arrest, Lipps had also never been to North Dakota, according to the complaint.
How was this charge not thrown out immediately?
Essentially, it was. As soon as anyone actually took a look at the evidence. The problem is that the police held her in jail all that time claiming they had a positive ID when that was not the case. There are several problems to highlight here:
- poor police training on the tools they use
- lack of reasonable guidelines on how those tools should be applied
- an overburdened and slow-moving justice system that allows someone to be in jail for 6 months (or longer sometimes) before there's any action on their case
Not to mention inability to afford a decent attorney, because we can be sure if she had enough money she wouldn't have spent more than a day in jail.
It alleges that Detective Lucas Heck proceeded with charges despite knowing that Lipps lived in Tennessee, had never visited North Dakota, did not match the physical description of the suspect captured on surveillance footage, and had no unexplained funds linking her to the thefts.
If proven true, this seems like a slam dunk win for the victim.
I wonder if this egregiousness would also expose Detective Heck to personal liability bypassing his qualified immunity so that he could be sued directly too.
I wonder if this egregiousness would also expose Detective Heck to personal liability bypassing his qualified immunity so that he could be sued directly too.
In the U.S.? That would mean the police would be accountable for their actions. Can't have that.
I love it when these cases come to light, and even to this day have some hope that the bad press, and expense of this lawsuit will incur some change in behavior from the city and police department. I know, pretty naive, right? Go get 'em Ms. Lipps, take the money and run.
Fargo PD is pretty bad. This is the exact type of shoddy police work I expect from them
$10 million isn't enough.
This new season of Fargo is a crossover with Black Mirror
You go, Granny!
Aggregious
Egregious, unless you were going for that plus aggression, which is appropriate.
Aggreeegssious
My favorite dinosaur.
Anti-Gregarious
"loss of her home, car" poor lady.....
"and bog" Get the torches, men! We're going hunting.
"grandma"
...what is with the articles going out of their way to label 50 yr old women like this is elderly stage of life meanwhile men of 80 are gossiped about like they have their whole life still ahead of them.
I'd guess, in this case, imagining a wrongfully imprisoned grandma is thought to be more immoral than "just" a 50 year old. It also causes readers to imagine their own grandma in the same situation, instead of a stranger.
cuz that's what it takes to feel any empathy for a woman. Thanks unconsious bias.
