Dahua Offers Race Recognition - "Black", "White", "Yellow"

I'm pleased you chimed in, Ethan. It was what I expected. I never spoke of the definition of free speech, but simply how it is being valued, practiced and in some 'real world' examples, limited, but am happy you did move to provide clarification for those that may have misunderstood the post, such as yourself. I was more-so referring to how the term is thrown around in order to practice that right until those responsible for operating these media and social-media platforms simply pick and choose what is OK to say and what is not. Wouldn't it be great to be able to still have reasonable access to unbiased platforms to practice 'free speech' in the U.S. (you know, the speech congress cannot limit but all major communications platforms can limit)? You certainly must understand as well as all of the rest of us that as technology changes, so do the modes/methods of transmitting the speech. How nice it is that everyone was sold on these wonderful social media platforms as a means to communicate and express thoughts and ideas, only to be silenced when certain, reasonable, legitimate, but maybe unpopular opinions sneak out of one's mind. And actually, you can't and shouldn't be held responsible (under free speech in terms of law) for 'others' actions, based on spoken or written word. But if you can be held responsible, it should apply to everyone, not just some. It is not the responsibility of the person simply speaking, to determine whether or not it will 'provoke' anyone to take unlawful actions. Someone is always feeling provoked by something someone else says. It is, however, the responsibility of those feeling 'provoked' to conduct 'their' actions in a manner that follows the law. >>>>>>>>>>>>This topic was not meant to dwell on 'free speech' but rather, on whether or not a company should be held responsible for providing technology that was or could be misused and did they lie about their technological abilities. If the company is to be shamed or held responsible, let's do away with AI/analytics altogether. Any of the analytic data can be misused and any technology can be misused. The ones actually responsible are those misusing the information. For instance; What is the first thing law enforcement asks witnesses to a bank robbery? "Can you describe the person? What did they look like, how did they sound, were they White, Black, yellow, green blue"? How tall were they, were they large or small in weight. "Gee whiz officer, I don't know if it would be appropriate for me to describe this person; I may be racist for describing their ethnicity or I may be body shaming if I were to place a label on the description or the words I used to describe them..Would I somehow be biased by providing you with their approximate age or god forbid, what if I chose the wrong gender and got the wrong person apprehended?"....What industry are we in again? We collect information...

We don't delete comments from people supporting China's human rights abuses. That does not mean we are 'welcoming' China human rights abuses, it means we are confident that a straightforward discussion with evidence and logic is better than barring such people.