• Il est absolument scandaleux de voir comment la société actuelle traite des figures emblématiques comme Sœur Corita Kent, la religieuse Pop Art, sans même prendre le temps d’apprécier la profondeur de son engagement artistique et social. Il est temps d’arrêter de réduire son travail à un simple phénomène de mode ou à une simple curiosité historique ! Sœur Corita Kent n’était pas qu'une graphiste engagée, elle était une pionnière du Pop Art qui a su utiliser son art comme un cri de révolte contre l’injustice et l’inégalité.

    Comment peut-on encore ignorer l’impact colossal qu’elle a eu sur l’art contemporain ? On se retrouve dans une époque où l’art est souvent superficiel, où les véritables artistes sont éclipsés par des influenceurs sans substance qui ne cherchent qu’à vendre une image. C’est une honte ! Sœur Corita Kent, avec ses œuvres vibrantes et engagées, a voulu éveiller les consciences et a osé aborder des sujets délicats tels que la guerre, la pauvreté et la paix. Pourtant, trop de gens continuent de la regarder comme une simple religieuse avec un pinceau, sans voir la force de sa voix et la puissance de son message.

    Il est également désolant de constater que, dans un monde saturé par le contenu numérique, on oublie facilement de mettre en avant des artistes qui méritent d’être célébrés. Au lieu de cela, on glorifie des créations éphémères qui n’ont rien à dire. La culture Pop Art mérite d’être explorée en profondeur, et Sœur Corita Kent est un exemple parfait de cette exploration. Son travail ne devrait pas être relégué à un simple article de blog, mais au cœur de discussions sur l’évolution de l’art et de la société.

    Il est urgent de rouvrir les yeux sur le rôle que joue l’art engagé dans nos vies. Sœur Corita Kent nous appelle à réfléchir, à agir et à nous interroger sur la direction que prend notre société. Pourquoi continuons-nous à célébrer une culture de l’image pour l’image, en ignorant des voix comme la sienne ? C’est une véritable trahison envers l’art et l’humanité.

    Nous devons nous battre pour que son héritage ne soit pas oublié. Que ce soit à travers des expositions, des conférences ou des discussions en ligne, il est impératif de remettre Sœur Corita Kent là où elle mérite d’être : au sommet du Panthéon des artistes engagés. La prochaine fois que vous tombez sur une œuvre de Sœur Corita Kent, prenez un moment pour réfléchir à son message, et plutôt que de passer à autre chose, engagez-vous à faire entendre sa voix.

    Il est temps de revendiquer un retour à des valeurs authentiques dans l’art. Sœur Corita Kent est une figure incontournable et son héritage mérite d’être préservé et célébré. Arrêtons de nous contenter de peu et de vivre dans l’ignorance !

    #SœurCoritaKent #PopArt #ArtEngagé #JusticeSociale #Culture
    Il est absolument scandaleux de voir comment la société actuelle traite des figures emblématiques comme Sœur Corita Kent, la religieuse Pop Art, sans même prendre le temps d’apprécier la profondeur de son engagement artistique et social. Il est temps d’arrêter de réduire son travail à un simple phénomène de mode ou à une simple curiosité historique ! Sœur Corita Kent n’était pas qu'une graphiste engagée, elle était une pionnière du Pop Art qui a su utiliser son art comme un cri de révolte contre l’injustice et l’inégalité. Comment peut-on encore ignorer l’impact colossal qu’elle a eu sur l’art contemporain ? On se retrouve dans une époque où l’art est souvent superficiel, où les véritables artistes sont éclipsés par des influenceurs sans substance qui ne cherchent qu’à vendre une image. C’est une honte ! Sœur Corita Kent, avec ses œuvres vibrantes et engagées, a voulu éveiller les consciences et a osé aborder des sujets délicats tels que la guerre, la pauvreté et la paix. Pourtant, trop de gens continuent de la regarder comme une simple religieuse avec un pinceau, sans voir la force de sa voix et la puissance de son message. Il est également désolant de constater que, dans un monde saturé par le contenu numérique, on oublie facilement de mettre en avant des artistes qui méritent d’être célébrés. Au lieu de cela, on glorifie des créations éphémères qui n’ont rien à dire. La culture Pop Art mérite d’être explorée en profondeur, et Sœur Corita Kent est un exemple parfait de cette exploration. Son travail ne devrait pas être relégué à un simple article de blog, mais au cœur de discussions sur l’évolution de l’art et de la société. Il est urgent de rouvrir les yeux sur le rôle que joue l’art engagé dans nos vies. Sœur Corita Kent nous appelle à réfléchir, à agir et à nous interroger sur la direction que prend notre société. Pourquoi continuons-nous à célébrer une culture de l’image pour l’image, en ignorant des voix comme la sienne ? C’est une véritable trahison envers l’art et l’humanité. Nous devons nous battre pour que son héritage ne soit pas oublié. Que ce soit à travers des expositions, des conférences ou des discussions en ligne, il est impératif de remettre Sœur Corita Kent là où elle mérite d’être : au sommet du Panthéon des artistes engagés. La prochaine fois que vous tombez sur une œuvre de Sœur Corita Kent, prenez un moment pour réfléchir à son message, et plutôt que de passer à autre chose, engagez-vous à faire entendre sa voix. Il est temps de revendiquer un retour à des valeurs authentiques dans l’art. Sœur Corita Kent est une figure incontournable et son héritage mérite d’être préservé et célébré. Arrêtons de nous contenter de peu et de vivre dans l’ignorance ! #SœurCoritaKent #PopArt #ArtEngagé #JusticeSociale #Culture
    Sœur Corita Kent, la religieuse Pop Art
    Sœur Corita Kent (1918-1986). Graphiste engagée et pionnière du Pop Art. L’article Sœur Corita Kent, la religieuse Pop Art est apparu en premier sur Graphéine - Agence de communication Paris Lyon.
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Sad
    Angry
    606
    1 Comments 0 Shares 0 Reviews
  • Mortal Kombat 1 DLC is officially over as developer teases next project

    Mortal Kombat 1 DLC is officially over as developer teases next project

    Adam Starkey

    Published May 26, 2025 1:08pm

    Updated May 26, 2025 1:09pm

    Finish himNetherRealm has confirmed there will be no more DLC characters for Mortal Kombat 1 following disappointing sales.
    Mortal Kombat is still the best-selling fighting game franchise in the world, but the latest entry fell short of its usual sales expectations.
    The latest game, titled Mortal Kombat 1, was a reboot of the series set in a new timeline, where classic characters like Raiden, Sub-Zero, and Johnny Cage possessed reworked origin stories and aesthetics.
    While the game itself was mechanically solid, it clearly didn’t connect with fans in the same way as its predecessor, Mortal Kombat 11. The latter managed to sell over 15 million copies during its lifetime, whereas Mortal Kombat 1, as of January this year, has sold 5 million.
    After rumours emerged last year of an early cut to DLC support, developer NetherRealm has confirmed there will be no more extra characters or expansions for Mortal Kombat 1.
    ‘We are hearing players’ requests for continued game support of Mortal Kombat 1, and, while we will continue to support Mortal Kombat 1 through balance adjustments and fixes, there will not be additional DLC characters or story chapters released from this point on,’ a post on X reads.
    ‘We understand this will be disappointing for fans, but our team at NetherRealm needs to shift focus to the next project in order to make it as great as we possibly can.’

    The last DLC character for Mortal Kombat 1 was the T-1000 from Terminator 2: Judgement Day, which rolled out in March following last year’s Khaos Reigns expansion. Earlier this month, a definitive edition combining all the DLC was released.
    NetherRealm hasn’t announced what its next project actually is, but a dataminer recently suggested the studio is working on the next entry in the Injustice franchise.

    In a post on X earlier this month, dataminer MultiverSusie, who is known for MultiVersus leaks, wrote: ‘MultiVersus shutting down is an injustice, then doing it all again is another injustice. Leaving me without any leaks is yet again another Injustice. 3.’

    More Trending

    If true, this would be the first entry in the series since 2017’s Injustice 2. The series takes place in an alternate reality within the DC Universe, where Superman has become an evil tyrant, and features a roster of fighters ranging from Wonder Woman to Black Adam.
    Prior to Injustice, NetherRealm developed a DC crossover fighter titled Mortal Kombat vs. DC Universe, which was released in 2008 on the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360.
    Rumours of a new Injustice game have floated around for years, but the timing might be right for a new instalment to coincide with DC’s revamped cinematic universe, which starts with Superman this summer.

    Is it time for another Injustice?Email gamecentral@metro.co.uk, leave a comment below, follow us on Twitter, and sign-up to our newsletter.
    To submit Inbox letters and Reader’s Features more easily, without the need to send an email, just use our Submit Stuff page here.
    For more stories like this, check our Gaming page.

    GameCentral
    Sign up for exclusive analysis, latest releases, and bonus community content.
    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Your information will be used in line with our Privacy Policy
    #mortal #kombat #dlc #officially #over
    Mortal Kombat 1 DLC is officially over as developer teases next project
    Mortal Kombat 1 DLC is officially over as developer teases next project Adam Starkey Published May 26, 2025 1:08pm Updated May 26, 2025 1:09pm Finish himNetherRealm has confirmed there will be no more DLC characters for Mortal Kombat 1 following disappointing sales. Mortal Kombat is still the best-selling fighting game franchise in the world, but the latest entry fell short of its usual sales expectations. The latest game, titled Mortal Kombat 1, was a reboot of the series set in a new timeline, where classic characters like Raiden, Sub-Zero, and Johnny Cage possessed reworked origin stories and aesthetics. While the game itself was mechanically solid, it clearly didn’t connect with fans in the same way as its predecessor, Mortal Kombat 11. The latter managed to sell over 15 million copies during its lifetime, whereas Mortal Kombat 1, as of January this year, has sold 5 million. After rumours emerged last year of an early cut to DLC support, developer NetherRealm has confirmed there will be no more extra characters or expansions for Mortal Kombat 1. ‘We are hearing players’ requests for continued game support of Mortal Kombat 1, and, while we will continue to support Mortal Kombat 1 through balance adjustments and fixes, there will not be additional DLC characters or story chapters released from this point on,’ a post on X reads. ‘We understand this will be disappointing for fans, but our team at NetherRealm needs to shift focus to the next project in order to make it as great as we possibly can.’ The last DLC character for Mortal Kombat 1 was the T-1000 from Terminator 2: Judgement Day, which rolled out in March following last year’s Khaos Reigns expansion. Earlier this month, a definitive edition combining all the DLC was released. NetherRealm hasn’t announced what its next project actually is, but a dataminer recently suggested the studio is working on the next entry in the Injustice franchise. In a post on X earlier this month, dataminer MultiverSusie, who is known for MultiVersus leaks, wrote: ‘MultiVersus shutting down is an injustice, then doing it all again is another injustice. Leaving me without any leaks is yet again another Injustice. 3.’ More Trending If true, this would be the first entry in the series since 2017’s Injustice 2. The series takes place in an alternate reality within the DC Universe, where Superman has become an evil tyrant, and features a roster of fighters ranging from Wonder Woman to Black Adam. Prior to Injustice, NetherRealm developed a DC crossover fighter titled Mortal Kombat vs. DC Universe, which was released in 2008 on the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360. Rumours of a new Injustice game have floated around for years, but the timing might be right for a new instalment to coincide with DC’s revamped cinematic universe, which starts with Superman this summer. Is it time for another Injustice?Email gamecentral@metro.co.uk, leave a comment below, follow us on Twitter, and sign-up to our newsletter. To submit Inbox letters and Reader’s Features more easily, without the need to send an email, just use our Submit Stuff page here. For more stories like this, check our Gaming page. GameCentral Sign up for exclusive analysis, latest releases, and bonus community content. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Your information will be used in line with our Privacy Policy #mortal #kombat #dlc #officially #over
    METRO.CO.UK
    Mortal Kombat 1 DLC is officially over as developer teases next project
    Mortal Kombat 1 DLC is officially over as developer teases next project Adam Starkey Published May 26, 2025 1:08pm Updated May 26, 2025 1:09pm Finish him (Warner Bros.) NetherRealm has confirmed there will be no more DLC characters for Mortal Kombat 1 following disappointing sales. Mortal Kombat is still the best-selling fighting game franchise in the world, but the latest entry fell short of its usual sales expectations. The latest game, titled Mortal Kombat 1, was a reboot of the series set in a new timeline, where classic characters like Raiden, Sub-Zero, and Johnny Cage possessed reworked origin stories and aesthetics. While the game itself was mechanically solid, it clearly didn’t connect with fans in the same way as its predecessor, Mortal Kombat 11. The latter managed to sell over 15 million copies during its lifetime, whereas Mortal Kombat 1, as of January this year, has sold 5 million. After rumours emerged last year of an early cut to DLC support, developer NetherRealm has confirmed there will be no more extra characters or expansions for Mortal Kombat 1. ‘We are hearing players’ requests for continued game support of Mortal Kombat 1, and, while we will continue to support Mortal Kombat 1 through balance adjustments and fixes, there will not be additional DLC characters or story chapters released from this point on,’ a post on X reads. ‘We understand this will be disappointing for fans, but our team at NetherRealm needs to shift focus to the next project in order to make it as great as we possibly can.’ The last DLC character for Mortal Kombat 1 was the T-1000 from Terminator 2: Judgement Day, which rolled out in March following last year’s Khaos Reigns expansion. Earlier this month, a definitive edition combining all the DLC was released. NetherRealm hasn’t announced what its next project actually is, but a dataminer recently suggested the studio is working on the next entry in the Injustice franchise. In a post on X earlier this month, dataminer MultiverSusie, who is known for MultiVersus leaks, wrote: ‘MultiVersus shutting down is an injustice, then doing it all again is another injustice. Leaving me without any leaks is yet again another Injustice. 3.’ More Trending If true, this would be the first entry in the series since 2017’s Injustice 2. The series takes place in an alternate reality within the DC Universe, where Superman has become an evil tyrant, and features a roster of fighters ranging from Wonder Woman to Black Adam. Prior to Injustice, NetherRealm developed a DC crossover fighter titled Mortal Kombat vs. DC Universe, which was released in 2008 on the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360. Rumours of a new Injustice game have floated around for years, but the timing might be right for a new instalment to coincide with DC’s revamped cinematic universe, which starts with Superman this summer. Is it time for another Injustice? (Warner Bros.) Email gamecentral@metro.co.uk, leave a comment below, follow us on Twitter, and sign-up to our newsletter. To submit Inbox letters and Reader’s Features more easily, without the need to send an email, just use our Submit Stuff page here. For more stories like this, check our Gaming page. GameCentral Sign up for exclusive analysis, latest releases, and bonus community content. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Your information will be used in line with our Privacy Policy
    0 Comments 0 Shares 0 Reviews
  • NetherRealm ends Mortal Kombat 1 support as focus shifts to "the next project"

    NetherRealm ends Mortal Kombat 1 support as focus shifts to "the next project"
    "There will not be additional DLC characters or story chapters released from this point on."

    Image credit: NetherRealm

    News

    by Vikki Blake
    Contributor

    Published on May 24, 2025

    NetherRealm has confirmed there will be no more additional story chapters or characters "from this point on".
    In a statement posted to X/Twitter, the studio said that despite "hearing players' requests for continued game support of Mortal Kombat 1", "there will not be additional DLC characters or story chapters released". It will, however, "continue to support Mortal Kombat 1 through balance adjustments and fixes".

    A trailer for Mortal Kombat 1's Definitive Edition.Watch on YouTube
    "We understand this will be disappointing for fans, but our team at NetherRealm needs to shift focus to the next project in order to make it as great as we possibly can," the team added.

    To see this content please enable targeting cookies.

    "It's disappointing because there's no thorough QoL, no online lobbies, & locked away skins....you truly gave us an unfinished game," replied one player. "An extreme low from WB/NRS. What changed over there???"
    As for that "next project" NetherRealm refers to? Well, no-one's entirely sure as it's not been formally confirmed as yet, but that's widely thought to be Injustice 3. Let's watch this space.
    Some fans aren't surprised by the announcement, however. NetherRealm Studios released its surprise Mortal Kombat 1: Definitive Edition on Switch, Xbox Series X/S, PS5, and PC earlier this month with minimal fanfare, bundling together the main game, its Khaos Reigns story expansion, Shang Tsung, two Kombat Packs featuring additional fighters and Kameo characters, some in-game currency, and a selection of skins. Animality finishing moves have also been added in a free update for all players.
    "The arrival of the definitive edition meant it was over with the previous games, so... I guess that was it," noted one poster on the Mortal Kombat subreddit at the time, a sentiment largely shared across the playerbase.
    Mortal Kombat 1: Definitive Edition costs £55/on PS5, Xbox Series X/S, and PC, while Switch players can pick it up for There's also a £50/Definitive Edition Upgradefor Mortal Kombat 1 owners wanting to get everything in the new version without purchasing each bit of DLC separately.
    #netherrealm #ends #mortal #kombat #support
    NetherRealm ends Mortal Kombat 1 support as focus shifts to "the next project"
    NetherRealm ends Mortal Kombat 1 support as focus shifts to "the next project" "There will not be additional DLC characters or story chapters released from this point on." Image credit: NetherRealm News by Vikki Blake Contributor Published on May 24, 2025 NetherRealm has confirmed there will be no more additional story chapters or characters "from this point on". In a statement posted to X/Twitter, the studio said that despite "hearing players' requests for continued game support of Mortal Kombat 1", "there will not be additional DLC characters or story chapters released". It will, however, "continue to support Mortal Kombat 1 through balance adjustments and fixes". A trailer for Mortal Kombat 1's Definitive Edition.Watch on YouTube "We understand this will be disappointing for fans, but our team at NetherRealm needs to shift focus to the next project in order to make it as great as we possibly can," the team added. To see this content please enable targeting cookies. "It's disappointing because there's no thorough QoL, no online lobbies, & locked away skins....you truly gave us an unfinished game," replied one player. "An extreme low from WB/NRS. What changed over there???" As for that "next project" NetherRealm refers to? Well, no-one's entirely sure as it's not been formally confirmed as yet, but that's widely thought to be Injustice 3. Let's watch this space. Some fans aren't surprised by the announcement, however. NetherRealm Studios released its surprise Mortal Kombat 1: Definitive Edition on Switch, Xbox Series X/S, PS5, and PC earlier this month with minimal fanfare, bundling together the main game, its Khaos Reigns story expansion, Shang Tsung, two Kombat Packs featuring additional fighters and Kameo characters, some in-game currency, and a selection of skins. Animality finishing moves have also been added in a free update for all players. "The arrival of the definitive edition meant it was over with the previous games, so... I guess that was it," noted one poster on the Mortal Kombat subreddit at the time, a sentiment largely shared across the playerbase. Mortal Kombat 1: Definitive Edition costs £55/on PS5, Xbox Series X/S, and PC, while Switch players can pick it up for There's also a £50/Definitive Edition Upgradefor Mortal Kombat 1 owners wanting to get everything in the new version without purchasing each bit of DLC separately. #netherrealm #ends #mortal #kombat #support
    WWW.EUROGAMER.NET
    NetherRealm ends Mortal Kombat 1 support as focus shifts to "the next project"
    NetherRealm ends Mortal Kombat 1 support as focus shifts to "the next project" "There will not be additional DLC characters or story chapters released from this point on." Image credit: NetherRealm News by Vikki Blake Contributor Published on May 24, 2025 NetherRealm has confirmed there will be no more additional story chapters or characters "from this point on". In a statement posted to X/Twitter, the studio said that despite "hearing players' requests for continued game support of Mortal Kombat 1", "there will not be additional DLC characters or story chapters released". It will, however, "continue to support Mortal Kombat 1 through balance adjustments and fixes". A trailer for Mortal Kombat 1's Definitive Edition.Watch on YouTube "We understand this will be disappointing for fans, but our team at NetherRealm needs to shift focus to the next project in order to make it as great as we possibly can," the team added. To see this content please enable targeting cookies. "It's disappointing because there's no thorough QoL, no online lobbies, & locked away skins....you truly gave us an unfinished $140 game," replied one player. "An extreme low from WB/NRS. What changed over there???" As for that "next project" NetherRealm refers to? Well, no-one's entirely sure as it's not been formally confirmed as yet, but that's widely thought to be Injustice 3. Let's watch this space. Some fans aren't surprised by the announcement, however. NetherRealm Studios released its surprise Mortal Kombat 1: Definitive Edition on Switch, Xbox Series X/S, PS5, and PC earlier this month with minimal fanfare, bundling together the main game, its Khaos Reigns story expansion, Shang Tsung, two Kombat Packs featuring additional fighters and Kameo characters, some in-game currency, and a selection of skins. Animality finishing moves have also been added in a free update for all players. "The arrival of the definitive edition meant it was over with the previous games, so... I guess that was it," noted one poster on the Mortal Kombat subreddit at the time, a sentiment largely shared across the playerbase. Mortal Kombat 1: Definitive Edition costs £55/$70 on PS5, Xbox Series X/S, and PC, while Switch players can pick it up for $60. There's also a £50/$60 Definitive Edition Upgrade ($50 on Switch) for Mortal Kombat 1 owners wanting to get everything in the new version without purchasing each bit of DLC separately.
    0 Comments 0 Shares 0 Reviews
  • Mortal Kombat 1 Won’t Receive Any More Story DLC or Characters, NetherRealm Focused on Next Project

    It was rumored for many months and somewhat a given with the launch of the Definitive Edition, but NetherRealm Studios has finally confirmed it. Mortal Kombat 1 won’t receive any more DLC characters or story chapters.
    While balance adjustments and fixes will continue, the developer will focus on its next project to “make it as great as we possibly can,” though it understands the news will disappoint fans.
    Launched in September 2023 for Xbox Series X/S, PS5, PC, and Nintendo Switch, Mortal Kombat 1 is a reboot of the series timeline. It introduced Kameo Fighters as assists and a new mode, Invasions, to accommodate a seasonal format. While it received acclaim for its visuals and story, fans raised concerns about the mechanics, extensive bugs and excessive monetization.
    An expansion, Khaos Reigns, followed in September 2024 alongside Kombat Pack 2, but this also received criticism for its short story and price. Another expansion and Kombat Pack 3 were allegedly in development but seemingly cancelled due to Khaos Reigns’ poor sales.
    As for the future, NetherRealm Studios may be working on a new Injustice, according to a MultiVersus leaker. Nothing is confirmed, so stay tuned for updates.

    We are hearing players’ requests for continued game support of Mortal Kombat 1, and, while we will continue to support Mortal Kombat 1 through balance adjustments and fixes, there will not be additional DLC characters or story chapters released from this point on.— Mortal Kombat 1May 23, 2025

    We understand this will be disappointing for fans, but our team at NetherRealm needs to shift focus to the next project in order to make it as great as we possibly can.— Mortal Kombat 1May 23, 2025
    #mortal #kombat #wont #receive #any
    Mortal Kombat 1 Won’t Receive Any More Story DLC or Characters, NetherRealm Focused on Next Project
    It was rumored for many months and somewhat a given with the launch of the Definitive Edition, but NetherRealm Studios has finally confirmed it. Mortal Kombat 1 won’t receive any more DLC characters or story chapters. While balance adjustments and fixes will continue, the developer will focus on its next project to “make it as great as we possibly can,” though it understands the news will disappoint fans. Launched in September 2023 for Xbox Series X/S, PS5, PC, and Nintendo Switch, Mortal Kombat 1 is a reboot of the series timeline. It introduced Kameo Fighters as assists and a new mode, Invasions, to accommodate a seasonal format. While it received acclaim for its visuals and story, fans raised concerns about the mechanics, extensive bugs and excessive monetization. An expansion, Khaos Reigns, followed in September 2024 alongside Kombat Pack 2, but this also received criticism for its short story and price. Another expansion and Kombat Pack 3 were allegedly in development but seemingly cancelled due to Khaos Reigns’ poor sales. As for the future, NetherRealm Studios may be working on a new Injustice, according to a MultiVersus leaker. Nothing is confirmed, so stay tuned for updates. We are hearing players’ requests for continued game support of Mortal Kombat 1, and, while we will continue to support Mortal Kombat 1 through balance adjustments and fixes, there will not be additional DLC characters or story chapters released from this point on.— Mortal Kombat 1May 23, 2025 We understand this will be disappointing for fans, but our team at NetherRealm needs to shift focus to the next project in order to make it as great as we possibly can.— Mortal Kombat 1May 23, 2025 #mortal #kombat #wont #receive #any
    GAMINGBOLT.COM
    Mortal Kombat 1 Won’t Receive Any More Story DLC or Characters, NetherRealm Focused on Next Project
    It was rumored for many months and somewhat a given with the launch of the Definitive Edition, but NetherRealm Studios has finally confirmed it. Mortal Kombat 1 won’t receive any more DLC characters or story chapters. While balance adjustments and fixes will continue, the developer will focus on its next project to “make it as great as we possibly can,” though it understands the news will disappoint fans. Launched in September 2023 for Xbox Series X/S, PS5, PC, and Nintendo Switch, Mortal Kombat 1 is a reboot of the series timeline. It introduced Kameo Fighters as assists and a new mode, Invasions, to accommodate a seasonal format. While it received acclaim for its visuals and story, fans raised concerns about the mechanics, extensive bugs and excessive monetization. An expansion, Khaos Reigns, followed in September 2024 alongside Kombat Pack 2, but this also received criticism for its short story and $50 price. Another expansion and Kombat Pack 3 were allegedly in development but seemingly cancelled due to Khaos Reigns’ poor sales. As for the future, NetherRealm Studios may be working on a new Injustice, according to a MultiVersus leaker. Nothing is confirmed, so stay tuned for updates. We are hearing players’ requests for continued game support of Mortal Kombat 1, and, while we will continue to support Mortal Kombat 1 through balance adjustments and fixes, there will not be additional DLC characters or story chapters released from this point on.— Mortal Kombat 1 (@MortalKombat) May 23, 2025 We understand this will be disappointing for fans, but our team at NetherRealm needs to shift focus to the next project in order to make it as great as we possibly can.— Mortal Kombat 1 (@MortalKombat) May 23, 2025
    0 Comments 0 Shares 0 Reviews
  • Confirmed: Mortal Kombat 1 Won’t Get Any More DLC Characters or Story Chapters as NetherRealm ‘Needs to Shift Focus to the Next Project’

    Warner Bros. has confirmed what Mortal Kombat 1 fans feared after the recent launch of the Definitive Edition: no new DLC characters or story chapters will be released for the game.Mortal Kombat 1 has sold 5 million copies, with the franchise now up to 100 million. Mortal Kombat 11 became the best-selling game in the franchise by passing Mortal Kombat X's nearly 11 million units sold worldwide soon after launch. By 2022, Mortal Kombat 11 had sold more than 15 million copies worldwide. Clearly, Mortal Kombat 1 has underperformed compared to previous games in the series.In a tweet on the official Mortal Kombat social media account, Warner Bros. acknowledged the disappointment the news will cause players, "but our team at NetherRealm needs to shift focus to the next project in order to make it as great as we possibly can.”Warner Bros. failed to say what this new project is, but current speculation points to Injustice 3, a continuation of NetherRealm’s DC fighting game series.PlayHere’s the statement in full:We are hearing players’ requests for continued game support of Mortal Kombat 1, and, while we will continue to support Mortal Kombat 1 through balance adjustments and fixes, there will not be additional DLC characters or story chapters released from this point on.We understand this will be disappointing for fans, but our team at NetherRealm needs to shift focus to the next project in order to make it as great as we possibly can.March 2025's release of the T-1000 guest character, which came a year-and-a-half after the release of Mortal Kombat 1 itself, now goes down as the game’s final major content drop. For context, in July 2021, NetherRealm announced it had started work on its next projectand, as a result, there would be no further DLC for Mortal Kombat 11. That announcement came two years and three months after the release of the game. Today’s announcement comes one year and eight months after the release of Mortal Kombat 1.Players are already bringing up prior comments from NetherRealm development chief Ed Boon, who had promised fans years of support. Indeed, many are now pointing to a September 2024 tweet from Boon, who at the time moved to reassure fans already concerned that the studio had moved onto its next game by saying: “NetherRealm is still fully committed to supporting Mortal Kombat 1 for a long time to come.”Mortal Kombat 1 enjoyed something of a resurgence in January with the secret fight with Floyd, the pink ninja developer Boon had been teasing for years. That sparked a fun community-wide effort that breathed new life into the game. But that was a rare bright spot for what has, overall, been a disappointing release for many core Mortal Kombat fans.What now for Mortal Kombat? Parent company Warner Bros. Discovery has indicated that it still believes the gory fighting game franchise has a future. In November, CEO David Zaslav said that on the games side of things, the company plans to double down on just four titles, one of which was Mortal Kombat. Movie adaptation Mortal Kombat 2 is due out later this year.Wesley is Director, News at IGN. Find him on Twitter at @wyp100. You can reach Wesley at wesley_yinpoole@ign.com or confidentially at wyp100@proton.me.
    #confirmed #mortal #kombat #wont #get
    Confirmed: Mortal Kombat 1 Won’t Get Any More DLC Characters or Story Chapters as NetherRealm ‘Needs to Shift Focus to the Next Project’
    Warner Bros. has confirmed what Mortal Kombat 1 fans feared after the recent launch of the Definitive Edition: no new DLC characters or story chapters will be released for the game.Mortal Kombat 1 has sold 5 million copies, with the franchise now up to 100 million. Mortal Kombat 11 became the best-selling game in the franchise by passing Mortal Kombat X's nearly 11 million units sold worldwide soon after launch. By 2022, Mortal Kombat 11 had sold more than 15 million copies worldwide. Clearly, Mortal Kombat 1 has underperformed compared to previous games in the series.In a tweet on the official Mortal Kombat social media account, Warner Bros. acknowledged the disappointment the news will cause players, "but our team at NetherRealm needs to shift focus to the next project in order to make it as great as we possibly can.”Warner Bros. failed to say what this new project is, but current speculation points to Injustice 3, a continuation of NetherRealm’s DC fighting game series.PlayHere’s the statement in full:We are hearing players’ requests for continued game support of Mortal Kombat 1, and, while we will continue to support Mortal Kombat 1 through balance adjustments and fixes, there will not be additional DLC characters or story chapters released from this point on.We understand this will be disappointing for fans, but our team at NetherRealm needs to shift focus to the next project in order to make it as great as we possibly can.March 2025's release of the T-1000 guest character, which came a year-and-a-half after the release of Mortal Kombat 1 itself, now goes down as the game’s final major content drop. For context, in July 2021, NetherRealm announced it had started work on its next projectand, as a result, there would be no further DLC for Mortal Kombat 11. That announcement came two years and three months after the release of the game. Today’s announcement comes one year and eight months after the release of Mortal Kombat 1.Players are already bringing up prior comments from NetherRealm development chief Ed Boon, who had promised fans years of support. Indeed, many are now pointing to a September 2024 tweet from Boon, who at the time moved to reassure fans already concerned that the studio had moved onto its next game by saying: “NetherRealm is still fully committed to supporting Mortal Kombat 1 for a long time to come.”Mortal Kombat 1 enjoyed something of a resurgence in January with the secret fight with Floyd, the pink ninja developer Boon had been teasing for years. That sparked a fun community-wide effort that breathed new life into the game. But that was a rare bright spot for what has, overall, been a disappointing release for many core Mortal Kombat fans.What now for Mortal Kombat? Parent company Warner Bros. Discovery has indicated that it still believes the gory fighting game franchise has a future. In November, CEO David Zaslav said that on the games side of things, the company plans to double down on just four titles, one of which was Mortal Kombat. Movie adaptation Mortal Kombat 2 is due out later this year.Wesley is Director, News at IGN. Find him on Twitter at @wyp100. You can reach Wesley at wesley_yinpoole@ign.com or confidentially at wyp100@proton.me. #confirmed #mortal #kombat #wont #get
    WWW.IGN.COM
    Confirmed: Mortal Kombat 1 Won’t Get Any More DLC Characters or Story Chapters as NetherRealm ‘Needs to Shift Focus to the Next Project’
    Warner Bros. has confirmed what Mortal Kombat 1 fans feared after the recent launch of the Definitive Edition: no new DLC characters or story chapters will be released for the game.Mortal Kombat 1 has sold 5 million copies, with the franchise now up to 100 million. Mortal Kombat 11 became the best-selling game in the franchise by passing Mortal Kombat X's nearly 11 million units sold worldwide soon after launch. By 2022, Mortal Kombat 11 had sold more than 15 million copies worldwide. Clearly, Mortal Kombat 1 has underperformed compared to previous games in the series.In a tweet on the official Mortal Kombat social media account, Warner Bros. acknowledged the disappointment the news will cause players, "but our team at NetherRealm needs to shift focus to the next project in order to make it as great as we possibly can.”Warner Bros. failed to say what this new project is, but current speculation points to Injustice 3, a continuation of NetherRealm’s DC fighting game series.PlayHere’s the statement in full:We are hearing players’ requests for continued game support of Mortal Kombat 1, and, while we will continue to support Mortal Kombat 1 through balance adjustments and fixes, there will not be additional DLC characters or story chapters released from this point on.We understand this will be disappointing for fans, but our team at NetherRealm needs to shift focus to the next project in order to make it as great as we possibly can.March 2025's release of the T-1000 guest character, which came a year-and-a-half after the release of Mortal Kombat 1 itself, now goes down as the game’s final major content drop. For context, in July 2021, NetherRealm announced it had started work on its next project (Mortal Kombat 1) and, as a result, there would be no further DLC for Mortal Kombat 11. That announcement came two years and three months after the release of the game. Today’s announcement comes one year and eight months after the release of Mortal Kombat 1.Players are already bringing up prior comments from NetherRealm development chief Ed Boon, who had promised fans years of support. Indeed, many are now pointing to a September 2024 tweet from Boon, who at the time moved to reassure fans already concerned that the studio had moved onto its next game by saying: “NetherRealm is still fully committed to supporting Mortal Kombat 1 for a long time to come.”Mortal Kombat 1 enjoyed something of a resurgence in January with the secret fight with Floyd, the pink ninja developer Boon had been teasing for years. That sparked a fun community-wide effort that breathed new life into the game. But that was a rare bright spot for what has, overall, been a disappointing release for many core Mortal Kombat fans.What now for Mortal Kombat? Parent company Warner Bros. Discovery has indicated that it still believes the gory fighting game franchise has a future. In November, CEO David Zaslav said that on the games side of things, the company plans to double down on just four titles, one of which was Mortal Kombat. Movie adaptation Mortal Kombat 2 is due out later this year.Wesley is Director, News at IGN. Find him on Twitter at @wyp100. You can reach Wesley at wesley_yinpoole@ign.com or confidentially at wyp100@proton.me.
    0 Comments 0 Shares 0 Reviews
  • Real-time action: Creators make the world a better place at Unity for Humanity Summit 2022

    That’s a wrap on this year’s Unity for Humanity Summit. We’ve pulled together our favorite moments and takeaways in case you weren’t able to make it or just wanted to relive the highlights.During the Summit, we announced that applications for the Unity for Humanity 2023 Grant are open. Submit your social impact project for a share of USD in funding, plus technical support and mentorship.We met so many incredible social impact creators using Unity in innovative ways to drive change. If you have a similar project, the Unity for Humanity Grant is open for applications to help support you in making your vision a reality.Grant recipients will receive a bespoke grant from a pool of USD, plus mentorship and technical support to help bring their project to life. Your project must be currently in production and align with one of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. For application details and criteria, please visit the Unity for Humanity FAQ. Don’t have a prototype ready this year but want to pre-register for next year’s grant? Sign up to be one of the first to hear when the next grant is live.“gave us the freedom to create with so much autonomy.”“Receiving the grant was what made possible for this first chapter of Origen to come off paper and become a reality,” shared Presencias, creators of Origen. “It also gave us the freedom to create with so much autonomy, it allowed us to delve into the artisanal and interdisciplinary part of the project, which was crucial to respect its identity.”Actor and activist Rosario Dawson joined us to share her vision for the future – which she believes is possible thanks to the remarkable potential of technology and the impact of creators.“We used to be all around the fire: the medicine woman, the warrior, the mother, the father, the child, the person who worked with the animals, and the food. Everyone had an equal space around that fire where they came together as a community. And, as industry built up, we started going into that pyramid shape where it was just the few people at the top and all the workers at the bottom,” she shared. “What’s remarkable now, with this technology, is we get to open up that portal, and get that light in our face and be back around the fire again – through our watches and our tablets and our phones.”So why does she have so much faith that technology will change the world? In Dawson’s words,“I know that we’re getting there because this generation is coming in hot. They are looking at the problems that we have perpetuated up until this moment and they are factoring in. They are being so conscious and intentional with what they are making and creating, and that just gives me a lot of hope.”In one session, attendees met students from Spelman College, Urban Arts Partnership, and Generation Pakistan. These remarkable organizations provide STEM education to underserved students, to skill-up more students, provide more career opportunities, and diversify the tech industry.Since its inception, Urban Arts has served more than 250,000 students across 150 New York City public schools. Their mission is to provide students from low-income communities with a high quality education in an industry lacking workforce diversity.Generation is on a mission to transform education-to-employment systems and help prepare, place, and support people into life-changing careers that would otherwise be inaccessible. Unity partners with Generation to run a 3-month training bootcamp in Pakistan, that not only teaches participants Unity skills, but also provides mentorship, employer site visits and support to place them in a career upon graduation.A 2022 graduate of the program, Farwar Bashir, shared, “The course improved my Unity skills, but also focused on our personality and built up our professional skills. It wasn’t just Unity – it was also how to deal with challenges and solutions that we would face in the real-time industry.”“When I came out of the interview room, I had the biggest smile on my face, and I knew in my heart that yes I got the job,” added fellow graduate Humaira Salamat. “I received a call the day after the interview, 'yes you got the job, please come to our office for negotiation of your salary'.”“It wasn’t just Unity – it was also how to deal with challenges and solutions that we would face in the real-time industry.”We heard from a number of creators using Unity to fight climate change and protect the planet. Former Unity for Humanity grant winners shared insights into their projects and gave attendees an update on their progress.For example, Gone to Water is currently in production and has an anticipated release on STEAM VR in February 2023. “Gone to water” is a term that describes the process by which an oil well becomes unproductive and therefore unprofitable, eventually filling with water.According to Cat Ross, designer and researcher for Love Death Design, “We chose to apply forsupport to create this immersive documentary on urban oil extraction and its community health impacts on Tongva Land – in South Los Angeles – because, for those most affected by environmental racism, it is a matter of survival. Los Angeles is considered a microcosm of the world for its rich cultural contributions, but it is also a snapshot of environmental injustices faced by BIPOC and low-income communities throughout the world.”Drop in the Ocean, another grant-winning project, is a 10-minute social VR adventure where audiences hitch a ride on a jellyfish and encounter the mysteries of the deep. Most importantly, participants experience the plastic pollution crisis from the viewpoint of sea life. about this project in a blog from one of the creators.“Through 2023, we will be exploring staging Drop in the Ocean at the most important environmental and climate action conferences and events, as well as supporting Conservation International’s outreach activity,” shared Vision3 Immersive Creator and Producer Adam May.At the “Accessibility Insights for Creators” roundtable we heard from Studio Director of Falling Squirrel Dave Evans, Accessibility Product Manager at Owlchemy Labs Jazmin Cano, and Blind Accessibility Consultant, Gamer, and Developer Lukáš Hosnedl about the importance of creating experiences with accessibility in mind.During this open conversation we listened as experts discussed the future of accessible gaming and how game developers can add features that will ensure their games can be enjoyed by everyone.In the “Create with AR Live” workshop, we were introduced to the latest Unity Learn free online course, Create with AR. This 13-hour, self-paced course will teach you how to create your own ARface filter app.As we unlock the potential of AR apps, these skills are increasingly growing in demand, so now is a great time to add AR to your Unity skill set.What was your favorite part of this year’s Summit? To keep up with Unity for Humanity year round, visit the program website and sign up to our mailing list for social impact creator news and inspiration.
    #realtime #action #creators #make #world
    Real-time action: Creators make the world a better place at Unity for Humanity Summit 2022
    That’s a wrap on this year’s Unity for Humanity Summit. We’ve pulled together our favorite moments and takeaways in case you weren’t able to make it or just wanted to relive the highlights.During the Summit, we announced that applications for the Unity for Humanity 2023 Grant are open. Submit your social impact project for a share of USD in funding, plus technical support and mentorship.We met so many incredible social impact creators using Unity in innovative ways to drive change. If you have a similar project, the Unity for Humanity Grant is open for applications to help support you in making your vision a reality.Grant recipients will receive a bespoke grant from a pool of USD, plus mentorship and technical support to help bring their project to life. Your project must be currently in production and align with one of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. For application details and criteria, please visit the Unity for Humanity FAQ. Don’t have a prototype ready this year but want to pre-register for next year’s grant? Sign up to be one of the first to hear when the next grant is live.“gave us the freedom to create with so much autonomy.”“Receiving the grant was what made possible for this first chapter of Origen to come off paper and become a reality,” shared Presencias, creators of Origen. “It also gave us the freedom to create with so much autonomy, it allowed us to delve into the artisanal and interdisciplinary part of the project, which was crucial to respect its identity.”Actor and activist Rosario Dawson joined us to share her vision for the future – which she believes is possible thanks to the remarkable potential of technology and the impact of creators.“We used to be all around the fire: the medicine woman, the warrior, the mother, the father, the child, the person who worked with the animals, and the food. Everyone had an equal space around that fire where they came together as a community. And, as industry built up, we started going into that pyramid shape where it was just the few people at the top and all the workers at the bottom,” she shared. “What’s remarkable now, with this technology, is we get to open up that portal, and get that light in our face and be back around the fire again – through our watches and our tablets and our phones.”So why does she have so much faith that technology will change the world? In Dawson’s words,“I know that we’re getting there because this generation is coming in hot. They are looking at the problems that we have perpetuated up until this moment and they are factoring in. They are being so conscious and intentional with what they are making and creating, and that just gives me a lot of hope.”In one session, attendees met students from Spelman College, Urban Arts Partnership, and Generation Pakistan. These remarkable organizations provide STEM education to underserved students, to skill-up more students, provide more career opportunities, and diversify the tech industry.Since its inception, Urban Arts has served more than 250,000 students across 150 New York City public schools. Their mission is to provide students from low-income communities with a high quality education in an industry lacking workforce diversity.Generation is on a mission to transform education-to-employment systems and help prepare, place, and support people into life-changing careers that would otherwise be inaccessible. Unity partners with Generation to run a 3-month training bootcamp in Pakistan, that not only teaches participants Unity skills, but also provides mentorship, employer site visits and support to place them in a career upon graduation.A 2022 graduate of the program, Farwar Bashir, shared, “The course improved my Unity skills, but also focused on our personality and built up our professional skills. It wasn’t just Unity – it was also how to deal with challenges and solutions that we would face in the real-time industry.”“When I came out of the interview room, I had the biggest smile on my face, and I knew in my heart that yes I got the job,” added fellow graduate Humaira Salamat. “I received a call the day after the interview, 'yes you got the job, please come to our office for negotiation of your salary'.”“It wasn’t just Unity – it was also how to deal with challenges and solutions that we would face in the real-time industry.”We heard from a number of creators using Unity to fight climate change and protect the planet. Former Unity for Humanity grant winners shared insights into their projects and gave attendees an update on their progress.For example, Gone to Water is currently in production and has an anticipated release on STEAM VR in February 2023. “Gone to water” is a term that describes the process by which an oil well becomes unproductive and therefore unprofitable, eventually filling with water.According to Cat Ross, designer and researcher for Love Death Design, “We chose to apply forsupport to create this immersive documentary on urban oil extraction and its community health impacts on Tongva Land – in South Los Angeles – because, for those most affected by environmental racism, it is a matter of survival. Los Angeles is considered a microcosm of the world for its rich cultural contributions, but it is also a snapshot of environmental injustices faced by BIPOC and low-income communities throughout the world.”Drop in the Ocean, another grant-winning project, is a 10-minute social VR adventure where audiences hitch a ride on a jellyfish and encounter the mysteries of the deep. Most importantly, participants experience the plastic pollution crisis from the viewpoint of sea life. about this project in a blog from one of the creators.“Through 2023, we will be exploring staging Drop in the Ocean at the most important environmental and climate action conferences and events, as well as supporting Conservation International’s outreach activity,” shared Vision3 Immersive Creator and Producer Adam May.At the “Accessibility Insights for Creators” roundtable we heard from Studio Director of Falling Squirrel Dave Evans, Accessibility Product Manager at Owlchemy Labs Jazmin Cano, and Blind Accessibility Consultant, Gamer, and Developer Lukáš Hosnedl about the importance of creating experiences with accessibility in mind.During this open conversation we listened as experts discussed the future of accessible gaming and how game developers can add features that will ensure their games can be enjoyed by everyone.In the “Create with AR Live” workshop, we were introduced to the latest Unity Learn free online course, Create with AR. This 13-hour, self-paced course will teach you how to create your own ARface filter app.As we unlock the potential of AR apps, these skills are increasingly growing in demand, so now is a great time to add AR to your Unity skill set.What was your favorite part of this year’s Summit? To keep up with Unity for Humanity year round, visit the program website and sign up to our mailing list for social impact creator news and inspiration. #realtime #action #creators #make #world
    UNITY.COM
    Real-time action: Creators make the world a better place at Unity for Humanity Summit 2022
    That’s a wrap on this year’s Unity for Humanity Summit. We’ve pulled together our favorite moments and takeaways in case you weren’t able to make it or just wanted to relive the highlights.During the Summit, we announced that applications for the Unity for Humanity 2023 Grant are open. Submit your social impact project for a share of $500,000 USD in funding, plus technical support and mentorship.We met so many incredible social impact creators using Unity in innovative ways to drive change. If you have a similar project, the Unity for Humanity Grant is open for applications to help support you in making your vision a reality.Grant recipients will receive a bespoke grant from a pool of $500,000 USD, plus mentorship and technical support to help bring their project to life. Your project must be currently in production and align with one of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. For application details and criteria, please visit the Unity for Humanity FAQ. Don’t have a prototype ready this year but want to pre-register for next year’s grant? Sign up to be one of the first to hear when the next grant is live.“[Receiving the grant] gave us the freedom to create with so much autonomy.”“Receiving the grant was what made possible for this first chapter of Origen to come off paper and become a reality,” shared Presencias, creators of Origen. “It also gave us the freedom to create with so much autonomy, it allowed us to delve into the artisanal and interdisciplinary part of the project, which was crucial to respect its identity.”Actor and activist Rosario Dawson joined us to share her vision for the future – which she believes is possible thanks to the remarkable potential of technology and the impact of creators.“We used to be all around the fire: the medicine woman, the warrior, the mother, the father, the child, the person who worked with the animals, and the food. Everyone had an equal space around that fire where they came together as a community. And, as industry built up, we started going into that pyramid shape where it was just the few people at the top and all the workers at the bottom,” she shared. “What’s remarkable now, with this technology, is we get to open up that portal, and get that light in our face and be back around the fire again – through our watches and our tablets and our phones.”So why does she have so much faith that technology will change the world? In Dawson’s words,“I know that we’re getting there because this generation is coming in hot. They are looking at the problems that we have perpetuated up until this moment and they are factoring in. They are being so conscious and intentional with what they are making and creating, and that just gives me a lot of hope.”In one session, attendees met students from Spelman College, Urban Arts Partnership, and Generation Pakistan. These remarkable organizations provide STEM education to underserved students, to skill-up more students, provide more career opportunities, and diversify the tech industry.Since its inception, Urban Arts has served more than 250,000 students across 150 New York City public schools. Their mission is to provide students from low-income communities with a high quality education in an industry lacking workforce diversity.Generation is on a mission to transform education-to-employment systems and help prepare, place, and support people into life-changing careers that would otherwise be inaccessible. Unity partners with Generation to run a 3-month training bootcamp in Pakistan, that not only teaches participants Unity skills, but also provides mentorship, employer site visits and support to place them in a career upon graduation.A 2022 graduate of the program, Farwar Bashir, shared, “The course improved my Unity skills, but also focused on our personality and built up our professional skills. It wasn’t just Unity – it was also how to deal with challenges and solutions that we would face in the real-time industry.”“When I came out of the interview room, I had the biggest smile on my face, and I knew in my heart that yes I got the job,” added fellow graduate Humaira Salamat. “I received a call the day after the interview, 'yes you got the job, please come to our office for negotiation of your salary'.”“It wasn’t just Unity – it was also how to deal with challenges and solutions that we would face in the real-time industry.”We heard from a number of creators using Unity to fight climate change and protect the planet. Former Unity for Humanity grant winners shared insights into their projects and gave attendees an update on their progress.For example, Gone to Water is currently in production and has an anticipated release on STEAM VR in February 2023. “Gone to water” is a term that describes the process by which an oil well becomes unproductive and therefore unprofitable, eventually filling with water.According to Cat Ross, designer and researcher for Love Death Design, “We chose to apply for [Unity] support to create this immersive documentary on urban oil extraction and its community health impacts on Tongva Land – in South Los Angeles – because, for those most affected by environmental racism, it is a matter of survival. Los Angeles is considered a microcosm of the world for its rich cultural contributions, but it is also a snapshot of environmental injustices faced by BIPOC and low-income communities throughout the world.”Drop in the Ocean, another grant-winning project, is a 10-minute social VR adventure where audiences hitch a ride on a jellyfish and encounter the mysteries of the deep. Most importantly, participants experience the plastic pollution crisis from the viewpoint of sea life. Read more about this project in a blog from one of the creators.“Through 2023, we will be exploring staging Drop in the Ocean at the most important environmental and climate action conferences and events, as well as supporting Conservation International’s outreach activity,” shared Vision3 Immersive Creator and Producer Adam May.At the “Accessibility Insights for Creators” roundtable we heard from Studio Director of Falling Squirrel Dave Evans, Accessibility Product Manager at Owlchemy Labs Jazmin Cano, and Blind Accessibility Consultant, Gamer, and Developer Lukáš Hosnedl about the importance of creating experiences with accessibility in mind.During this open conversation we listened as experts discussed the future of accessible gaming and how game developers can add features that will ensure their games can be enjoyed by everyone.In the “Create with AR Live” workshop, we were introduced to the latest Unity Learn free online course, Create with AR. This 13-hour, self-paced course will teach you how to create your own AR (augmented reality) face filter app.As we unlock the potential of AR apps, these skills are increasingly growing in demand, so now is a great time to add AR to your Unity skill set.What was your favorite part of this year’s Summit? To keep up with Unity for Humanity year round, visit the program website and sign up to our mailing list for social impact creator news and inspiration.
    0 Comments 0 Shares 0 Reviews
  • Essex Police discloses ‘incoherent’ facial recognition assessment

    Essex Police has not properly considered the potentially discriminatory impacts of its live facial recognitionuse, according to documents obtained by Big Brother Watch and shared with Computer Weekly.
    While the force claims in an equality impact assessmentthat “Essex Police has carefully considered issues regarding bias and algorithmic injustice”, privacy campaign group Big Brother Watch said the document – obtained under Freedom of Informationrules – shows it has likely failed to fulfil its public sector equality dutyto consider how its policies and practices could be discriminatory.
    The campaigners highlighted how the force is relying on false comparisons to other algorithms and “parroting misleading claims” from the supplier about the LFR system’s lack of bias.
    For example, Essex Police said that when deploying LFR, it will set the system threshold “at 0.6 or above, as this is the level whereby equitability of the rate of false positive identification across all demographics is achieved”.
    However, this figure is based on the National Physical Laboratory’stesting of NEC’s Neoface V4 LFR algorithm deployed by the Metropolitan Police and South Wales Police, which Essex Police does not use.
    Instead, Essex Police has opted to use an algorithm developed by Israeli biometrics firm Corsight, whose chief privacy officer, Tony Porter, was formerly the UK’s surveillance camera commissioner until January 2021.
    Highlighting testing of the Corsight_003 algorithm conducted in June 2022 by the US National Institute of Standards and Technology, the EIA also claims it has “a bias differential FMRof 0.0006 overall, the lowest of any tested within NIST at the time of writing, according to the supplier”.
    However, looking at the NIST website, where all of the testing data is publicly shared, there is no information to support the figure cited by Corsight, or its claim to essentially have the least biased algorithm available.
    A separate FoI response to Big Brother Watch confirmed that, as of 16 January 2025, Essex Police had not conducted any “formal or detailed” testing of the system itself, or otherwise commissioned a third party to do so.

    Essex Police's lax approach to assessing the dangers of a controversial and dangerous new form of surveillance has put the rights of thousands at risk

    Jake Hurfurt, Big Brother Watch

    “Looking at Essex Police’s EIA, we are concerned about the force’s compliance with its duties under equality law, as the reliance on shaky evidence seriously undermines the force’s claims about how the public will be protected against algorithmic bias,” said Jake Hurfurt, head of research and investigations at Big Brother Watch.
    “Essex Police’s lax approach to assessing the dangers of a controversial and dangerous new form of surveillance has put the rights of thousands at risk. This slapdash scrutiny of their intrusive facial recognition system sets a worrying precedent.
    “Facial recognition is notorious for misidentifying women and people of colour, and Essex Police’s willingness to deploy the technology without testing it themselves raises serious questions about the force’s compliance with equalities law. Essex Police should immediately stop their use of facial recognition surveillance.”
    The need for UK police forces deploying facial recognition to consider how their use of the technology could be discriminatory was highlighted by a legal challenge brought against South Wales Police by Cardiff resident Ed Bridges.
    In August 2020, the UK Court of Appeal ruled that the use of LFR by the force was unlawful because the privacy violations it entailed were “not in accordance” with legally permissible restrictions on Bridges’ Article 8 privacy rights; it did not conduct an appropriate data protection impact assessment; and it did not comply with its PSED to consider how its policies and practices could be discriminatory.
    The judgment specifically found that the PSED is a “duty of process and not outcome”, and requires public bodies to take reasonable steps “to make enquiries about what may not yet be known to a public authority about the potential impact of a proposed decision or policy on people with the relevant characteristics, in particular for present purposes race and sex”.
    Big Brother Watch said equality assessments must rely on “sufficient quality evidence” to back up the claims being made and ultimately satisfy the PSED, but that the documents obtained do not demonstrate the force has had “due regard” for equalities.
    Academic Karen Yeung, an interdisciplinary professor at Birmingham Law School and School of Computer Science, told Computer Weekly that, in her view, the EIA is “clearly inadequate”.
    She also criticised the document for being “incoherent”, failing to look at the systemic equalities impacts of the technology, and relying exclusively on testing of entirely different software algorithms used by other police forces trained on different populations: “This does not, in my view, fulfil the requirements of the public sector equality duty. It is a document produced from a cut-and-paste exercise from the largely irrelevant material produced by others.”

    Computer Weekly contacted Essex Police about every aspect of the story.
    “We take our responsibility to meet our public sector equality duty very seriously, and there is a contractual requirement on our LFR partner to ensure sufficient testing has taken place to ensure the software meets the specification and performance outlined in the tender process,” said a spokesperson.
    “There have been more than 50 deployments of our LFR vans, scanning 1.7 million faces, which have led to more than 200 positive alerts, and nearly 70 arrests.
    “To date, there has been one false positive, which, when reviewed, was established to be as a result of a low-quality photo uploaded onto the watchlist and not the result of bias issues with the technology. This did not lead to an arrest or any other unlawful action because of the procedures in place to verify all alerts. This issue has been resolved to ensure it does not occur again.”
    The spokesperson added that the force is also committed to carrying out further assessment of the software and algorithms, with the evaluation of deployments and results being subject to an independent academic review.
    “As part of this, we have carried out, and continue to do so, testing and evaluation activity in conjunction with the University of Cambridge. The NPL have recently agreed to carry out further independent testing, which will take place over the summer. The company have also achieved an ISO 42001 certification,” said the spokesperson. “We are also liaising with other technical specialists regarding further testing and evaluation activity.”
    However, the force did not comment on why it was relying on the testing of a completely different algorithm in its EIA, or why it had not conducted or otherwise commissioned its own testing before operationally deploying the technology in the field.
    Computer Weekly followed up Essex Police for clarification on when the testing with Cambridge began, as this is not mentioned in the EIA, but received no response by time of publication.

    Although Essex Police and Corsight claim the facial recognition algorithm in use has “a bias differential FMR of 0.0006 overall, the lowest of any tested within NIST at the time of writing”, there is no publicly available data on NIST’s website to support this claim.
    Drilling down into the demographic split of false positive rates shows, for example, that there is a factor of 100 more false positives in West African women than for Eastern European men.
    While this is an improvement on the previous two algorithms submitted for testing by Corsight, other publicly available data held by NIST undermines Essex Police’s claim in the EIA that the “algorithm is identified by NIST as having the lowest bias variance between demographics”.
    Looking at another metric held by NIST – FMR Max/Min, which refers to the ratio between demographic groups that give the most and least false positives – it essentially represents how inequitable the error rates are across different age groups, sexes and ethnicities.
    In this instance, smaller values represent better performance, with the ratio being an estimate of how many times more false positives can be expected in one group over another.
    According to the NIST webpage for “demographic effects” in facial recognition algorithms, the Corsight algorithm has an FMR Max/Min of 113, meaning there are at least 21 algorithms that display less bias. For comparison, the least biased algorithm according to NIST results belongs to a firm called Idemia, which has an FMR Max/Min of 5.
    However, like Corsight, the highest false match rate for Idemia’s algorithm was for older West African women. Computer Weekly understands this is a common problem with many of the facial recognition algorithms NIST tests because this group is not typically well-represented in the underlying training data of most firms.
    Computer Weekly also confirmed with NIST that the FMR metric cited by Corsight relates to one-to-one verification, rather than the one-to-many situation police forces would be using it in.
    This is a key distinction, because if 1,000 people are enrolled in a facial recognition system that was built on one-to-one verification, then the false positive rate will be 1,000 times larger than the metrics held by NIST for FMR testing.
    “If a developer implements 1:Nsearch as N 1:1 comparisons, then the likelihood of a false positive from a search is expected to be proportional to the false match for the 1:1 comparison algorithm,” said NIST scientist Patrick Grother. “Some developers do not implement 1:N search that way.”
    Commenting on the contrast between this testing methodology and the practical scenarios the tech will be deployed in, Birmingham Law School’s Yeung said one-to-one is for use in stable environments to provide admission to spaces with limited access, such as airport passport gates, where only one person’s biometric data is scrutinised at a time.
    “One-to-many is entirely different – it’s an entirely different process, an entirely different technical challenge, and therefore cannot typically achieve equivalent levels of accuracy,” she said.
    Computer Weekly contacted Corsight about every aspect of the story related to its algorithmic testing, including where the “0.0006” figure is drawn from and its various claims to have the “least biased” algorithm.
    “The facts presented in your article are partial, manipulated and misleading,” said a company spokesperson. “Corsight AI’s algorithms have been tested by numerous entities, including NIST, and have been proven to be the least biased in the industry in terms of gender and ethnicity. This is a major factor for our commercial and government clients.”
    However, Corsight was either unable or unwilling to specify which facts are “partial, manipulated or misleading” in response to Computer Weekly’s request for clarification.
    Computer Weekly also contacted Corsight about whether it has done any further testing by running N one-to-one comparisons, and whether it has changed the system’s threshold settings for detecting a match to suppress the false positive rate, but received no response on these points.
    While most facial recognition developers submit their algorithms to NIST for testing on an annual or bi-annual basis, Corsight last submitted an algorithm in mid-2022. Computer Weekly contacted Corsight about why this was the case, given that most algorithms in NIST testing show continuous improvement with each submission, but again received no response on this point.

    The Essex Police EIA also highlights testing of the Corsight algorithm conducted in 2022 by the Department of Homeland Security, claiming it demonstrated “Corsight’s capability to perform equally across all demographics”.
    However, Big Brother Watch’s Hurfurt highlighted that the DHS study focused on bias in the context of true positives, and did not assess the algorithm for inequality in false positives.
    This is a key distinction for the testing of LFR systems, as false negatives where the system fails to recognise someone will likely not lead to incorrect stops or other adverse effects, whereas a false positive where the system confuses two people could have more severe consequences for an individual.
    The DHS itself also publicly came out against Corsight’s representation of the test results, after the firm claimed in subsequent marketing materials that “no matter how you look at it, Corsight is ranked #1. #1 in overall recognition, #1 in dark skin, #1 in Asian, #1 in female”.
    Speaking with IVPM in August 2023, DHS said: “We do not know what this claim, being ‘#1’ is referring to.” The department added that the rules of the testing required companies to get their claims cleared through DHS to ensure they do not misrepresent their performance.
    In its breakdown of the test results, IVPM noted that systems of multiple other manufacturers achieved similar results to Corsight. The company did not respond to a request for comment about the DHS testing.
    Computer Weekly contacted Essex Police about all the issues raised around Corsight testing, but received no direct response to these points from the force.

    While Essex Police claimed in its EIA that it “also sought advice from their own independent Data and Digital Ethics Committee in relation to their use of LFR generally”, meeting minutes obtained via FoI rules show that key impacts had not been considered.
    For example, when one panel member questioned how LFR deployments could affect community events or protests, and how the force could avoid the technology having a “chilling presence”, the officer presentsaid “that’s a pretty good point, actually”, adding that he had “made a note” to consider this going forward.
    The EIA itself also makes no mention of community events or protests, and does not specify how different groups could be affected by these different deployment scenarios.
    Elsewhere in the EIA, Essex Police claims that the system is likely to have minimal impact across age, gender and race, citing the 0.6 threshold setting, as well as NIST and DHS testing, as ways of achieving “equitability” across different demographics. Again, this threshold setting relates to a completely different system used by the Met and South Wales Police.
    For each protected characteristic, the EIA has a section on “mitigating” actions that can be taken to reduce adverse impacts.
    While the “ethnicity” section again highlights the National Physical Laboratory’s testing of a completely different algorithm, most other sections note that “any watchlist created will be done so as close to the deployment as possible, therefore hoping to ensure the most accurate and up-to-date images of persons being added are uploaded”.
    However, Yeung noted that the EIA makes no mention of the specific watchlist creation criteria beyond high-level “categories of images” that can be included, and the claimed equality impacts of that process.
    For example, it does not consider how people from certain ethnic minority or religious backgrounds could be disproportionally impacted as a result of their over-representation in police databases, or the issue of unlawful custody image retention whereby the Home Office is continuing to hold millions of custody images illegally in the Police National Database.
    While the ethics panel meeting minutes offer greater insight into how Essex Police is approaching watchlist creation, the custody image retention issue was also not mentioned.
    Responding to Computer Weekly’s questions about the meeting minutes and the lack of scrutiny of key issues related to UK police LFR deployments, an Essex Police spokesperson said: “Our polices and processes around the use of live facial recognition have been carefully scrutinised through a thorough ethics panel.”

    Instead, the officer present explained how watchlists and deployments are decided based on the “intelligence case”, which then has to be justified as both proportionate and necessary.
    On the “Southend intelligence case”, the officer said deploying in the town centre would be permissible because “that’s where the most footfall is, the most opportunity to locate outstanding suspects”.
    They added: “The watchlisthas to be justified by the key elements, the policing purpose. Everything has to be proportionate and strictly necessary to be able to deploy… If the commander in Southend said, ‘I want to put everyone that’s wanted for shoplifting across Essex on the watchlist for Southend’, the answer would be no, because is it necessary? Probably not. Is it proportionate? I don’t think it is. Would it be proportionate to have individuals who are outstanding for shoplifting from the Southend area? Yes, because it’s local.”
    However, the officer also said that, on most occasions, the systems would be deployed to catch “our most serious offenders”, as this would be easier to justify from a public perception point of view. They added that, during the summer, it would be easier to justify deployments because of the seasonal population increase in Southend.
    “We know that there is a general increase in violence during those months. So, we don’t need to go down to the weeds to specifically look at grievous bodily harmor murder or rape, because they’re not necessarily fuelled by a spike in terms of seasonality, for example,” they said.
    “However, we know that because the general population increases significantly, the level of violence increases significantly, which would justify that I could put those serious crimes on that watchlist.”
    Commenting on the responses given to the ethics panel, Yeung said they “failed entirely to provide me with confidence that their proposed deployments will have the required legal safeguards in place”.
    According to the Court of Appeal judgment against South Wales Police in the Bridges case, the force’s facial recognition policy contained “fundamental deficiencies” in relation to the “who” and “where” question of LFR.
    “In relation to both of those questions, too much discretion is currently left to individual police officers,” it said. “It is not clear who can be placed on the watchlist, nor is it clear that there are any criteria for determining where AFRcan be deployed.”
    Yeung added: “The same applies to these responses of Essex Police force, failing to adequately answer the ‘who’ and ‘where’ questions concerning their proposed facial recognition deployments.
    “Worse still, the court stated that a police force’s local policies can only satisfy the requirements that the privacy interventions arising from use of LFR are ‘prescribed by law’ if they are published. The documents were obtained by Big Brother Watch through freedom of information requests, strongly suggesting that these even these basic legal safeguards are not being met.”
    Yeung added that South Wales Police’s use of the technology was found to be unlawful in the Bridges case because there was excessive discretion left in the hands of individual police officers, allowing undue opportunities for arbitrary decision-making and abuses of power.

    Every decision ... must be specified in advance, documented and justified in accordance with the tests of proportionality and necessity. I don’t see any of that happening

    Karen Yeung, Birmingham Law School

    “Every decision – where you will deploy, whose face is placed on the watchlist and why, and the duration of deployment – must be specified in advance, documented and justified in accordance with the tests of proportionality and necessity,” she said.
    “I don’t see any of that happening. There are simply vague claims that ‘we’ll make sure we apply the legal test’, but how? They just offer unsubstantiated promises that ‘we will abide by the law’ without specifying how they will do so by meeting specific legal requirements.”
    Yeung further added these documents indicate that the police force is not looking for specific people wanted for serious crimes, but setting up dragnets for a wide variety of ‘wanted’ individuals, including those wanted for non-serious crimes such as shoplifting.
    “There are many platitudes about being ethical, but there’s nothing concrete indicating how they propose to meet the legal tests of necessity and proportionality,” she said.
    “In liberal democratic societies, every single decision about an individual by the police made without their consent must be justified in accordance with law. That means that the police must be able to justify and defend the reasons why every single person whose face is uploaded to the facial recognition watchlist meets the legal test, based on their specific operational purpose.”
    Yeung concluded that, assuming they can do this, police must also consider the equality impacts of their actions, and how different groups are likely to be affected by their practical deployments: “I don’t see any of that.”
    In response to the concerns raised around watchlist creation, proportionality and necessity, an Essex Police spokesperson said: “The watchlists for each deployment are created to identify specific people wanted for specific crimes and to enforce orders. To date, we have focused on the types of offences which cause the most harm to our communities, including our hardworking businesses.
    “This includes violent crime, drugs, sexual offences and thefts from shops. As a result of our deployments, we have arrested people wanted in connection with attempted murder investigations, high-risk domestic abuse cases, GBH, sexual assault, drug supply and aggravated burglary offences. We have also been able to progress investigations and move closer to securing justice for victims.”

    about police data and technology

    Metropolitan Police to deploy permanent facial recognition tech in Croydon: The Met is set to deploy permanent live facial recognition cameras on street furniture in Croydon from summer 2025, but local councillors say the decision – which has taken place with no community input – will further contribute the over-policing of Black communities.
    UK MoJ crime prediction algorithms raise serious concerns: The Ministry of Justice is using one algorithm to predict people’s risk of reoffending and another to predict who will commit murder, but critics say the profiling in these systems raises ‘serious concerns’ over racism, classism and data inaccuracies.
    UK law enforcement data adequacy at risk: The UK government says reforms to police data protection rules will help to simplify law enforcement data processing, but critics argue the changes will lower protection to the point where the UK risks losing its European data adequacy.
    #essex #police #discloses #incoherent #facial
    Essex Police discloses ‘incoherent’ facial recognition assessment
    Essex Police has not properly considered the potentially discriminatory impacts of its live facial recognitionuse, according to documents obtained by Big Brother Watch and shared with Computer Weekly. While the force claims in an equality impact assessmentthat “Essex Police has carefully considered issues regarding bias and algorithmic injustice”, privacy campaign group Big Brother Watch said the document – obtained under Freedom of Informationrules – shows it has likely failed to fulfil its public sector equality dutyto consider how its policies and practices could be discriminatory. The campaigners highlighted how the force is relying on false comparisons to other algorithms and “parroting misleading claims” from the supplier about the LFR system’s lack of bias. For example, Essex Police said that when deploying LFR, it will set the system threshold “at 0.6 or above, as this is the level whereby equitability of the rate of false positive identification across all demographics is achieved”. However, this figure is based on the National Physical Laboratory’stesting of NEC’s Neoface V4 LFR algorithm deployed by the Metropolitan Police and South Wales Police, which Essex Police does not use. Instead, Essex Police has opted to use an algorithm developed by Israeli biometrics firm Corsight, whose chief privacy officer, Tony Porter, was formerly the UK’s surveillance camera commissioner until January 2021. Highlighting testing of the Corsight_003 algorithm conducted in June 2022 by the US National Institute of Standards and Technology, the EIA also claims it has “a bias differential FMRof 0.0006 overall, the lowest of any tested within NIST at the time of writing, according to the supplier”. However, looking at the NIST website, where all of the testing data is publicly shared, there is no information to support the figure cited by Corsight, or its claim to essentially have the least biased algorithm available. A separate FoI response to Big Brother Watch confirmed that, as of 16 January 2025, Essex Police had not conducted any “formal or detailed” testing of the system itself, or otherwise commissioned a third party to do so. Essex Police's lax approach to assessing the dangers of a controversial and dangerous new form of surveillance has put the rights of thousands at risk Jake Hurfurt, Big Brother Watch “Looking at Essex Police’s EIA, we are concerned about the force’s compliance with its duties under equality law, as the reliance on shaky evidence seriously undermines the force’s claims about how the public will be protected against algorithmic bias,” said Jake Hurfurt, head of research and investigations at Big Brother Watch. “Essex Police’s lax approach to assessing the dangers of a controversial and dangerous new form of surveillance has put the rights of thousands at risk. This slapdash scrutiny of their intrusive facial recognition system sets a worrying precedent. “Facial recognition is notorious for misidentifying women and people of colour, and Essex Police’s willingness to deploy the technology without testing it themselves raises serious questions about the force’s compliance with equalities law. Essex Police should immediately stop their use of facial recognition surveillance.” The need for UK police forces deploying facial recognition to consider how their use of the technology could be discriminatory was highlighted by a legal challenge brought against South Wales Police by Cardiff resident Ed Bridges. In August 2020, the UK Court of Appeal ruled that the use of LFR by the force was unlawful because the privacy violations it entailed were “not in accordance” with legally permissible restrictions on Bridges’ Article 8 privacy rights; it did not conduct an appropriate data protection impact assessment; and it did not comply with its PSED to consider how its policies and practices could be discriminatory. The judgment specifically found that the PSED is a “duty of process and not outcome”, and requires public bodies to take reasonable steps “to make enquiries about what may not yet be known to a public authority about the potential impact of a proposed decision or policy on people with the relevant characteristics, in particular for present purposes race and sex”. Big Brother Watch said equality assessments must rely on “sufficient quality evidence” to back up the claims being made and ultimately satisfy the PSED, but that the documents obtained do not demonstrate the force has had “due regard” for equalities. Academic Karen Yeung, an interdisciplinary professor at Birmingham Law School and School of Computer Science, told Computer Weekly that, in her view, the EIA is “clearly inadequate”. She also criticised the document for being “incoherent”, failing to look at the systemic equalities impacts of the technology, and relying exclusively on testing of entirely different software algorithms used by other police forces trained on different populations: “This does not, in my view, fulfil the requirements of the public sector equality duty. It is a document produced from a cut-and-paste exercise from the largely irrelevant material produced by others.” Computer Weekly contacted Essex Police about every aspect of the story. “We take our responsibility to meet our public sector equality duty very seriously, and there is a contractual requirement on our LFR partner to ensure sufficient testing has taken place to ensure the software meets the specification and performance outlined in the tender process,” said a spokesperson. “There have been more than 50 deployments of our LFR vans, scanning 1.7 million faces, which have led to more than 200 positive alerts, and nearly 70 arrests. “To date, there has been one false positive, which, when reviewed, was established to be as a result of a low-quality photo uploaded onto the watchlist and not the result of bias issues with the technology. This did not lead to an arrest or any other unlawful action because of the procedures in place to verify all alerts. This issue has been resolved to ensure it does not occur again.” The spokesperson added that the force is also committed to carrying out further assessment of the software and algorithms, with the evaluation of deployments and results being subject to an independent academic review. “As part of this, we have carried out, and continue to do so, testing and evaluation activity in conjunction with the University of Cambridge. The NPL have recently agreed to carry out further independent testing, which will take place over the summer. The company have also achieved an ISO 42001 certification,” said the spokesperson. “We are also liaising with other technical specialists regarding further testing and evaluation activity.” However, the force did not comment on why it was relying on the testing of a completely different algorithm in its EIA, or why it had not conducted or otherwise commissioned its own testing before operationally deploying the technology in the field. Computer Weekly followed up Essex Police for clarification on when the testing with Cambridge began, as this is not mentioned in the EIA, but received no response by time of publication. Although Essex Police and Corsight claim the facial recognition algorithm in use has “a bias differential FMR of 0.0006 overall, the lowest of any tested within NIST at the time of writing”, there is no publicly available data on NIST’s website to support this claim. Drilling down into the demographic split of false positive rates shows, for example, that there is a factor of 100 more false positives in West African women than for Eastern European men. While this is an improvement on the previous two algorithms submitted for testing by Corsight, other publicly available data held by NIST undermines Essex Police’s claim in the EIA that the “algorithm is identified by NIST as having the lowest bias variance between demographics”. Looking at another metric held by NIST – FMR Max/Min, which refers to the ratio between demographic groups that give the most and least false positives – it essentially represents how inequitable the error rates are across different age groups, sexes and ethnicities. In this instance, smaller values represent better performance, with the ratio being an estimate of how many times more false positives can be expected in one group over another. According to the NIST webpage for “demographic effects” in facial recognition algorithms, the Corsight algorithm has an FMR Max/Min of 113, meaning there are at least 21 algorithms that display less bias. For comparison, the least biased algorithm according to NIST results belongs to a firm called Idemia, which has an FMR Max/Min of 5. However, like Corsight, the highest false match rate for Idemia’s algorithm was for older West African women. Computer Weekly understands this is a common problem with many of the facial recognition algorithms NIST tests because this group is not typically well-represented in the underlying training data of most firms. Computer Weekly also confirmed with NIST that the FMR metric cited by Corsight relates to one-to-one verification, rather than the one-to-many situation police forces would be using it in. This is a key distinction, because if 1,000 people are enrolled in a facial recognition system that was built on one-to-one verification, then the false positive rate will be 1,000 times larger than the metrics held by NIST for FMR testing. “If a developer implements 1:Nsearch as N 1:1 comparisons, then the likelihood of a false positive from a search is expected to be proportional to the false match for the 1:1 comparison algorithm,” said NIST scientist Patrick Grother. “Some developers do not implement 1:N search that way.” Commenting on the contrast between this testing methodology and the practical scenarios the tech will be deployed in, Birmingham Law School’s Yeung said one-to-one is for use in stable environments to provide admission to spaces with limited access, such as airport passport gates, where only one person’s biometric data is scrutinised at a time. “One-to-many is entirely different – it’s an entirely different process, an entirely different technical challenge, and therefore cannot typically achieve equivalent levels of accuracy,” she said. Computer Weekly contacted Corsight about every aspect of the story related to its algorithmic testing, including where the “0.0006” figure is drawn from and its various claims to have the “least biased” algorithm. “The facts presented in your article are partial, manipulated and misleading,” said a company spokesperson. “Corsight AI’s algorithms have been tested by numerous entities, including NIST, and have been proven to be the least biased in the industry in terms of gender and ethnicity. This is a major factor for our commercial and government clients.” However, Corsight was either unable or unwilling to specify which facts are “partial, manipulated or misleading” in response to Computer Weekly’s request for clarification. Computer Weekly also contacted Corsight about whether it has done any further testing by running N one-to-one comparisons, and whether it has changed the system’s threshold settings for detecting a match to suppress the false positive rate, but received no response on these points. While most facial recognition developers submit their algorithms to NIST for testing on an annual or bi-annual basis, Corsight last submitted an algorithm in mid-2022. Computer Weekly contacted Corsight about why this was the case, given that most algorithms in NIST testing show continuous improvement with each submission, but again received no response on this point. The Essex Police EIA also highlights testing of the Corsight algorithm conducted in 2022 by the Department of Homeland Security, claiming it demonstrated “Corsight’s capability to perform equally across all demographics”. However, Big Brother Watch’s Hurfurt highlighted that the DHS study focused on bias in the context of true positives, and did not assess the algorithm for inequality in false positives. This is a key distinction for the testing of LFR systems, as false negatives where the system fails to recognise someone will likely not lead to incorrect stops or other adverse effects, whereas a false positive where the system confuses two people could have more severe consequences for an individual. The DHS itself also publicly came out against Corsight’s representation of the test results, after the firm claimed in subsequent marketing materials that “no matter how you look at it, Corsight is ranked #1. #1 in overall recognition, #1 in dark skin, #1 in Asian, #1 in female”. Speaking with IVPM in August 2023, DHS said: “We do not know what this claim, being ‘#1’ is referring to.” The department added that the rules of the testing required companies to get their claims cleared through DHS to ensure they do not misrepresent their performance. In its breakdown of the test results, IVPM noted that systems of multiple other manufacturers achieved similar results to Corsight. The company did not respond to a request for comment about the DHS testing. Computer Weekly contacted Essex Police about all the issues raised around Corsight testing, but received no direct response to these points from the force. While Essex Police claimed in its EIA that it “also sought advice from their own independent Data and Digital Ethics Committee in relation to their use of LFR generally”, meeting minutes obtained via FoI rules show that key impacts had not been considered. For example, when one panel member questioned how LFR deployments could affect community events or protests, and how the force could avoid the technology having a “chilling presence”, the officer presentsaid “that’s a pretty good point, actually”, adding that he had “made a note” to consider this going forward. The EIA itself also makes no mention of community events or protests, and does not specify how different groups could be affected by these different deployment scenarios. Elsewhere in the EIA, Essex Police claims that the system is likely to have minimal impact across age, gender and race, citing the 0.6 threshold setting, as well as NIST and DHS testing, as ways of achieving “equitability” across different demographics. Again, this threshold setting relates to a completely different system used by the Met and South Wales Police. For each protected characteristic, the EIA has a section on “mitigating” actions that can be taken to reduce adverse impacts. While the “ethnicity” section again highlights the National Physical Laboratory’s testing of a completely different algorithm, most other sections note that “any watchlist created will be done so as close to the deployment as possible, therefore hoping to ensure the most accurate and up-to-date images of persons being added are uploaded”. However, Yeung noted that the EIA makes no mention of the specific watchlist creation criteria beyond high-level “categories of images” that can be included, and the claimed equality impacts of that process. For example, it does not consider how people from certain ethnic minority or religious backgrounds could be disproportionally impacted as a result of their over-representation in police databases, or the issue of unlawful custody image retention whereby the Home Office is continuing to hold millions of custody images illegally in the Police National Database. While the ethics panel meeting minutes offer greater insight into how Essex Police is approaching watchlist creation, the custody image retention issue was also not mentioned. Responding to Computer Weekly’s questions about the meeting minutes and the lack of scrutiny of key issues related to UK police LFR deployments, an Essex Police spokesperson said: “Our polices and processes around the use of live facial recognition have been carefully scrutinised through a thorough ethics panel.” Instead, the officer present explained how watchlists and deployments are decided based on the “intelligence case”, which then has to be justified as both proportionate and necessary. On the “Southend intelligence case”, the officer said deploying in the town centre would be permissible because “that’s where the most footfall is, the most opportunity to locate outstanding suspects”. They added: “The watchlisthas to be justified by the key elements, the policing purpose. Everything has to be proportionate and strictly necessary to be able to deploy… If the commander in Southend said, ‘I want to put everyone that’s wanted for shoplifting across Essex on the watchlist for Southend’, the answer would be no, because is it necessary? Probably not. Is it proportionate? I don’t think it is. Would it be proportionate to have individuals who are outstanding for shoplifting from the Southend area? Yes, because it’s local.” However, the officer also said that, on most occasions, the systems would be deployed to catch “our most serious offenders”, as this would be easier to justify from a public perception point of view. They added that, during the summer, it would be easier to justify deployments because of the seasonal population increase in Southend. “We know that there is a general increase in violence during those months. So, we don’t need to go down to the weeds to specifically look at grievous bodily harmor murder or rape, because they’re not necessarily fuelled by a spike in terms of seasonality, for example,” they said. “However, we know that because the general population increases significantly, the level of violence increases significantly, which would justify that I could put those serious crimes on that watchlist.” Commenting on the responses given to the ethics panel, Yeung said they “failed entirely to provide me with confidence that their proposed deployments will have the required legal safeguards in place”. According to the Court of Appeal judgment against South Wales Police in the Bridges case, the force’s facial recognition policy contained “fundamental deficiencies” in relation to the “who” and “where” question of LFR. “In relation to both of those questions, too much discretion is currently left to individual police officers,” it said. “It is not clear who can be placed on the watchlist, nor is it clear that there are any criteria for determining where AFRcan be deployed.” Yeung added: “The same applies to these responses of Essex Police force, failing to adequately answer the ‘who’ and ‘where’ questions concerning their proposed facial recognition deployments. “Worse still, the court stated that a police force’s local policies can only satisfy the requirements that the privacy interventions arising from use of LFR are ‘prescribed by law’ if they are published. The documents were obtained by Big Brother Watch through freedom of information requests, strongly suggesting that these even these basic legal safeguards are not being met.” Yeung added that South Wales Police’s use of the technology was found to be unlawful in the Bridges case because there was excessive discretion left in the hands of individual police officers, allowing undue opportunities for arbitrary decision-making and abuses of power. Every decision ... must be specified in advance, documented and justified in accordance with the tests of proportionality and necessity. I don’t see any of that happening Karen Yeung, Birmingham Law School “Every decision – where you will deploy, whose face is placed on the watchlist and why, and the duration of deployment – must be specified in advance, documented and justified in accordance with the tests of proportionality and necessity,” she said. “I don’t see any of that happening. There are simply vague claims that ‘we’ll make sure we apply the legal test’, but how? They just offer unsubstantiated promises that ‘we will abide by the law’ without specifying how they will do so by meeting specific legal requirements.” Yeung further added these documents indicate that the police force is not looking for specific people wanted for serious crimes, but setting up dragnets for a wide variety of ‘wanted’ individuals, including those wanted for non-serious crimes such as shoplifting. “There are many platitudes about being ethical, but there’s nothing concrete indicating how they propose to meet the legal tests of necessity and proportionality,” she said. “In liberal democratic societies, every single decision about an individual by the police made without their consent must be justified in accordance with law. That means that the police must be able to justify and defend the reasons why every single person whose face is uploaded to the facial recognition watchlist meets the legal test, based on their specific operational purpose.” Yeung concluded that, assuming they can do this, police must also consider the equality impacts of their actions, and how different groups are likely to be affected by their practical deployments: “I don’t see any of that.” In response to the concerns raised around watchlist creation, proportionality and necessity, an Essex Police spokesperson said: “The watchlists for each deployment are created to identify specific people wanted for specific crimes and to enforce orders. To date, we have focused on the types of offences which cause the most harm to our communities, including our hardworking businesses. “This includes violent crime, drugs, sexual offences and thefts from shops. As a result of our deployments, we have arrested people wanted in connection with attempted murder investigations, high-risk domestic abuse cases, GBH, sexual assault, drug supply and aggravated burglary offences. We have also been able to progress investigations and move closer to securing justice for victims.” about police data and technology Metropolitan Police to deploy permanent facial recognition tech in Croydon: The Met is set to deploy permanent live facial recognition cameras on street furniture in Croydon from summer 2025, but local councillors say the decision – which has taken place with no community input – will further contribute the over-policing of Black communities. UK MoJ crime prediction algorithms raise serious concerns: The Ministry of Justice is using one algorithm to predict people’s risk of reoffending and another to predict who will commit murder, but critics say the profiling in these systems raises ‘serious concerns’ over racism, classism and data inaccuracies. UK law enforcement data adequacy at risk: The UK government says reforms to police data protection rules will help to simplify law enforcement data processing, but critics argue the changes will lower protection to the point where the UK risks losing its European data adequacy. #essex #police #discloses #incoherent #facial
    WWW.COMPUTERWEEKLY.COM
    Essex Police discloses ‘incoherent’ facial recognition assessment
    Essex Police has not properly considered the potentially discriminatory impacts of its live facial recognition (LFR) use, according to documents obtained by Big Brother Watch and shared with Computer Weekly. While the force claims in an equality impact assessment (EIA) that “Essex Police has carefully considered issues regarding bias and algorithmic injustice”, privacy campaign group Big Brother Watch said the document – obtained under Freedom of Information (FoI) rules – shows it has likely failed to fulfil its public sector equality duty (PSED) to consider how its policies and practices could be discriminatory. The campaigners highlighted how the force is relying on false comparisons to other algorithms and “parroting misleading claims” from the supplier about the LFR system’s lack of bias. For example, Essex Police said that when deploying LFR, it will set the system threshold “at 0.6 or above, as this is the level whereby equitability of the rate of false positive identification across all demographics is achieved”. However, this figure is based on the National Physical Laboratory’s (NPL) testing of NEC’s Neoface V4 LFR algorithm deployed by the Metropolitan Police and South Wales Police, which Essex Police does not use. Instead, Essex Police has opted to use an algorithm developed by Israeli biometrics firm Corsight, whose chief privacy officer, Tony Porter, was formerly the UK’s surveillance camera commissioner until January 2021. Highlighting testing of the Corsight_003 algorithm conducted in June 2022 by the US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the EIA also claims it has “a bias differential FMR [False Match Rate] of 0.0006 overall, the lowest of any tested within NIST at the time of writing, according to the supplier”. However, looking at the NIST website, where all of the testing data is publicly shared, there is no information to support the figure cited by Corsight, or its claim to essentially have the least biased algorithm available. A separate FoI response to Big Brother Watch confirmed that, as of 16 January 2025, Essex Police had not conducted any “formal or detailed” testing of the system itself, or otherwise commissioned a third party to do so. Essex Police's lax approach to assessing the dangers of a controversial and dangerous new form of surveillance has put the rights of thousands at risk Jake Hurfurt, Big Brother Watch “Looking at Essex Police’s EIA, we are concerned about the force’s compliance with its duties under equality law, as the reliance on shaky evidence seriously undermines the force’s claims about how the public will be protected against algorithmic bias,” said Jake Hurfurt, head of research and investigations at Big Brother Watch. “Essex Police’s lax approach to assessing the dangers of a controversial and dangerous new form of surveillance has put the rights of thousands at risk. This slapdash scrutiny of their intrusive facial recognition system sets a worrying precedent. “Facial recognition is notorious for misidentifying women and people of colour, and Essex Police’s willingness to deploy the technology without testing it themselves raises serious questions about the force’s compliance with equalities law. Essex Police should immediately stop their use of facial recognition surveillance.” The need for UK police forces deploying facial recognition to consider how their use of the technology could be discriminatory was highlighted by a legal challenge brought against South Wales Police by Cardiff resident Ed Bridges. In August 2020, the UK Court of Appeal ruled that the use of LFR by the force was unlawful because the privacy violations it entailed were “not in accordance” with legally permissible restrictions on Bridges’ Article 8 privacy rights; it did not conduct an appropriate data protection impact assessment (DPIA); and it did not comply with its PSED to consider how its policies and practices could be discriminatory. The judgment specifically found that the PSED is a “duty of process and not outcome”, and requires public bodies to take reasonable steps “to make enquiries about what may not yet be known to a public authority about the potential impact of a proposed decision or policy on people with the relevant characteristics, in particular for present purposes race and sex”. Big Brother Watch said equality assessments must rely on “sufficient quality evidence” to back up the claims being made and ultimately satisfy the PSED, but that the documents obtained do not demonstrate the force has had “due regard” for equalities. Academic Karen Yeung, an interdisciplinary professor at Birmingham Law School and School of Computer Science, told Computer Weekly that, in her view, the EIA is “clearly inadequate”. She also criticised the document for being “incoherent”, failing to look at the systemic equalities impacts of the technology, and relying exclusively on testing of entirely different software algorithms used by other police forces trained on different populations: “This does not, in my view, fulfil the requirements of the public sector equality duty. It is a document produced from a cut-and-paste exercise from the largely irrelevant material produced by others.” Computer Weekly contacted Essex Police about every aspect of the story. “We take our responsibility to meet our public sector equality duty very seriously, and there is a contractual requirement on our LFR partner to ensure sufficient testing has taken place to ensure the software meets the specification and performance outlined in the tender process,” said a spokesperson. “There have been more than 50 deployments of our LFR vans, scanning 1.7 million faces, which have led to more than 200 positive alerts, and nearly 70 arrests. “To date, there has been one false positive, which, when reviewed, was established to be as a result of a low-quality photo uploaded onto the watchlist and not the result of bias issues with the technology. This did not lead to an arrest or any other unlawful action because of the procedures in place to verify all alerts. This issue has been resolved to ensure it does not occur again.” The spokesperson added that the force is also committed to carrying out further assessment of the software and algorithms, with the evaluation of deployments and results being subject to an independent academic review. “As part of this, we have carried out, and continue to do so, testing and evaluation activity in conjunction with the University of Cambridge. The NPL have recently agreed to carry out further independent testing, which will take place over the summer. The company have also achieved an ISO 42001 certification,” said the spokesperson. “We are also liaising with other technical specialists regarding further testing and evaluation activity.” However, the force did not comment on why it was relying on the testing of a completely different algorithm in its EIA, or why it had not conducted or otherwise commissioned its own testing before operationally deploying the technology in the field. Computer Weekly followed up Essex Police for clarification on when the testing with Cambridge began, as this is not mentioned in the EIA, but received no response by time of publication. Although Essex Police and Corsight claim the facial recognition algorithm in use has “a bias differential FMR of 0.0006 overall, the lowest of any tested within NIST at the time of writing”, there is no publicly available data on NIST’s website to support this claim. Drilling down into the demographic split of false positive rates shows, for example, that there is a factor of 100 more false positives in West African women than for Eastern European men. While this is an improvement on the previous two algorithms submitted for testing by Corsight, other publicly available data held by NIST undermines Essex Police’s claim in the EIA that the “algorithm is identified by NIST as having the lowest bias variance between demographics”. Looking at another metric held by NIST – FMR Max/Min, which refers to the ratio between demographic groups that give the most and least false positives – it essentially represents how inequitable the error rates are across different age groups, sexes and ethnicities. In this instance, smaller values represent better performance, with the ratio being an estimate of how many times more false positives can be expected in one group over another. According to the NIST webpage for “demographic effects” in facial recognition algorithms, the Corsight algorithm has an FMR Max/Min of 113(22), meaning there are at least 21 algorithms that display less bias. For comparison, the least biased algorithm according to NIST results belongs to a firm called Idemia, which has an FMR Max/Min of 5(1). However, like Corsight, the highest false match rate for Idemia’s algorithm was for older West African women. Computer Weekly understands this is a common problem with many of the facial recognition algorithms NIST tests because this group is not typically well-represented in the underlying training data of most firms. Computer Weekly also confirmed with NIST that the FMR metric cited by Corsight relates to one-to-one verification, rather than the one-to-many situation police forces would be using it in. This is a key distinction, because if 1,000 people are enrolled in a facial recognition system that was built on one-to-one verification, then the false positive rate will be 1,000 times larger than the metrics held by NIST for FMR testing. “If a developer implements 1:N (one-to-many) search as N 1:1 comparisons, then the likelihood of a false positive from a search is expected to be proportional to the false match for the 1:1 comparison algorithm,” said NIST scientist Patrick Grother. “Some developers do not implement 1:N search that way.” Commenting on the contrast between this testing methodology and the practical scenarios the tech will be deployed in, Birmingham Law School’s Yeung said one-to-one is for use in stable environments to provide admission to spaces with limited access, such as airport passport gates, where only one person’s biometric data is scrutinised at a time. “One-to-many is entirely different – it’s an entirely different process, an entirely different technical challenge, and therefore cannot typically achieve equivalent levels of accuracy,” she said. Computer Weekly contacted Corsight about every aspect of the story related to its algorithmic testing, including where the “0.0006” figure is drawn from and its various claims to have the “least biased” algorithm. “The facts presented in your article are partial, manipulated and misleading,” said a company spokesperson. “Corsight AI’s algorithms have been tested by numerous entities, including NIST, and have been proven to be the least biased in the industry in terms of gender and ethnicity. This is a major factor for our commercial and government clients.” However, Corsight was either unable or unwilling to specify which facts are “partial, manipulated or misleading” in response to Computer Weekly’s request for clarification. Computer Weekly also contacted Corsight about whether it has done any further testing by running N one-to-one comparisons, and whether it has changed the system’s threshold settings for detecting a match to suppress the false positive rate, but received no response on these points. While most facial recognition developers submit their algorithms to NIST for testing on an annual or bi-annual basis, Corsight last submitted an algorithm in mid-2022. Computer Weekly contacted Corsight about why this was the case, given that most algorithms in NIST testing show continuous improvement with each submission, but again received no response on this point. The Essex Police EIA also highlights testing of the Corsight algorithm conducted in 2022 by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), claiming it demonstrated “Corsight’s capability to perform equally across all demographics”. However, Big Brother Watch’s Hurfurt highlighted that the DHS study focused on bias in the context of true positives, and did not assess the algorithm for inequality in false positives. This is a key distinction for the testing of LFR systems, as false negatives where the system fails to recognise someone will likely not lead to incorrect stops or other adverse effects, whereas a false positive where the system confuses two people could have more severe consequences for an individual. The DHS itself also publicly came out against Corsight’s representation of the test results, after the firm claimed in subsequent marketing materials that “no matter how you look at it, Corsight is ranked #1. #1 in overall recognition, #1 in dark skin, #1 in Asian, #1 in female”. Speaking with IVPM in August 2023, DHS said: “We do not know what this claim, being ‘#1’ is referring to.” The department added that the rules of the testing required companies to get their claims cleared through DHS to ensure they do not misrepresent their performance. In its breakdown of the test results, IVPM noted that systems of multiple other manufacturers achieved similar results to Corsight. The company did not respond to a request for comment about the DHS testing. Computer Weekly contacted Essex Police about all the issues raised around Corsight testing, but received no direct response to these points from the force. While Essex Police claimed in its EIA that it “also sought advice from their own independent Data and Digital Ethics Committee in relation to their use of LFR generally”, meeting minutes obtained via FoI rules show that key impacts had not been considered. For example, when one panel member questioned how LFR deployments could affect community events or protests, and how the force could avoid the technology having a “chilling presence”, the officer present (whose name has been redacted from the document) said “that’s a pretty good point, actually”, adding that he had “made a note” to consider this going forward. The EIA itself also makes no mention of community events or protests, and does not specify how different groups could be affected by these different deployment scenarios. Elsewhere in the EIA, Essex Police claims that the system is likely to have minimal impact across age, gender and race, citing the 0.6 threshold setting, as well as NIST and DHS testing, as ways of achieving “equitability” across different demographics. Again, this threshold setting relates to a completely different system used by the Met and South Wales Police. For each protected characteristic, the EIA has a section on “mitigating” actions that can be taken to reduce adverse impacts. While the “ethnicity” section again highlights the National Physical Laboratory’s testing of a completely different algorithm, most other sections note that “any watchlist created will be done so as close to the deployment as possible, therefore hoping to ensure the most accurate and up-to-date images of persons being added are uploaded”. However, Yeung noted that the EIA makes no mention of the specific watchlist creation criteria beyond high-level “categories of images” that can be included, and the claimed equality impacts of that process. For example, it does not consider how people from certain ethnic minority or religious backgrounds could be disproportionally impacted as a result of their over-representation in police databases, or the issue of unlawful custody image retention whereby the Home Office is continuing to hold millions of custody images illegally in the Police National Database (PND). While the ethics panel meeting minutes offer greater insight into how Essex Police is approaching watchlist creation, the custody image retention issue was also not mentioned. Responding to Computer Weekly’s questions about the meeting minutes and the lack of scrutiny of key issues related to UK police LFR deployments, an Essex Police spokesperson said: “Our polices and processes around the use of live facial recognition have been carefully scrutinised through a thorough ethics panel.” Instead, the officer present explained how watchlists and deployments are decided based on the “intelligence case”, which then has to be justified as both proportionate and necessary. On the “Southend intelligence case”, the officer said deploying in the town centre would be permissible because “that’s where the most footfall is, the most opportunity to locate outstanding suspects”. They added: “The watchlist [then] has to be justified by the key elements, the policing purpose. Everything has to be proportionate and strictly necessary to be able to deploy… If the commander in Southend said, ‘I want to put everyone that’s wanted for shoplifting across Essex on the watchlist for Southend’, the answer would be no, because is it necessary? Probably not. Is it proportionate? I don’t think it is. Would it be proportionate to have individuals who are outstanding for shoplifting from the Southend area? Yes, because it’s local.” However, the officer also said that, on most occasions, the systems would be deployed to catch “our most serious offenders”, as this would be easier to justify from a public perception point of view. They added that, during the summer, it would be easier to justify deployments because of the seasonal population increase in Southend. “We know that there is a general increase in violence during those months. So, we don’t need to go down to the weeds to specifically look at grievous bodily harm [GBH] or murder or rape, because they’re not necessarily fuelled by a spike in terms of seasonality, for example,” they said. “However, we know that because the general population increases significantly, the level of violence increases significantly, which would justify that I could put those serious crimes on that watchlist.” Commenting on the responses given to the ethics panel, Yeung said they “failed entirely to provide me with confidence that their proposed deployments will have the required legal safeguards in place”. According to the Court of Appeal judgment against South Wales Police in the Bridges case, the force’s facial recognition policy contained “fundamental deficiencies” in relation to the “who” and “where” question of LFR. “In relation to both of those questions, too much discretion is currently left to individual police officers,” it said. “It is not clear who can be placed on the watchlist, nor is it clear that there are any criteria for determining where AFR [automated facial recognition] can be deployed.” Yeung added: “The same applies to these responses of Essex Police force, failing to adequately answer the ‘who’ and ‘where’ questions concerning their proposed facial recognition deployments. “Worse still, the court stated that a police force’s local policies can only satisfy the requirements that the privacy interventions arising from use of LFR are ‘prescribed by law’ if they are published. The documents were obtained by Big Brother Watch through freedom of information requests, strongly suggesting that these even these basic legal safeguards are not being met.” Yeung added that South Wales Police’s use of the technology was found to be unlawful in the Bridges case because there was excessive discretion left in the hands of individual police officers, allowing undue opportunities for arbitrary decision-making and abuses of power. Every decision ... must be specified in advance, documented and justified in accordance with the tests of proportionality and necessity. I don’t see any of that happening Karen Yeung, Birmingham Law School “Every decision – where you will deploy, whose face is placed on the watchlist and why, and the duration of deployment – must be specified in advance, documented and justified in accordance with the tests of proportionality and necessity,” she said. “I don’t see any of that happening. There are simply vague claims that ‘we’ll make sure we apply the legal test’, but how? They just offer unsubstantiated promises that ‘we will abide by the law’ without specifying how they will do so by meeting specific legal requirements.” Yeung further added these documents indicate that the police force is not looking for specific people wanted for serious crimes, but setting up dragnets for a wide variety of ‘wanted’ individuals, including those wanted for non-serious crimes such as shoplifting. “There are many platitudes about being ethical, but there’s nothing concrete indicating how they propose to meet the legal tests of necessity and proportionality,” she said. “In liberal democratic societies, every single decision about an individual by the police made without their consent must be justified in accordance with law. That means that the police must be able to justify and defend the reasons why every single person whose face is uploaded to the facial recognition watchlist meets the legal test, based on their specific operational purpose.” Yeung concluded that, assuming they can do this, police must also consider the equality impacts of their actions, and how different groups are likely to be affected by their practical deployments: “I don’t see any of that.” In response to the concerns raised around watchlist creation, proportionality and necessity, an Essex Police spokesperson said: “The watchlists for each deployment are created to identify specific people wanted for specific crimes and to enforce orders. To date, we have focused on the types of offences which cause the most harm to our communities, including our hardworking businesses. “This includes violent crime, drugs, sexual offences and thefts from shops. As a result of our deployments, we have arrested people wanted in connection with attempted murder investigations, high-risk domestic abuse cases, GBH, sexual assault, drug supply and aggravated burglary offences. We have also been able to progress investigations and move closer to securing justice for victims.” Read more about police data and technology Metropolitan Police to deploy permanent facial recognition tech in Croydon: The Met is set to deploy permanent live facial recognition cameras on street furniture in Croydon from summer 2025, but local councillors say the decision – which has taken place with no community input – will further contribute the over-policing of Black communities. UK MoJ crime prediction algorithms raise serious concerns: The Ministry of Justice is using one algorithm to predict people’s risk of reoffending and another to predict who will commit murder, but critics say the profiling in these systems raises ‘serious concerns’ over racism, classism and data inaccuracies. UK law enforcement data adequacy at risk: The UK government says reforms to police data protection rules will help to simplify law enforcement data processing, but critics argue the changes will lower protection to the point where the UK risks losing its European data adequacy.
    0 Comments 0 Shares 0 Reviews
  • You can change the world: Unity for Humanity Grant application tips and inspiration

    Following the 2022 Unity for Humanity Summit, we’re looking for social impact creators who are using real-time 3D to make the world a better place. Is that you? If your answer is yes, or even maybe, Unity is awarding funding, technical support, and mentorship to help bring changemaking projects to life in 2023.To help you make the most of this opportunity, we’ve put together a few tips to guide you through the application process. Not sure if you need the support? We also spoke with three past grantees about their experience and how the support has helped them realize their creative vision.1. Lead with your passion.Are you dedicated to making the world a better place? That’s exactly what our judges will be looking for, so try to get that across in your application.2. Keep a record of all of your answers.To avoid potentially losing your hard work, write your submission text in a separate document before entering it into the Typeform application.3. Read the application criteria and questions carefully.There are no trick questions – we’re transparent about the projects that are eligible and the judging criteria we’ll be using, so make sure your application includes all the required information to improve your chance of being selected.For more guidance, watch our session on grant application tips from the 2021 Unity for Humanity Summit.To make sure all applicants have as much information and context as possible, we make our judging criteria clear. All projects must be impact-driven – meaning that they have measurable impact goals and/or calls to action – and encompass social, healthcare, education, humanitarian, and/or environmental issues. Projects must also align with at least one of the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals.When reviewing grant applications, we consider inclusion, impact, viability, and vision:Inclusion – Inclusive storytelling is at the heart of the Unity for Humanity program. Does your project reflect a diversity of experiences and backgrounds? Does it have a natural connection to the community and audience being represented or served through the work? Does your application demonstrate that you are thinking about future audiences and distribution of the work in an inclusive way?Vision – Is there a strong motivation for creating the work? Does your project express a unique perspective? Does it reflect a strong sense of compassion for humanity?Impact – Does your project have measurable impact goals and calls to action? Is your project aligned with at least one of the UN Sustainable Development Goals?Viability – Does your team have a realistic plan of execution for the production and distribution of the project so that it can achieve the greatest impact? Is it realistic in scope?For more detailed information on applying, read our Unity for Humanity FAQ. If your project’s timeline doesn’t align with this year’s application period, you can pre-register for next year’s grant to receive inspiration, tips, and grant news.We spoke with three past Unity for Humanity grantees to learn about the impact receiving the grant has had on the development of their project.Love Death Design, creators of Gone to Water / Ido al Agua, an immersive documentary that brings first-hand accounts of environmental injustice in Los Angeles, Tongva Land, into a virtual space of protest.AnythingEverything, creators of Powers of X, an immersive film exploring our planet’s environmental fragility relative to the effects of global consumption and man-made climate breakdown.Presencias, creators of Origen, a series of virtual, digital and real-world experiences that reveal ancestral stories through nature.Q: What inspired you to create a social impact project?Love Death Design, creators of Gone to Water / Ido al Agua – New media can be leveraged as a profoundly impactful mode of storytelling: we can protest in virtual spaces, we can employ new technologies to demand sustainable future architectures.“New media can be leveraged as a profoundly impactful mode of storytelling.” – Love Death Design, creators of Gone to Water / Ido al Agua“Gone to Water” is a term that describes the process by which an oil well becomes unproductive and therefore unprofitable, eventually filling with water. We chose to apply for UFH support to create this immersive documentary on urban oil extraction and its community health impacts on Tongva Land – in South Los Angeles because for those most affected by environmental racism, it is a matter of survival. Los Angeles is considered a microcosm of the world for its rich cultural contributions but it is also a snapshot of environmental injustices faced by BIPOC and low-income communities throughout the world.AnythingEverything, creators of Powers of X – We are incredibly excited about using emerging technologies like XR to enable new formats for storytelling and create positive change, particularly when it comes to education about the climate crisis. With Powers Of X, we saw a powerful opportunity to harness VR and AR's unique ability to convey scale in order to reveal the impact we each have on the planet in a much more tangible way.Presencias, creators of Origen – Having been in contact with stories, memories of this land’s origin, led us to think that collaborating with storytellers from the various territoriesto jointly create an experience in first person, interwoven by meaningful interactions, could result In a significant project capable of touching many hearts.“The project has driven an initiative to replant 20 different species in the mid-Ucayali region of the Amazon Rainforest.” – Presencias, creators of OrigenSomething incredible happened from the production phase of Origen, thanks to the collaborative networks it has woven, the project has driven an initiative to replant 20 different species in the mid-Ucayali region of the Amazon Rainforest. We understood that a project with these characteristics transcends what it can generate in the public once released. It is since its construction, through its dialogue with reality, that starts to generate an impact on multiple levels.Q: How did you come up with the idea for your project?Presencias, creators of Origen – The story of this project began more than ten years ago thanks to the bond with an incredible Mapuche descendant woman, Celeste, a great friend I’ve known since I was 19. Since then, in successive trips that I’ve made in Latin America, Celeste asked me to take presents of great symbolic value to her friends, guardians of other territories. It was revolutionary for me to be in contact with these women, their stories and this powerful network. Eventually these experiences became the opportunity to collectively create Origen.Q: What impact has the Unity for Humanity Grant had on your project?Love Death Design, creators of Gone to Water / Ido al Agua – Support from the Unity for Humanity Grant enabled our small creative design studio to produce a large scale project, collaborating with a wide spectrum of community members, activists and artists across South Los Angeles – Tongva Land. We were able to afford hardware to create the work, time and space to produce it, and the ability to compensate all our contributors – as well as offer free community workshops. As this is a pilot project for our artist-led studio, Love Death Design, having the support to realize the work in scope with our vision has been impactful and has greatly lifted our presence as under-represented artists and voices in the XR community.We are so grateful to have the support to co-create this work with community members, activists, and artists on the frontlines of environmental injustice and hope that this piece provokes those who experience it to consider their privilege and position, and join us in demanding the end of neighborhood drilling.“UFH was instrumental in helping us get our project off the ground and taking our concept from abstract idea to a tangible prototype.” – AnythingEverything, creators of Powers of XAnythingEverything, creators of Powers of X – We have used the UFH funding in order to conduct research around the subject matter, refine the conceptual experience, and most importantly to develop a functioning prototype which demonstrates the format and can be used in order to raise follow-on funding for the full production. We have successfully completed the prototype and we could not have done it if it wasn't for the help, resources, and support we received from Unity For Humanity.Presencias, creators of Origen – For the development of the experience and to implement the first steps of the replanting initiative that emerged as a result of the process of creating the firsts chapters of Origen.Receiving the grant was what made possible for this first chapter of Origen to come off paper and become a reality. It also gave us the freedom to create with so much autonomy, it allowed us to delve into the artisanal and interdisciplinary part of the project, which was crucial to respect its identity.The premiere of the first chapter, “The Journey to the Heart of the Amazon Rainforest,” is approaching and we are starting the pre-production of chapter two – “The Journey to the Andes” – which keeps us working and very excited for what is to come.The Unity for Humanity 2023 Grant is open for applications until 11:59 pm PT on December 9, 2022. Join our Social Impact creator Discord to speak to the Unity for Humanity team, ask questions, and meet other creators. Apply for the grant today.
    #you #can #change #world #unity
    You can change the world: Unity for Humanity Grant application tips and inspiration
    Following the 2022 Unity for Humanity Summit, we’re looking for social impact creators who are using real-time 3D to make the world a better place. Is that you? If your answer is yes, or even maybe, Unity is awarding funding, technical support, and mentorship to help bring changemaking projects to life in 2023.To help you make the most of this opportunity, we’ve put together a few tips to guide you through the application process. Not sure if you need the support? We also spoke with three past grantees about their experience and how the support has helped them realize their creative vision.1. Lead with your passion.Are you dedicated to making the world a better place? That’s exactly what our judges will be looking for, so try to get that across in your application.2. Keep a record of all of your answers.To avoid potentially losing your hard work, write your submission text in a separate document before entering it into the Typeform application.3. Read the application criteria and questions carefully.There are no trick questions – we’re transparent about the projects that are eligible and the judging criteria we’ll be using, so make sure your application includes all the required information to improve your chance of being selected.For more guidance, watch our session on grant application tips from the 2021 Unity for Humanity Summit.To make sure all applicants have as much information and context as possible, we make our judging criteria clear. All projects must be impact-driven – meaning that they have measurable impact goals and/or calls to action – and encompass social, healthcare, education, humanitarian, and/or environmental issues. Projects must also align with at least one of the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals.When reviewing grant applications, we consider inclusion, impact, viability, and vision:Inclusion – Inclusive storytelling is at the heart of the Unity for Humanity program. Does your project reflect a diversity of experiences and backgrounds? Does it have a natural connection to the community and audience being represented or served through the work? Does your application demonstrate that you are thinking about future audiences and distribution of the work in an inclusive way?Vision – Is there a strong motivation for creating the work? Does your project express a unique perspective? Does it reflect a strong sense of compassion for humanity?Impact – Does your project have measurable impact goals and calls to action? Is your project aligned with at least one of the UN Sustainable Development Goals?Viability – Does your team have a realistic plan of execution for the production and distribution of the project so that it can achieve the greatest impact? Is it realistic in scope?For more detailed information on applying, read our Unity for Humanity FAQ. If your project’s timeline doesn’t align with this year’s application period, you can pre-register for next year’s grant to receive inspiration, tips, and grant news.We spoke with three past Unity for Humanity grantees to learn about the impact receiving the grant has had on the development of their project.Love Death Design, creators of Gone to Water / Ido al Agua, an immersive documentary that brings first-hand accounts of environmental injustice in Los Angeles, Tongva Land, into a virtual space of protest.AnythingEverything, creators of Powers of X, an immersive film exploring our planet’s environmental fragility relative to the effects of global consumption and man-made climate breakdown.Presencias, creators of Origen, a series of virtual, digital and real-world experiences that reveal ancestral stories through nature.Q: What inspired you to create a social impact project?Love Death Design, creators of Gone to Water / Ido al Agua – New media can be leveraged as a profoundly impactful mode of storytelling: we can protest in virtual spaces, we can employ new technologies to demand sustainable future architectures.“New media can be leveraged as a profoundly impactful mode of storytelling.” – Love Death Design, creators of Gone to Water / Ido al Agua“Gone to Water” is a term that describes the process by which an oil well becomes unproductive and therefore unprofitable, eventually filling with water. We chose to apply for UFH support to create this immersive documentary on urban oil extraction and its community health impacts on Tongva Land – in South Los Angeles because for those most affected by environmental racism, it is a matter of survival. Los Angeles is considered a microcosm of the world for its rich cultural contributions but it is also a snapshot of environmental injustices faced by BIPOC and low-income communities throughout the world.AnythingEverything, creators of Powers of X – We are incredibly excited about using emerging technologies like XR to enable new formats for storytelling and create positive change, particularly when it comes to education about the climate crisis. With Powers Of X, we saw a powerful opportunity to harness VR and AR's unique ability to convey scale in order to reveal the impact we each have on the planet in a much more tangible way.Presencias, creators of Origen – Having been in contact with stories, memories of this land’s origin, led us to think that collaborating with storytellers from the various territoriesto jointly create an experience in first person, interwoven by meaningful interactions, could result In a significant project capable of touching many hearts.“The project has driven an initiative to replant 20 different species in the mid-Ucayali region of the Amazon Rainforest.” – Presencias, creators of OrigenSomething incredible happened from the production phase of Origen, thanks to the collaborative networks it has woven, the project has driven an initiative to replant 20 different species in the mid-Ucayali region of the Amazon Rainforest. We understood that a project with these characteristics transcends what it can generate in the public once released. It is since its construction, through its dialogue with reality, that starts to generate an impact on multiple levels.Q: How did you come up with the idea for your project?Presencias, creators of Origen – The story of this project began more than ten years ago thanks to the bond with an incredible Mapuche descendant woman, Celeste, a great friend I’ve known since I was 19. Since then, in successive trips that I’ve made in Latin America, Celeste asked me to take presents of great symbolic value to her friends, guardians of other territories. It was revolutionary for me to be in contact with these women, their stories and this powerful network. Eventually these experiences became the opportunity to collectively create Origen.Q: What impact has the Unity for Humanity Grant had on your project?Love Death Design, creators of Gone to Water / Ido al Agua – Support from the Unity for Humanity Grant enabled our small creative design studio to produce a large scale project, collaborating with a wide spectrum of community members, activists and artists across South Los Angeles – Tongva Land. We were able to afford hardware to create the work, time and space to produce it, and the ability to compensate all our contributors – as well as offer free community workshops. As this is a pilot project for our artist-led studio, Love Death Design, having the support to realize the work in scope with our vision has been impactful and has greatly lifted our presence as under-represented artists and voices in the XR community.We are so grateful to have the support to co-create this work with community members, activists, and artists on the frontlines of environmental injustice and hope that this piece provokes those who experience it to consider their privilege and position, and join us in demanding the end of neighborhood drilling.“UFH was instrumental in helping us get our project off the ground and taking our concept from abstract idea to a tangible prototype.” – AnythingEverything, creators of Powers of XAnythingEverything, creators of Powers of X – We have used the UFH funding in order to conduct research around the subject matter, refine the conceptual experience, and most importantly to develop a functioning prototype which demonstrates the format and can be used in order to raise follow-on funding for the full production. We have successfully completed the prototype and we could not have done it if it wasn't for the help, resources, and support we received from Unity For Humanity.Presencias, creators of Origen – For the development of the experience and to implement the first steps of the replanting initiative that emerged as a result of the process of creating the firsts chapters of Origen.Receiving the grant was what made possible for this first chapter of Origen to come off paper and become a reality. It also gave us the freedom to create with so much autonomy, it allowed us to delve into the artisanal and interdisciplinary part of the project, which was crucial to respect its identity.The premiere of the first chapter, “The Journey to the Heart of the Amazon Rainforest,” is approaching and we are starting the pre-production of chapter two – “The Journey to the Andes” – which keeps us working and very excited for what is to come.The Unity for Humanity 2023 Grant is open for applications until 11:59 pm PT on December 9, 2022. Join our Social Impact creator Discord to speak to the Unity for Humanity team, ask questions, and meet other creators. Apply for the grant today. #you #can #change #world #unity
    UNITY.COM
    You can change the world: Unity for Humanity Grant application tips and inspiration
    Following the 2022 Unity for Humanity Summit, we’re looking for social impact creators who are using real-time 3D to make the world a better place. Is that you? If your answer is yes, or even maybe, Unity is awarding funding, technical support, and mentorship to help bring changemaking projects to life in 2023.To help you make the most of this opportunity, we’ve put together a few tips to guide you through the application process. Not sure if you need the support? We also spoke with three past grantees about their experience and how the support has helped them realize their creative vision.1. Lead with your passion.Are you dedicated to making the world a better place? That’s exactly what our judges will be looking for, so try to get that across in your application.2. Keep a record of all of your answers.To avoid potentially losing your hard work, write your submission text in a separate document before entering it into the Typeform application.3. Read the application criteria and questions carefully.There are no trick questions – we’re transparent about the projects that are eligible and the judging criteria we’ll be using, so make sure your application includes all the required information to improve your chance of being selected.For more guidance, watch our session on grant application tips from the 2021 Unity for Humanity Summit.To make sure all applicants have as much information and context as possible, we make our judging criteria clear. All projects must be impact-driven – meaning that they have measurable impact goals and/or calls to action – and encompass social, healthcare, education, humanitarian, and/or environmental issues. Projects must also align with at least one of the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals.When reviewing grant applications, we consider inclusion, impact, viability, and vision:Inclusion – Inclusive storytelling is at the heart of the Unity for Humanity program. Does your project reflect a diversity of experiences and backgrounds? Does it have a natural connection to the community and audience being represented or served through the work? Does your application demonstrate that you are thinking about future audiences and distribution of the work in an inclusive way?Vision – Is there a strong motivation for creating the work? Does your project express a unique perspective? Does it reflect a strong sense of compassion for humanity?Impact – Does your project have measurable impact goals and calls to action? Is your project aligned with at least one of the UN Sustainable Development Goals?Viability – Does your team have a realistic plan of execution for the production and distribution of the project so that it can achieve the greatest impact? Is it realistic in scope?For more detailed information on applying, read our Unity for Humanity FAQ. If your project’s timeline doesn’t align with this year’s application period, you can pre-register for next year’s grant to receive inspiration, tips, and grant news.We spoke with three past Unity for Humanity grantees to learn about the impact receiving the grant has had on the development of their project.Love Death Design, creators of Gone to Water / Ido al Agua, an immersive documentary that brings first-hand accounts of environmental injustice in Los Angeles, Tongva Land, into a virtual space of protest.AnythingEverything, creators of Powers of X, an immersive film exploring our planet’s environmental fragility relative to the effects of global consumption and man-made climate breakdown.Presencias, creators of Origen, a series of virtual, digital and real-world experiences that reveal ancestral stories through nature.Q: What inspired you to create a social impact project?Love Death Design, creators of Gone to Water / Ido al Agua – New media can be leveraged as a profoundly impactful mode of storytelling: we can protest in virtual spaces, we can employ new technologies to demand sustainable future architectures.“New media can be leveraged as a profoundly impactful mode of storytelling.” – Love Death Design, creators of Gone to Water / Ido al Agua“Gone to Water” is a term that describes the process by which an oil well becomes unproductive and therefore unprofitable, eventually filling with water. We chose to apply for UFH support to create this immersive documentary on urban oil extraction and its community health impacts on Tongva Land – in South Los Angeles because for those most affected by environmental racism, it is a matter of survival. Los Angeles is considered a microcosm of the world for its rich cultural contributions but it is also a snapshot of environmental injustices faced by BIPOC and low-income communities throughout the world.AnythingEverything, creators of Powers of X – We are incredibly excited about using emerging technologies like XR to enable new formats for storytelling and create positive change, particularly when it comes to education about the climate crisis. With Powers Of X, we saw a powerful opportunity to harness VR and AR's unique ability to convey scale in order to reveal the impact we each have on the planet in a much more tangible way.Presencias, creators of Origen – Having been in contact with stories, memories of this land’s origin, led us to think that collaborating with storytellers from the various territories (the Amazon, the Andes and northwestern Argentina) to jointly create an experience in first person, interwoven by meaningful interactions, could result In a significant project capable of touching many hearts.“The project has driven an initiative to replant 20 different species in the mid-Ucayali region of the Amazon Rainforest.” – Presencias, creators of OrigenSomething incredible happened from the production phase of Origen, thanks to the collaborative networks it has woven, the project has driven an initiative to replant 20 different species in the mid-Ucayali region of the Amazon Rainforest. We understood that a project with these characteristics transcends what it can generate in the public once released. It is since its construction, through its dialogue with reality, that starts to generate an impact on multiple levels.Q: How did you come up with the idea for your project?Presencias, creators of Origen – The story of this project began more than ten years ago thanks to the bond with an incredible Mapuche descendant woman, Celeste, a great friend I’ve known since I was 19 (she’s also a script supervisor in the VR experience). Since then, in successive trips that I’ve made in Latin America, Celeste asked me to take presents of great symbolic value to her friends, guardians of other territories. It was revolutionary for me to be in contact with these women, their stories and this powerful network. Eventually these experiences became the opportunity to collectively create Origen.Q: What impact has the Unity for Humanity Grant had on your project?Love Death Design, creators of Gone to Water / Ido al Agua – Support from the Unity for Humanity Grant enabled our small creative design studio to produce a large scale project, collaborating with a wide spectrum of community members, activists and artists across South Los Angeles – Tongva Land. We were able to afford hardware to create the work, time and space to produce it, and the ability to compensate all our contributors – as well as offer free community workshops. As this is a pilot project for our artist-led studio, Love Death Design, having the support to realize the work in scope with our vision has been impactful and has greatly lifted our presence as under-represented artists and voices in the XR community.We are so grateful to have the support to co-create this work with community members, activists, and artists on the frontlines of environmental injustice and hope that this piece provokes those who experience it to consider their privilege and position, and join us in demanding the end of neighborhood drilling.“UFH was instrumental in helping us get our project off the ground and taking our concept from abstract idea to a tangible prototype.” – AnythingEverything, creators of Powers of XAnythingEverything, creators of Powers of X – We have used the UFH funding in order to conduct research around the subject matter, refine the conceptual experience, and most importantly to develop a functioning prototype which demonstrates the format and can be used in order to raise follow-on funding for the full production. We have successfully completed the prototype and we could not have done it if it wasn't for the help, resources, and support we received from Unity For Humanity.Presencias, creators of Origen – For the development of the experience and to implement the first steps of the replanting initiative that emerged as a result of the process of creating the firsts chapters of Origen.Receiving the grant was what made possible for this first chapter of Origen to come off paper and become a reality. It also gave us the freedom to create with so much autonomy, it allowed us to delve into the artisanal and interdisciplinary part of the project, which was crucial to respect its identity.The premiere of the first chapter, “The Journey to the Heart of the Amazon Rainforest,” is approaching and we are starting the pre-production of chapter two – “The Journey to the Andes” – which keeps us working and very excited for what is to come.The Unity for Humanity 2023 Grant is open for applications until 11:59 pm PT on December 9, 2022. Join our Social Impact creator Discord to speak to the Unity for Humanity team, ask questions, and meet other creators. Apply for the grant today.
    0 Comments 0 Shares 0 Reviews
CGShares https://cgshares.com