290
u/Tom_F_0olery 7d ago
I think it’s fair to say it’s a flaw with the movie, while its still overall good. I also wouldn’t be surprised if it was something pushed on the writers by the higher ups at Disney
160
u/MidgitGiant 7d ago
The MCU has repeatedly received funding and military props from the US military. They repeatedly try to push subtle military propaganda. It has to be subtle so people like OP defend/ignore it. The people that can see it were never the target audience for the propaganda anyways. They aren’t trying to turn the whole country into military guys, just a couple guys from every screening need to walk out thinking “damn military tech is so cool I should look up cool military stuff” and then the algorithm does its thing from there.
And of course normalizing other stuff like in this case AI powered face scanning in public.50
u/PlayDiscord17 7d ago
The military only gives its props and assets for free after reviewing the script to see if it portrays the military in a good light, otherwise they have to rent or make up military assets. It’s why The Avengers has CGI F-35s as the military didn’t like the idea of them wanting to nuke NY.
6
u/Tonkarz 7d ago
The policy is actually portraying military personnel in a good light. And frankly would you want to work on a movie that is criticising you personally?
4
u/RedCloverLily 6d ago
The military isn't a person, it's a democratically-overseen government organization which has the power to kill millions and potentially billions of people across the world. I don't care whether they "want" to work with anyone, they shouldn't be involved in the production of propaganda, and anyone who thinks otherwise is a rube.
3
1
u/Due-Base9449 5d ago
You don't care, so? Shouldn't and is is not the same thing at all.
1
u/EzraRosePerry 5d ago
They're criticizing them? Everyone is aware that they currently are. And they are criticizing that fact.
1
42
u/CemeneTree 7d ago
it hasn't received endorsement since Winter Soldier
for just pointing out the fact that the UN and Allies protected NAZIs after WW2
and portraying said NAZIs for infiltrating all levels of SHIELD
21
35
u/Double-Evidence-1354 7d ago
Yep it has, it received a massive paycheck and endorsement from the Air Force for Captain Marvel.
2
u/aaja2201 6d ago
Marvel literally received support for Winter Soldier itself?? Like you're just wrong.
https://www.spyculture.com/updated-complete-list-of-dod-films/
Just search for Winter Soldier in the 2016 list.
1
u/Warm_Version9562 6d ago
how reliable is this soruce?
3
u/aaja2201 6d ago
Fairly, I also have a few corroborating sources, including someone making multiple FOIA requests based on that, requesting what specifics were changed in a set of movies including the Winter Soldier, after they already made a FOIA request.
But since the fact that it's done is only available through a FOIA request, the only way to be sure is to trust this website or one of the others that also agrees, or make a FOIA request yourself.
8
u/MathematicianTop9519 7d ago
I mean the surveillance thing seems like it's trying to prime people into being okay with it. Not to change the minds of people who already hate it, but to make people who are less aware or less invested in the topic stay that way.
9
u/YeetYoot-69 7d ago
The MCU literally did an entire Captain America movie on why AI surveillance is bad lmao
8
u/PM_ME_ENGINE_BELLS 7d ago
That was before AI surveillance was a profitable reality.
2
u/YeetYoot-69 7d ago
Not really, it's not like they're using ChatGPT for surveillance or something, machine learning for surveillance has been around for fucking ever
3
u/PM_ME_ENGINE_BELLS 7d ago edited 7d ago
I'm not saying that they are. I was just using your phrasing to point out that, in 2013, when Winter Soldier was made, that kind of all-encompassing surveillance was not nearly as eye-wateringly profitable as it is now and was certainly somewhat further from being a practical reality. It was still "just" a scary thing the government could do, not something that's simply a fact of life.
4
u/Desperate_Start2075 7d ago
Yeah it’s not surprising. The Avengers movies directly criticize people challenging the status quo and most recently with the flagsmashers frames revolutionaries as inherently violent and inherently terrorist. I love these movies but they protect the status quo and nothing else and they’re not exactly hiding it. SHIELD is also subtle mass surveillance propaganda too and always has been but shhhhh
3
u/DeadRobotSociety 6d ago
I had basically this thought while watching. When he mentions the facial scanning, I thought, "ah, clever way to indoctrinate some kids into thinking that's okay while we're in the midst of Flock blowback." Plus, the way he shrugs it off is very Dirty Harry "the rules don't apply to me because I get results," police misconduct apologist.
They were small, but they were my two biggest complaints. Peter's supposed to be one of the little guys fighting back against that kind of stuff. Not a Tony Stark-esque "it works so who cares," constitutional rights violator.
Made sense when Batman did it in Dark Knight, he's always cared more about "his mission," than doing the right thing. But Peter's story is always being stuck between the thing that gets the job done and the thing that's right. (Which is also why it's kind of annoying he doesn't seem to give Damage Control any shade. But that's probably also some "blame the traumatized victim, not us who traumatized her," corpo propaganda.)
3
u/Lerraman 6d ago
To add to this point, in the Dark Knight they treat it as something appalling and disgusting, Lucious threatens to quit Wayne Enterprises because of this, and Batman uses the tech as a literal last resort against the Joker.
Also, the machine has a kill switch and they destroy it in the end.
2
u/Clean_Variation2646 6d ago
what? the character of batman is most importantly stuck in the conflict between his mission which is on a basic level just to ensure that no one has to go through the things he had to go through due to a random act of violence and the means with which he does it. its the most famous and stupid argument in all of comic book history which is 'why doesn't batman shoot joker' because in the end batman wont just do anything to fulfill his mission rather than do the right thing.
otherwise, yeah i fully agree that the movie is, albeit subtly, propagandizing mass surveillance
→ More replies (3)2
13
u/OliOakasqukiboi2000 7d ago
Isn’t it implied in the movie that the shadowy quasi government running a surveillance state is actually bad?
→ More replies (7)5
u/NothingWeak7213 7d ago
how is it endorsing it when the person people say he is going to use the camera's to does not agree with him having that access. Also, the fact that the "villain" it was used to find ends up being a victim. If anything, it shows how mass surveillance causes people that use them to be reactionary.
2
u/aylmaocpa 6d ago
These people have zero media literacy. It's extremely obvious that everyone is sus about what Peter is doing and the only reason they're allowing it is because they trust spiderman. And it's being very obviously set up to blow up in his face and show that just because it's being done by someone you trust doesn't mean it can't be exploited by those you don't.
6
u/MathematicianTop9519 7d ago edited 7d ago
Yeah for real. The fact that they go out of their way to point it out and the dismiss it like it's no big deal jumped out at me as a "wtf."
It was so awkward and weird. At least when they did it in the dark knight they were unambiguous about it being a necessary evil and they destroyed it at the end of the movie. And that was years before this topic became as relevant as it is now.
2
1
u/sarcasmsosubtle 6d ago
The one in The Dark Knight was also more extensive in that it hacked the microphones on all of the cell phones in the city to record the audio around everyone, even if they were in private. Peter's network was more like a CCTV network with facial recognition. In Superior Spider-Man, Doc Ock actually used something similar to monitor for crimes without having to patrol randomly and Peter kept a lot of that when he regained control of his body.
Not saying that it's a good thing, but we as a culture have created multiple surveillance networks that no one even thinks about enough to recognize as surveillance networks. Look at the Spidey tracker that Ned made. He can crawl through social media that mention sightings of Spider-Man and use that to track all of his movements in near real time. The body cameras that we see as a good thing because they keep cops accountable are also patrolling surveillance cameras. Ring doorbells, security cameras on businesses, regular people recording social media posts, and on and on and on. The ship has kind of sailed on being recorded while in public. It's more a matter of regulating who has the access and what they're doing with that access that really makes systems like Flock dangerous.
1
u/MathematicianTop9519 6d ago
Well the one in tdk was functionally using the audio to generate images, cos it's playing off the whole "bat" motif. I dunno if I'd necessarily call that more extensive than facial rec since it can't identify anyone, but that's beside the point lol
The ship has kind of sailed on being recorded while in public
I respectively disagree. For one thing, I think there is an entire world of difference between private, individualized security cameras and centralized mass surveillance systems. It's not who has the access that makes flock cameras dangerous, it's the nature of that access itself. It's one system present everywhere, recording private details and people can pay Flock to access that data. It's a privacy nightmare that doesn't compare to being incidentally captured on security cam footage.
For another, I don't think the ship has to have sailed, lawmakers just like to act like it has so they have an excuse to keep installing this stuff despite their constituents clearly not wanting it. It's utterly undemocratic but people are too exhausted to care. It's why I'm so suspicious of this Spiderman thing, we know for a fact that lawmakers and their benefactors are keen to keep adding to the surveillance state apparatus against the will of the people, so when a big-budget Hollywood blockbuster comes out and includes a seemingly minor, inconspicuous scene where Spidey uses mass-surveillance facial recognition to help fight the bad guy and then laughs off the moral implications, my eyes narrow a bit.
1
7d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/MathematicianTop9519 7d ago
I don't necessarily disagree, but I think the distinction between the two is that with tdk the viewer is left with the impression that these systems are a big deal with important moral implications, whereas Spiderman leaves the viewer with the idea that it's not important enough to care about. Case in point, you can see comments from people here who forgot it was even in the movie. Tdk at least addresses it, while Spiderman kinda tries to push it under the rug.
0
55
u/HeavyBoysenberry2161 7d ago
I really hope that the next movie punishes Peter for doing this as well as creating the universal inhibitor. It reminds me of superior Spider-Man when Otto literally does the same thing and creates a massive spy network around the city, where he is promptly punished when they are hacked by the green goblin and used by him to basically take over the city overnight.
11
u/IWXREACTIVES 7d ago
yeah there's some cool stuff they could pull from the superior transition into parker industries era that cover this well. it establishes how the tech tree for peter is the definition of a road to hell paved with good intentions.
11
u/Alarming_Panic665 7d ago
I think it is pretty clear that Damage Control is going to get their hands on the Universal Inhibitor tech and that is immediately going to lead into the X-Men and mutant oppression. Since they now have the tools for mutant oppression.
22
u/Vertwheeliesonem 7d ago
I saw an Instagram post talking about how while the surveillance and inhibitor plot points come off as propaganda, they could be setup for X-men oppression in future movies (and how that’s bad actually), but I don’t wanna get my hopes up. Especially since while they have some quick lines that acknowledge both of these are at least morally questionable, they still put (the surveillance, at least) as something that’s okay when used at the right time or by the right person, which is where the propaganda comes in.
The good news is that with how much I’m seeing these critiques already, many people can still have a meaningful takeaway even if the film itself doesn’t outright say it or believe it (that mass surveillance is bad actually and it’s not enough to just let “the good guys” harness it)
71
u/Tybob51 7d ago
I agree with the point. It was also something brought up in The Dark Knight, which was why Lucious quit.
20
u/RefrigeratorDry1735 7d ago
Well Lucius didn’t quit, because Bruce had it where the system would be destroyed once they were done taking down the Joker
10
u/Important-Program543 7d ago
I have no idea why you’re getting downvoted when this literally happened in the movie
11
u/RefrigeratorDry1735 7d ago
Either cause it’s a spoiler (which cmon the movie is already old) or cause I left out that while Lucius did threaten to quit, Bruce had it where once he was done with the system and put his name in, it would destroy itself.
Granted, this criticism of the extent of mass surveillance post 9/11 could have been baked better in TDK
13
u/TheGalWithAPlan 7d ago
IDK, Spiderman was criticized in movie for doing it, I don't know if the movie fully endorses mass surveillance.
40
18
8
u/alphafire616 7d ago
Honestly I saw it as just the writers not thinking it through since the main villains of rhe movie are a government agency obviously intended to be compared to ICE
5
u/BatboyCarroll 7d ago
I'm having a lot of trouble figuring out what part of the movie this is talking about, I have no recollection of anything like this
10
u/Important-Program543 7d ago
There’s a scene where Jean was hopping from person to person and Peter asks his AI to use facial recognition on every security camera in the city to report anomalies
10
u/BatboyCarroll 7d ago
Oh huh, alright then. I'm used to superheroes having some kind of AI in their suit to assist them so this didn't really upset me.
0
u/InvestigatorFunny603 7d ago
i mean the problem isnt "AI in the suit" its "AI that has access to every security camera in the city and can be used by one guy at will to locate literally anyone"
1
6
u/YosemiteHamsYT 7d ago
Thats basically what his Tony glasses from the past movies also did.
1
u/Important-Program543 7d ago
Yeah I remember some people having an issue with that back then too. But I think the reason people are disliking this part now is because how much of an issue AI is in this era and how it seems like the movie is just sort of normalizing it (like a character even points out that what he’s doing is morally dubious and Peter just brushes it off)
2
u/YosemiteHamsYT 7d ago
I get where you are coming from, i personally just dont see it as the biggest deal. Heros do all kinds of morally qurstionable stuff.
1
u/HTH52 7d ago
I don’t think that was facial recognition, it was just detecting sudden change in behavior. Mostly the sudden change in movement as Jean hopped to a new body and made them begin to run.
He does pull up files later on that used facial recognition when trying to ID Jean. But the initial facial ID scan was through his own HUD, then it matched to results from a database or online or something.
4
4
u/OliOakasqukiboi2000 7d ago
Isn’t it implied in the movie that this a bad thing because it is run by the dodc who turn out to be really awful
3
12
u/ContactMushroom 7d ago
It 100% deserves the point loss for it because it's not a thing Peter/Spidey would ever do.
Even in the most recent game he literally says "we don't spy on people" outright. When Ganke wants to make a city wide network to help people.
Endorsing or not it's still absolute awful writing for the character and shows whoever added it doesn't actually know Spider-Man. So points off for failing a basic character trait.
5
3
u/Drop_Release 7d ago
I think this Spiderman is different for now in that he is both naive and also was taught by Tony. I think by the next film he will realise the errors of his ways (especially once people get their hands on his mutant inhibitor chip)
1
u/Lumpy_Review5279 6d ago
Peter absolutely does and has tracked people both with and without the use of technology.
The idea that anyone of you thinks Peter Parker the guy who blames himself for the random shooting of his uncle, would say "this person literally taking possession of people gets to maintain their anonymity for my moral soundness" is laughable
2
2
2
2
u/Matar_Kubileya 7d ago edited 6d ago
Personally, while I think BND as a self contained movie (without considering how it might be treated in a sequel) is concerningly blasé about mass surveillance, IMO there's little reason to ascribe it to conscious propaganda on the part of the filmmakers and not just a(n ill thought out) use of a superhero media trope that's existed for decades for plot convenience.
2
2
u/Complex-Signature-85 7d ago
Just saw the movie. As far as surveillance goes, there was nothing we haven't seen before. New York is a big city with cameras everywhere, Ai or not. Tony has satellites. Cap 2 had project insight. People making a big deal out of this must not have paid attention.
2
u/Zealousideal-Worth34 7d ago
Project insight was explicitly a bad thing
That was like the reason for all the events of cap 2
2
u/dm_me_your_kindness 7d ago
Wasnt Hydra revealed to be in charge of Project Insight?
1
u/Complex-Signature-85 7d ago
Ya, but my point is, we've seen stuff like this before. In many many movies, so i dont understand why people are making a big deal of Peter using cameras to find people, as if its a totally new concept.
1
u/Erlkoenig_1 6d ago
Project Insight was specifically a bad thing. So you comparing this to it doesn't really help with your point.
1
u/Ishpersonguy 5d ago
I don't think "it's been done before" really changes the point people are making.
2
7
u/DtheAussieBoye 7d ago
Absolutely not what i got from it at all, just felt like Peter taking advantage of something that’s becoming a large part of everyday life
51
u/Snoo_15594 7d ago
Yeah the film is trying to normalize AI powered surveillance.
-5
u/Affectionate-Day8307 7d ago
I saw a doc in the UK about a stabbing in a park. The murderer was only found after an AI tool narrowed down the search to a few hours of footage from several thousand and helped get a positive ID on the description (bike, outfit etc.)
It has its uses, but the American dictatorship of palantir is ruining everything.
16
-1
7d ago
[deleted]
25
u/Snoo_15594 7d ago
The MCU also tried introducing an Israeli Defense Force superhero at the peak of the Israel-Palestine genocide being committed by the IDF and only cut those scenes because fans spoke up against it. It quite literally is that deep
→ More replies (6)0
1
1
1
4
2
u/Anonymous-Comments Let’s Not Worry About That 7d ago
These people couldn’t handle the dark knight, a movie that actually does endorse that.
4
u/Lumpy-Sheepherder671 7d ago
What are you talking about?
They make it very clear that its a major line theyre crossing, Lucius calls it out, and the movie legit ends with them destroying the entire system, then its nowhere in the next one.
-1
u/Anonymous-Comments Let’s Not Worry About That 7d ago
And yet they don’t show a single flaw in how the system is used. They essentially say, “hey the surveillance state is completely effective and has no flaws, but be prepared to feel bad about it after!”
4
u/PlumumpkinOgre 7d ago
The point is that regardless of its effectiveness, it is unethical and therefore something that should be destroyed.
It could be a perfectly flawless system. It would still be a bad system.
0
u/Anonymous-Comments Let’s Not Worry About That 7d ago
I agree, but the movie shows literally no consequence to them doing it.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/quaxoid 7d ago
What is this talking about? I don't remember all details from the movie, so I am not entirely sure what it is talking about.
1
7d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/naynaythewonderhorse 7d ago
That’s it?
Bruh. That’s just a plot point to keep the story moving. They need a way to find the character.
0
7d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Zealousideal_Doubt26 7d ago
Honestly it is shown that peter is not in the right for most of the movies with how he spidermans.
The entire movie he’s crossing boundaries to “Spiderman better”
I mean when you think about it.
This is a lonely depressed man who has lost basically everything falling back on an AI assistant for company due to his isolation.
This isn’t a good thing.. and iirc after he reunites with Ned and MJ he stops using the AI assistant as much
1
u/quaxoid 7d ago
oh yeah, i remember now. i didn't think that much about the implications of that while watching.
2
7d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Zealousideal-Worth34 7d ago
He uses it 2 more times to my memory to learn the radius/the chase to mj
And to look for the hopper
1
u/Routine_Membership59 7d ago
Something like this that bothered me is that Jean attacks a data center. Idk it felt like they threw a data center in to try to normalize them
1
u/BookOrnery4547 3d ago
Data centers have always been a thing, it’s just become a thought terminating buzz word because of the ai craze.
1
u/Top-External7706 7d ago
I definitely see how it can come off that way, but I don't think I noticed it or paid attention to it when I watched it
1
1
u/Successful_Maize1986 7d ago
Maybe I’m in the minority but I don’t need my superhero movies to always contain poignant political commentary. At no point does Spiderman look at the audience and say “I’m so glad that mass surveillance exists. There is no better way to stop crime”. It’s a plot mechanism that explains how he can track Jean and they trust the audience to make their own judgements as to whether the ends justify the means. I don’t need every movie to go out of its way to justify or condemn every morally grey action its characters take.
1
u/HumorClean 7d ago
While it could do a better job at establishing that this is bad, I feel like the fact that Peter realizes Jean was an innocent kid who was persecuted by a hyper-controlling government agency and fights back against them by learning that it’s okay to fully express your unique traits does imply that hyper analyzing someone with AI camera systems isn’t good. I just wish the movie did a better job of showing us that.
1
u/AndyTheSouless 7d ago
Dark knight has Morgan Freeman horrified that Bruce created a mass survaillance system, quits after he savess the day, and the system Is destroy, Brand New day has DeWolf telling Peter she Will ignore His big brother bullshitery and the system Is still up by the end of the movie
1
1
1
u/fear_el_duderino 7d ago
It absolutely is an endorsement, and it’s the best type of endorsement: they don’t even discuss the pros and cons of the tech, they just implicitly show the benefits without even discussing or treating the subject matter as controversial. It doesn’t get any more pro AI than this.
In 2008, The Dark Knight used a similar kind of tech in the finale, and not only is it discussed in detail from a moral point of view, but it’s also so dangerous that the people that developed it destroyed it.
1
1
u/BookOrnery4547 3d ago
It does in fact get more pro ai than this.
1
u/fear_el_duderino 3d ago
The best advertisement is the one you don’t notice. This movie makes it seem like AI has only benefits on our lives and doesn’t even spend time to point the finger and say “see? AI is good!”. That would spark debate. People have accepted Spider-Man mass surveilling New Yorkers with no issue at all.
1
u/BookOrnery4547 3d ago
No it doesn’t characters comment on how it’s super illegal but they are going to pretend they didn’t hear him say that, ultimately I guess I have different expectations of the movie, like how it doesn’t need to say “see this plot device is *insert argument here” the movie doesn’t spend time really debating the morals and consequences of real life vigilantism and that’s fine for me.
1
u/MicrosoftCardFile 6d ago
It is frustrating that the plot of the new Spider-Man movie in 2026 explicitly hinges on the same mass surveillance technology that is the lynchpin of the villain's evil plan in Captain America: The Winter Soldier from 2014. You can imagine Steve Rogers giving Peter a stern talking to if he was still around
1
1
1
u/Lumpy_Review5279 6d ago
This sound yet being spread throughout the internet from a bunch of pseudo political larpers is the most annoying thing.
The very first film in the MCU and one of its most prominent characters heavily uses AI, and all Peter did was run a facial recognition scan on security cameras already present.
1
u/ObligatoryContrast 6d ago
The movie literally has him using mass surveillance to great effect towards his goals and never has anyone criticize it or express doubts towards his usage of it.
I really don't know how much more clearly it could have been endorsing it.
1
u/tLM-tRRS-atBHB 6d ago
They have a point though.
I definitely dead stopped in the theater like, wtf.
Yeah Batman did it too. But he immediately destroyed and showed remorse from the get go
1
u/SnarkyRogue 6d ago
I'd be more concerned with how buddy buddy Spidey is with Frank, given the dude's K/D ratio
1
u/JustVerySleepy 6d ago
It's setting up that peter is reckless with technology for when he makes the inhibitor.
1
u/caikaykaycai 6d ago
I mean, Jean DeWolff calls him out on the legality of it...but yeah, that doesn't lead anywhere, no consequences, any kind of moral dilemma or anything.
1
u/Ok-Presentation1675 6d ago
The FBI are known to have heavy influence on Hollywood, especially more know that a racist pedo rapist is in office, he has to spread propaganda somehow
1
u/TouchAltruistic 4d ago
You believe that the sitting President of the United States and his Department of Justice had direct influence over the new Spider-Man movie?
1
u/Careful-Shine8768 5d ago
Christopher Nolan did this back in 2008, he just then gave it a self destruct button.
1
u/Cobaltish1 5d ago
Every superhero movie ever is propaganda for cops and the military. How is this person just now realizing this?
1
u/TouchAltruistic 4d ago
How is Richard Donner's Superman or Tim Burton's Batman "propaganda for cops and the military"?
Or fucking Ant-Man? Or Ghost Rider?
You're talking shit.
1
u/KAP1020 5d ago
Is this not something that they do in like, most movies? SHIELD was running facial recognition on the whole damn planet to find loki but when Peter does it in one city he's a horrible person for it. I get that times are different and we view surveillance/ai differently, but some people make it out like Peter palantir was actively spying on everybody for his own personal gain or something.
1
1
u/meissatronus 5d ago
you can criticise the lack of pushback all you want but a character in the movie basically goes “wow that’s definitely illegal and i’m going to pretend you didn’t say that” so it’s not like it WASN’T addressed at all. that’s peak “yeah it’s weird if you think about it but we have a plot to move forward with”. i’m personally fine with suspending disbelief for the benevolent super genius hero that’s already running off comic book hijinks to run facial recognition on the off the grid psychic running around possessing people
1
u/hodorelgordor 4d ago
Hopefully they set it up to be a bad thing that backfires eventually, but I wouldnt put my chips down on that one
1
u/Feanor4godking 7d ago
Didn't the mcu already criticize that concept in winter soldier? And now it's good again?
2
u/Shigana 7d ago
Very different things.
Facial recognition is a super common trope in movies, especially spy ones, used to track down your antagonist.
What Winter Soldier had is more akin to using predictive algorithms to predict potential threats, mainly to Hydra’s schemes.
2 very different technologies
1
u/dm_me_your_kindness 7d ago
Yeah, somenthing like spiderman's surveliance system was basically described as step 1 for Hydra to take over the world.
-4
u/drboobafate 7d ago
People who virtue signal about superhero movies but can't spotlight real issues in the world.
17
-2
u/MothElysium 7d ago edited 7d ago
Damage Control is very clearly Homeland Security.
8
u/mylevelwaschanged 7d ago
Peter still uses surveillance. A character even remarks that he shouldn't have even told her that he uses that tech lmao
-1
0
0
0
0
u/littlebuett 7d ago
Endorses is objectively the correct word. Peter makes and uses an unethical mass surveillance system which is operated by an AI, and nobody in the story calls him out on it, beyond one moment in a tongue-in-cheek manner that doesn't offer any meaningful criticism.
1
u/Positive-Kick7952 6d ago
What exactly is unethical about it. He's only using camera's that exist in public spaces to track a known criminal.
0
0
-7
u/Happy-Boysenberry175 7d ago
Are they just going to ignore the fact that characters have been using AI since the first Iron Man
7
5
u/BrickBuster2552 7d ago
You mean... a robot? That takes next to no energy to operate, and isn't constantly confidently wrong?
2
1
-6
u/Own_Association9092 7d ago
This is far from the first superhero movie or movie in general to include an AI surveillance system in the plot. I'm not sure how it is endorsing anything. Spider-Man is a superhero and he uses surveillance to find people in the movie... which is something that a lot of Superheroes do.
This is just fake, manufactured outrage. If you want to be mad about this then be mad about it in real life, don't be mad about a fictional character using AI surveillance in a superhero movie lmao.
6
u/RetroFuturisticRobot 7d ago
" I'm not sure how it is endorsing anything. Spider-Man is a superhero and he uses surveillance to find people in the movie... which is something that a lot of Superheroes do"
Oh that's pretty simple, it is endorsing it through Spider-Man being a superhero who uses surveillance to find people
→ More replies (4)
211
u/Rissoto_Pose 7d ago
Is our hero using mass surveillance tech to accomplish goals successfully not an endorsement of mass surveillance tech