Tech & Science : We Don't Need To 'Pause' Police Use Of Face Recognition -- We Need To Ban It Forever - - PressFrom - Australia
  •   
  •   

Tech & Science We Don't Need To 'Pause' Police Use Of Face Recognition -- We Need To Ban It Forever

04:50  23 may  2019
04:50  23 may  2019 Source:   gizmodo.com.au

San Francisco becomes the first US city to BAN government use of facial recognition

San Francisco becomes the first US city to BAN government use of facial recognition Departments will need to get board approval to continue using or acquiring technology. The legislation bans municipal use but not personal, business or federal government use of face ID technology. require(["inlineoutstreamAd", "c.

Facial recognition experts called to testify before a congressional hearing on Wednesday found themselves in broad agreement: Citing a litany of However, the idea that we should simply ban police from using this problematic and, at present, demonstrably racist technology was somehow not

Facial recognition experts called to testify before a congressional hearing on Wednesday found themselves in broad agreement: Citing a litany However, the idea that we should simply ban police from using this problematic and, at present, demonstrably racist technology was somehow not the

We Don't Need To 'Pause' Police Use Of Face Recognition -- We Need To Ban It Forever© Photo: Steven Senne / AP Massachusetts Institute of Technology facial recognition researcher Joy Buolamwini stands for a portrait behind a mask at the school, in Cambridge, Mass. Buolamwini’s research has uncovered racial and gender bias in facial analysis tools sold by companies such as Amazon that have a hard time recognising certain faces, especially darker-skinned women. (Photo: Steven Senne / AP)

Facial recognition experts called to testify before a congressional hearing on Wednesday found themselves in broad agreement: Citing a litany of abuses, each pressed federal lawmakers to respond to the widespread, unregulated use of the technology by law enforcement at every level across the country.

Police closing in on Fortitude Valley stabbing attacker

Police closing in on Fortitude Valley stabbing attacker The victim has undergone facial reconstructive surgery and is in a stable condition today. © Supplied Security video shows the moment the man was stabbed. The attacker is described as being in his mid-20s, with a tanned complexion and solid build with short dark hair. He was wearing glasses, black shorts, a blue coloured jacket and black runners. Police say they know the identity of the man responsible.

Facial recognition experts called to testify before a congressional hearing on Wednesday found themselves in broad agreement: Citing a litany of abuses, each pressed federal lawmakers to respond to the widespread, unregulated use of the technology by law enfo…

We Don ' t Need to ' Pause ' Police Use of Face Recognition — We Need to Ban It Forever . According to the report, the restrictions on face recognition tech are part of a broader plan to address the use of artificial intelligence and to “foster public trust and acceptance” in this type of technology.

We Don't Need To 'Pause' Police Use Of Face Recognition -- We Need To Ban It Forever
How To Get A Home Loan With 5% Deposit
Find out more on Finder
Ad Finder.com.au

However, the idea that we should simply ban police from using this problematic and, at present, demonstrably racist technology was somehow not the only argument to be heard.

Some of the experts suggested in fact that, maybe, with the right amount of regulation, America wouldn’t devolve into a repressive police state just because its citizens have their faces scanned every time they step outside.

Witnesses before the House Committee on Oversight and Reform—attorneys, scientists, academics, and a noted law enforcement professional—spoke at length about the potential for abuse while offering a laundry list of real-world examples in which face recognition had already been used to trample the rights of U.S. citizens.

Police hunting suspected killer of crime figure

Police hunting suspected killer of crime figure A suspected gunman who executed a Melbourne crime figure is shown strolling from the crime scene in CCTV footage.

We Don ' t Need to ' Pause ' Police Use of Face Recognition — We Need to Ban It Forever . As such, these citywide bans are especially crucial given face recognition is still very much an emerging technology— we don ’ t yet know what the more insidious consequences of its widespread execution

But presumably, face recognition tools will always exhibit some form of bias. “ It is unlikely that we will ever achieve a point where every single demographic is identical in performance across the board, whether We Don ' t Need to ' Pause ' Police Use of Face Recognition — We Need to Ban It Forever .

With few exceptions, the technology, which each witness described as both deeply flawed and intrinsically biased, has been misemployed by the untrained police officers who utilise it—many of whom have concealed its use from defendants who are implicated in crimes by these defective algorithms.

“Using artificial intelligence to confer upon a highly subjective visual impression a halo of digital certainty is neither fact-based nor just,” said Dr. Cedric Alexander, a former chief of police and ex-security director for the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). “But,” he lamented, “it is not illegal.”

Despite offering some of the most powerful arguments in favour of at least temporarily prohibiting the use of the technology, noting for instance that there are no standards governing the kinds of images included in “any” agency’s face-recognition database—“Who is included in it? Who knows?”—Alexander would go on to disagree that it was time to “push the pause button” on face recognition, an opinion unanimously shared by his fellow experts called to testify.

Big news for Australian travellers heading to the UK

Big news for Australian travellers heading to the UK The UK Government has announced Australians with biometric passports can use the gates, which use facial recognition technology to compare the passenger’s face to the digital image recorded in the passport. © AAP The UK Government has announced Australians with biometric passports can use the gates, which use . Children aged 12 to 17 years old, who are accompanied by an adult, are also able to use them. However, children aged 11 and younger, and their accompanying adult, cannot.

One day after the biggest police body camera manufacturer in America banned the use of face recognition technology, Somerville, Massachusetts became the second city in the United States to ban the tech We Don ' t Need to ' Pause ' Police Use of Face Recognition — We Need to Ban It Forever .

https://gizmodo.com/ we -dont- need - to - pause - police - use - of - face - recognition - we -1834958605. Share Source.

Andrew Ferguson, a professor at the University of the District of Columbia, for example, did not mince words in his opening remarks: “Building a system with the potential to arbitrarily scan and identify individuals without any criminal suspicion and discover personal information about their location, interests or activities, can and should simply be banned by law.”

But in a room in which both Republicans and Democrats appeared to generally agree with the experts—that face recognition presents a clear and present threat to Americans’ civil rights and civil liberties—there were two conversations happening at once.

Whereas Ferguson’s solution was to flat-out ban police algorithms from gaining unfettered access to the (oft-cited) “50 million” surveillance cameras across the country, other proposals suggested that, maybe, there does exist a future in which all Americans’ faces are surveilled, but only under a fair and well-regulated system, transparent and accountable to the people.

The clearest example of this was in statements about the inherent biases of face recognition, which studies have repeatedly shown to be dramatically less accurate when it comes to faces of women and people of colour.

Terrorism charge: Man to face court in Brisbane after joint police raid on property

Terrorism charge: Man to face court in Brisbane after joint police raid on property A Brisbane man has been charged with attempting to support a terrorist organisation after a joint state and federal police team raided a house in the southern suburb of Algester yesterday. How To Get A Home Loan With 5% Deposit Find out more on Finder Ad Finder.com.au He is accused of supporting the Islamic State in Iraq by providing video-editing software to a relative who had travelled to the conflict zone. Australian Federal Police (AFP) alleged the man's relative was working for the "media unit" of the group. AFP assistant commissioner Ian McCartney said the arrest had helped protect national security.

The Transportation Security Administration will use face recognition technology at security With its face recognition technology, TSA will collect a dumb amount of data about participants, including their ID We Don ' t Need to ' Pause ' Police Use of Face Recognition — We Need to Ban It Forever .

We Don ' t Need to ' Pause ' Police Use of Face Recognition — We Need to Ban It Forever . The nonprofit advocacy group, which has historically focused its efforts on net neutrality, is calling for a “complete ban ” on government use of facial recognition —not just a moratorium or light regulation.

“Our faces may well be the final frontier of privacy,” testified Joy Buolamwini, founder of the Algorithmic Justice League, whose research on face recognition tools at M.I.T. Media Lab identified a 35-per cent error rate for photos of darker skinned women, as opposed to database searches using photos of white men, which proved accurate 99 per cent of the time.

“In one test, Amazon recognition even failed on the face of Oprah Winfrey labelling her male,” she said. “Personally, I’ve had to resort to literally wearing a white mask to have my face detected by some of this technology. Coding in white face is the last thing I expected to be doing at M.I.T., an American epicentre of innovation.”

The proven bias of facial recognition systems was presented by Buolamwini, among others, as one reason to declare a “moratorium” on the use of facial recognition; that is, to temporarily prohibit its use until the technology is improved, or “matured” as one witness put it.

A moratorium is both appropriate and necessary, testified Clare Garvie, the author of a recent study at the Georgetown Law Center on Privacy and Technology that found police had used look-alike celebrity photos and police sketches in attempts to identify suspects.

She added, however: “It may be that we can establish common sense rules that distinguish between appropriate and inappropriate uses—uses that promote public safety and uses that threaten our civil rights and liberties.”

Amazon set for facial recognition revolt

Amazon set for facial recognition revolt Investors are to vote on whether the firm should continue selling its facial ID tech to the police. Opposition to Amazon's sale of its facial recognition technology to US police forces is set to come to a head at its annual general meeting on Wednesday. Shareholders will vote twice on the matter. First, over whether the company should stop offering its Rekognition system to government agencies. And second, over whether to commission an independent study into whether the tech threatens people's civil rights. The votes are non-binding, meaning executives do not have to take specific action whatever the outcome.

In the United States, face recognition surveillance is a point of serious controversy. San Francisco became the first American city to outright ban the government entities from using Recommended Stories. We Don ' t Need to ' Pause ' Police Use of Face Recognition — We Need to Ban It Forever .

Critics argued that police need all the help they can get, especially in a city with high rates of property crime. That people expect privacy in public space is unreasonable given the proliferation of But those who support the ban say facial recognition technology is flawed and a serious threat to civil liberties.

These arguments leave at least some wiggle room for lawmakers to entertain the notion that there’s a future in which an artificial intelligence designed for police use scans the faces of Americans whenever they leave their homes.

It’s a vision of a police state that’s “good,” in that the police themselves are ethical and just because they’re held accountable by rules and regulations; a future in which police procedures are open and transparent, and defendants always get the full story about how they came under suspicion in the first place.

Ultimately, this is an absurd fantasy that ignores what is common knowledge about the history of abuses by U.S. law enforcement agencies over the relevant last half-century. In the last two years alone, an investigation by the Associated Press uncovered that police officers across the country had misused “confidential law enforcement databases to get information on romantic partners, business associates, neighbours, journalists and others for reasons that have nothing to do with daily police work...” The realisation of this outspread abuse by police did not prompt Congress to take action. It did not even dissuade the type of police stalking that the reporters exposed.

A Florida police officer, it was reported this March, made “several hundred questionable database queries of women,” authorities said. At least 150 women were targeted. Employees at federal agencies whose work is highly classified were also found guilty of this behaviour.

A 2013 report by the National Security Agency’s Office of Inspector General, for example, detailed how one NSA employee—on his first day of work—“queried six email addresses belonging to a former girlfriend, a U.S. person, without authorisation.”

In each of these cases, there were already regulations on the books to prohibit the kind of abuse committed. They simply had no effect.

While the witnesses Wednesday entertained the notion that some legislative solution might exist that permits law enforcement’s use of face recognition, they also spelled out why any such solution would essentially be unconstitutional anyway. Congress might as well give police the ability to collect DNA, fingerprints, or mobile phone location history on a whim, absent a subpoena, warrant, or court order of any kind.

“This power raises questions about our Fourth and First Amendment protections,” Garvie said. “Police can’t secretly fingerprint a crowd of people from across the street. They also can’t walk through that crowd demanding that everybody produce their driver’s licence. But they can scan their faces remotely and, in secret, and identify each person thanks to face recognition technology.”

A face recognition program that presents no racial bias is still one of the creepiest uses of technology by law enforcement ever. It should not merely be put “on pause” until Amazon figures out how to flawlessly identify residents of Black communities, where, one assumes, a majority of these AI-equipped cameras will inevitably be deployed.

Read more

'I'm going to have a bit of fun with it': Face-tattooed fugitive continues to taunt police by phoning Studio 10 to explain why he's ignoring a warrant out for his arrest.
Ethan Bramble, 23, has tattoos to 98 per cent of his body including his eyeballs. Victorian Police issued a warrant for his arrest on Wednesday after he failed to appear in court. He told Studio 10 rumours he was wanted on assault charges were false and confessed he was accused of criminal damage.

—   Share news in the SOC. Networks

Topical videos:

usr: 0
This is interesting!