Face Recognition Software Is A Danger To Our Civil Liberties
The problem is, when we have technology, the impulse is to put it to use. We want to put it in place, press those buttons, sound the bells, blow those whistles.
As I write in "Good Manners For Nice People Who Sometimes Say F*ck", privacy concerns often take a back seat to the impulse to try groovy new technology.
Natasha Singer writes about this software in The New York Times, quoting one of the pioneers of modern face recognition, Joseph J. Atick:
Face-matching today could enable mass surveillance, "basically robbing everyone of their anonymity," he says, and inhibit people's normal behavior outside their homes. Pointing to the intelligence documents made public by Edward J. Snowden, he adds that once companies amass consumers' facial data, government agencies might obtain access to it, too.To many in the biometrics industry, Dr. Atick's warning seems Cassandra-like. Face recognition to them is no different from a car, a neutral technology whose advantages far outweigh the risks. The conveniences of biometrics seem self-evident: Your unique code automatically accompanies you everywhere. They envision a world where, instead of having to rely on losable ID cards or on a jumble of easily forgettable -- not to mention hackable -- passwords, you could unlock your smartphone or gain entry to banks, apartment complexes, parking garages and health clubs just by showing your face.
Dr. Atick sees convenience in these kinds of uses as well. But he provides a cautionary counterexample to make his case. Just a few months back, he heard about NameTag, an app that, according to its news release, was available in an early form to people trying out Google Glass. Users had only to glance at a stranger and NameTag would instantly return a match complete with that stranger's name, occupation and public Facebook profile information. "We are basically allowing our fellow citizens to surveil us," Dr. Atick told me on the trade-show floor.
Where do we -- and where can we -- draw the line?
Maybe the cure will be to develop masks good enough that it's not obvious one is wearing a mask. Let them try to track millions of Guy Fawkeses.
jdgalt at May 17, 2014 9:20 AM
Here's a quick how-to to hack a counter:
http://mods-n-hacks.wonderhowto.com/how-to/make-infrared-mask-hide-your-face-from-cameras-201280/
Keith Glass at May 17, 2014 9:34 AM
The trick will be getting large numbers of people to wear masks whenever they're out in public. If it's just those with something to hide, the masks themselves will attract attention from the authorities, rather than deflect it.
Rex Little at May 17, 2014 10:29 AM
Users had only to glance at a stranger and NameTag would instantly return a match complete with that stranger's name, occupation and public Facebook profile information.
I wonder how many people would love to have this ability compared to how many are appalled by it. My guess is that the former would be the larger group.
JD at May 17, 2014 11:25 AM
Judging by the number who cheerfully post their worst qualities on Facebook, I fear you're right, JD.
Rex Little at May 17, 2014 11:31 AM
Sorry, but just as with the Rapiscan body scanners, there is another factor being ignored here.
Prove that you are the only one who looks like you.
You can't. Even DNA testing and fingerprint examination merely makes identification more probable, not absolute.
Meanwhile, iPhoto - and I presume a half-dozen freeware programs - does facial recognition from ordinary photo collections now, so that you can sort everybody out for personal albums.
So, the key is to point out the ambiguities, and be sure the technology is NOT used to advance "probable cause stretching", as is the case with the polygraph today.
Radwaste at May 17, 2014 2:52 PM
The cat is already out of the bag w/ this technology. Facial recognition has been maturing for years and the core algorithms are public. It's is an applied sub domain of computer vision and biometrics research, and relies on fundamental work in those areas. But it's only recently that software frameworks have become available that make it accessible to non-specialists. And these techniques are a generation behind the really impressive stuff. So there is no putting this genie back in the bottle.
And of course the government is going to want to abuse it. I don't know how to stop that, but if we've learned anything from the Obama era, it's that the press and civil rights establishment effectively become organs of the state when a Progressive is in office. So we can't expect civil liberties to be protected if we elect Progressives. And as we've seen, Progressives are even worse than conservatives when it comes to civil liberties.
Petro at May 17, 2014 4:00 PM
Leave a comment