Submitted by Gari_305 t3_10620l0 in Futurology
Comments
amitym t1_j3f2tci wrote
Only a week?? See, now, to me this says that automation is already greatly improving outcomes.
Before face recognition, it would have been 9 years, minimum. >_>
Uriah1024 t1_j3eqrzw wrote
At this point, it should be an understood human principle that we trust technology over older means because the old, reliable way of working is...work.
Explaining that the technology that's supposed to make things easier only makes work potentially more work is offputting.
It doesn't help that things are sold by a business for a profit, where sales and marketing are not going to be fully transparent about the limitations of the technology. As always, a lack of communication leading to poor understanding sets false expectations and leads to distrust and resentment.
fresh_ny t1_j3f6v6m wrote
I’m sure there were cases of mistaken identity before facial recognition.
I think I read something that the guy in question would have still been mistaken with old school people looking at photos.
The real test is, is there more or less mistaken identity with new tech vs old?
usgrant7977 t1_j3hg2ko wrote
This tech greatly increases the size of the net that catches people. It does not double check itself. People must do that. Nobody wants to hire humans. They're expensive and only want to work 40 hours a week. So more work is created, but there's no humans to take care of it. I expect jails to fill up, but there to not be enough judicial resources to deal with it.
TastyObligation3124 t1_j3g97a3 wrote
This man might have been falsely recognized if he stepped into a police bureau or somewhere similar, not at the airport or any other place with facial recognition cameras.
MetalJacket23 t1_j3gpst2 wrote
I don't really like the idea of been monitored. Not by shops and not even by the government, that I don't really trust. I don't want to live in a authoritarian world like China, where my very move is filmed on a camera and been denied basic needs because I didn't agree with my government.
axecrazyorc t1_j3hngzh wrote
I don’t know what country you live in but in the US almost every store has cameras. You’re being watched from the moment you step inside. Especially in local mom and pop joints and certain aisles in big box stores. Most of those domes are empty but not all of them.
I agree with the sentiment of not wanting to be watched but expecting to not be observed on private property isn’t realistic. In public? Yeah, I really don’t like the idea of cameras mounted on every street pole. Or in places where we should have a reasonable expectation of privacy, like a bathroom or our own homes.
yesyupyee t1_j3i9ycy wrote
Not just stores. So many houses have Ring cameras that there is a chance you're being watched from the moment you step put your front door.
axecrazyorc t1_j3js45i wrote
Yeah there’s also that. But there’s only so much you can do about that. THEORETICALLY we get a say in whether the state starts putting up cameras on ever street corner. Provided enough are sufficiently loud about it. Theoretical.
TemetN t1_j3hwecv wrote
This is one of the areas where I actually agree with the alarmism - it isn't even hypothetical, this tech already causes problems with its current deployment. While I still expect that everything is going to wind up monitored in the future, this area needs regulation because it's both directly, practically dangerous, and prone to mistakes.
SupaDupaTron t1_j3g0jmu wrote
Alarming Pitfalls is my middle name. Now, who need's rapid facial potatoes?
FuturologyBot t1_j3e9pdy wrote
The following submission statement was provided by /u/Gari_305:
From the article
>The breakneck development and deployment of facial recognition technology are outstripping efforts to corral alarming pitfalls.
>
>Why it matters: Police, retail stores, airports and sports arenas are rapidly increasing biometric surveillance. But critics say the results are too often blindly trusted, without enough double-checking of matches.
>
>Catch up quick: The latest face-recognition surveillance technology is designed to identify people seen on security cameras in real-time, or close to it.
Also from the Article
>A Black man was recently jailed for almost a week in Georgia after a facial recognition system incorrectly matched his face with a suspect in a New Orleans robbery, his lawyer told The New Orleans Advocate.
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/10620l0/facial_recognitions_rapid_adoption_exposes/j3e5bet/
Cheezyrock t1_j3hs9o5 wrote
Yeah, I hate being monitored and all…but what I really miss is unlocking my phone with my thumb instead of my face. Sometimes I’m just not looking directly at my phone, wearing a mask, or the lighting conditions aren’t right. It also unlocks when I don’t want it too sometimes.
yesyupyee t1_j3ia4sz wrote
You can just use a passcode.... its more secure in the sense that law enforcement cannot compel you to give your passcode without a warrant, whereas they CAN open your phone with a fingerprint or facial recognition.
Cheezyrock t1_j3icbf3 wrote
I’m pretty sure this isn’t accurate for most of the US. It has been upheld in some courts as protected under the 5th amendment. Providing access to your device through any means can be construed as being forced to testify against oneself. In sone circumstances a judge can issue a warrant, but if police do this without consent it is illegal search.
Outside of these extreme circumstances, I primarily like the convenience of fingerprint biometrics when compared to facial recognition.
From a security perspective, my device gives way nore access than ai care for from the lock screen that I can’t disable wothout disabling the features when it is unlocked as well and the average user will lack the skills for this configuration. Device security is in a nightmare state right now.
JCPRuckus t1_j3iltq1 wrote
From my understanding it's considered the equivalent of fingerprinting or mug shots, both of which can be compelled.
Gari_305 OP t1_j3e5bet wrote
From the article
>The breakneck development and deployment of facial recognition technology are outstripping efforts to corral alarming pitfalls.
>
>Why it matters: Police, retail stores, airports and sports arenas are rapidly increasing biometric surveillance. But critics say the results are too often blindly trusted, without enough double-checking of matches.
>
>Catch up quick: The latest face-recognition surveillance technology is designed to identify people seen on security cameras in real-time, or close to it.
Also from the Article
>A Black man was recently jailed for almost a week in Georgia after a facial recognition system incorrectly matched his face with a suspect in a New Orleans robbery, his lawyer told The New Orleans Advocate.