The Era of Automatic Facial Recognition and Surveillance Is Here • Hacker News Board

Re: The Era of Automatic Facial Recognition and Surveillance Is Here

#61

Post by euske » Mon, Oct 05, 2015, 11:28 PM UTC

iamcurious wrote: post #4

I no longer know what to do about this problem. I'm convinced surveillance is here to stay and that making it illegal will only serve to hide the microphones. I'm still extremely grateful for those who fight for privacy, is just that I don't see how we can win. Not knowing how to treat the cause, I'm at least trying to treat the symptoms. We might not be able to stop them from seeing our secrets, but we might very we…

As much as I hope this is wrong, I think the logical consequence would be a transition from an imbalanced one-to-all surveillance society to an all-to-all surveillance society, i.e. everyone knows everyone else's secret. If we can't take the surveillance part back, all we can do is to equalize it. I don't know myself if this is dystopian or not. I'd just feel very uncomfortable, but maybe that's what a society really is.

Re: The Era of Automatic Facial Recognition and Surveillance Is Here

#62

Post by avn2109 » Mon, Oct 05, 2015, 11:32 PM UTC

MichaelApproved wrote: post #36

hackuser wrote: post #6

A HN contest: Provide an elevator pitch, to completely non-technical end-users, that will make them aware of this issue and persuade them that it is important to them. Vote up the best ones. [EDIT: The goal is to persuade them about its dangers, not sell them something based on it] That elevator pitch is key. I have extensive knowledge about this issue but have a hard time coming up with it; I need to be prepared. Ch…

It's now easier than ever for the political party in power to spy on the opposition. Imagine what Nixon would do if he had the NSA surveillance powers that are available to the current President. Republican, Democrat, or independent. Do you want any party to have that much power while in office?

If history is any guide, you've got the surveillance directionality mixed up here.

Most fallen regimes that we have good records for - e.g. the Khmer Rouge, the Nazis, and (kind of) the East Germans had various factions competing overtly or covertly for power. Each faction had an intelligence service constructing dossiers on/blackmailing the chiefs and other interesting people associated with other factions. The nominal chief executives were spied on by everyone except their own ultraloyal people.

I don't see any reason to expect different outcomes in America, so most likely the NSA would be closely watching Nixon and everyone else, while Nixon's people tried to do the same.

And of course this isn't a special property of Nixon - it would be very naive to believe there aren't various dossiers on Obama floating around the Virginia/Maryland suburbs.

Re: The Era of Automatic Facial Recognition and Surveillance Is Here

#63

Post by analyst74 » Mon, Oct 05, 2015, 11:36 PM UTC

iamcurious wrote: post #4

I no longer know what to do about this problem. I'm convinced surveillance is here to stay and that making it illegal will only serve to hide the microphones. I'm still extremely grateful for those who fight for privacy, is just that I don't see how we can win. Not knowing how to treat the cause, I'm at least trying to treat the symptoms. We might not be able to stop them from seeing our secrets, but we might very we…

Surveillance technologies themselves is also a tool, dangerous one. It's only bad when wielded by bad characters.

The problem, I feel, is lack of transparency, what exactly is the government collecting, and how they are being used, etc.

Once those information are made public, then we can allow the judiciary system to decide on a case by case level what is allowed and what is not.

Re: The Era of Automatic Facial Recognition and Surveillance Is Here

#64

Post by fnordfnordfnord » Mon, Oct 05, 2015, 11:36 PM UTC

pkinsky wrote: post #40

hackuser wrote: post #6

A HN contest: Provide an elevator pitch, to completely non-technical end-users, that will make them aware of this issue and persuade them that it is important to them. Vote up the best ones. [EDIT: The goal is to persuade them about its dangers, not sell them something based on it] That elevator pitch is key. I have extensive knowledge about this issue but have a hard time coming up with it; I need to be prepared. Ch…

Real-life targeted advertising: bus-stop ads that scan your face, look up your private browsing history, and try to sell you the complete works of Nickelback or something equally embarrassing.

"Other customers who purchased Nickelback also liked..."

Re: The Era of Automatic Facial Recognition and Surveillance Is Here

#65

Post by jpatokal » Mon, Oct 05, 2015, 11:38 PM UTC

So are we actually there yet? I was under the impression that, while face recognition has evolved to the point that face matching against a limited group of people (say, your Facebook friends) is feasible, we're still a long ways off from being able to put a face-scanner in a crowd in NYC and have it spot the 1 suspect among 10 million without a totally ridiculous rate of false positives.

Re: The Era of Automatic Facial Recognition and Surveillance Is Here

#66

Post by ineedtosleep » Mon, Oct 05, 2015, 11:43 PM UTC

analyst74 wrote: post #60

macNchz wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've spent years saving up to finally buy a home. You're having a baby in a few months, and you really need the space. You have the down payment ready, your credit is great, you've ticked all the boxes on the application, but you're turned down for the loan. Why? Maybe you walk home through a bad neighborhood. Maybe you sometimes grab a beer at a bit of a divey bar near your office. Maybe you've visited an old frie…

But doesn't this cut both ways? If you don't hang around questionable people, you'd qualify for better rate for loans. Or if your credit score is not very high, but the fact you don't hang around questionable people brings your credit file up a notch and make you qualify.

"Questionable people" is hardly a concrete descriptor, nor is it something immediately obvious.

Let's say I meet a guy at a party. Facial scanners detect me with him. He seems like a nice guy, but he is currently on trial for a number of white collar offenses -- I know none of this. "The machine" does and will now assume I hang around questionable people.

Re: The Era of Automatic Facial Recognition and Surveillance Is Here

#67

Post by shabbyrobe » Mon, Oct 05, 2015, 11:46 PM UTC

macNchz wrote: post #51

hackuser wrote: post #6

A HN contest: Provide an elevator pitch, to completely non-technical end-users, that will make them aware of this issue and persuade them that it is important to them. Vote up the best ones. [EDIT: The goal is to persuade them about its dangers, not sell them something based on it] That elevator pitch is key. I have extensive knowledge about this issue but have a hard time coming up with it; I need to be prepared. Ch…

You've spent years saving up to finally buy a home. You're having a baby in a few months, and you really need the space. You have the down payment ready, your credit is great, you've ticked all the boxes on the application, but you're turned down for the loan. Why? Maybe you walk home through a bad neighborhood. Maybe you sometimes grab a beer at a bit of a divey bar near your office. Maybe you've visited an old frie…

I've tried this one on lay people before. The problem I have is that they usually can't get past their firm belief that these things are technologically impossible, even after you explain to them that they are. "That all sounds like science fiction, that can't happen in the real world."

Also it can fall down if you don't stick only to directly relatable details: "but I don't walk through a bad neighbourhood, so this wouldn't affect me and therefore I don't see how it could be a problem". The instant it ceases to speak to their experience directly, you've lost them.

Re: The Era of Automatic Facial Recognition and Surveillance Is Here

#68

Post by bostonpete » Mon, Oct 05, 2015, 11:47 PM UTC

analyst74 wrote: post #60

macNchz wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've spent years saving up to finally buy a home. You're having a baby in a few months, and you really need the space. You have the down payment ready, your credit is great, you've ticked all the boxes on the application, but you're turned down for the loan. Why? Maybe you walk home through a bad neighborhood. Maybe you sometimes grab a beer at a bit of a divey bar near your office. Maybe you've visited an old frie…

But doesn't this cut both ways? If you don't hang around questionable people, you'd qualify for better rate for loans. Or if your credit score is not very high, but the fact you don't hang around questionable people brings your credit file up a notch and make you qualify.

Yeah, in my mind, this completely negates the argument. If I don't engage in a given statistically risky behavior today, I'm paying more for insurance because some people do and the insurance company doesn't know who should be paying for that risky behavior so we all pay a little more.

To me, the more compelling angle to attack surveillance has to appeal to people's desire to keep some portion of their lives from being made public (rather than appealing to their wallet).

Re: The Era of Automatic Facial Recognition and Surveillance Is Here

#69

Post by hackuser » Mon, Oct 05, 2015, 11:59 PM UTC

shabbyrobe wrote: post #67

macNchz wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've spent years saving up to finally buy a home. You're having a baby in a few months, and you really need the space. You have the down payment ready, your credit is great, you've ticked all the boxes on the application, but you're turned down for the loan. Why? Maybe you walk home through a bad neighborhood. Maybe you sometimes grab a beer at a bit of a divey bar near your office. Maybe you've visited an old frie…

I've tried this one on lay people before. The problem I have is that they usually can't get past their firm belief that these things are technologically impossible, even after you explain to them that they are. "That all sounds like science fiction, that can't happen in the real world." Also it can fall down if you don't stick only to directly relatable details: "but I don't walk through a bad neighbourhood, so this…

> it can fall down if you don't stick only to directly relatable details: "but I don't walk through a bad neighbourhood, so this wouldn't affect me and therefore I don't see how it could be a problem". The instant it ceases to speak to their experience directly, you've lost them.

A tangent: I enounter this too, all the time, with intelligent, well-educated people. It's as if people don't understand what "example" means, or can't project concepts from an example to a broader class.

What am I misunderstanding?

Re: The Era of Automatic Facial Recognition and Surveillance Is Here

#70

Post by imron » Tue, Oct 06, 2015, 12:02 AM UTC

shabbyrobe wrote: post #67

macNchz wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've spent years saving up to finally buy a home. You're having a baby in a few months, and you really need the space. You have the down payment ready, your credit is great, you've ticked all the boxes on the application, but you're turned down for the loan. Why? Maybe you walk home through a bad neighborhood. Maybe you sometimes grab a beer at a bit of a divey bar near your office. Maybe you've visited an old frie…

I've tried this one on lay people before. The problem I have is that they usually can't get past their firm belief that these things are technologically impossible, even after you explain to them that they are. "That all sounds like science fiction, that can't happen in the real world." Also it can fall down if you don't stick only to directly relatable details: "but I don't walk through a bad neighbourhood, so this…

> "That all sounds like science fiction, that can't happen in the real world."

Tell them that the mobile phone they have in their pocket also seems like science fiction - and it was 20-30 years ago. Now it is science fact. Facial recognition is getting the same way.

If anything, based on all the shoddy movies that 'zoom in, enhance' with photos, the public should be primed to accept facial recognition quite easily.