I wonder how much more outraged people would be if you swapped Amazon for Facebook which has names and much more information to tie back to a bunch of faces.
Amazon Pushes Facial Recognition to Police, Critics See Surveillance Risk
71–80 of 256 posts
Re: Amazon Pushes Facial Recognition to Police, Critics See Surveillance Risk
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you expand on "literally everyone is worse off", and I'll assume you meant literally in the colloquial sense, as an emphasis. OP gave an example where he was better off. Do you mean that the trade-off is not worth risk/down side?
OP gave the example where they felt better because someone got a harsher punishment.
Re: Amazon Pushes Facial Recognition to Police, Critics See Surveillance Risk
#73I find this article a bit funny, and see it mostly as hype. I worked very revently on a large internal face detection service for a legal and compliance application at a large US company. Being pragmatic engineers, the first thing we did was to pilot test Rekognition against an in-house prototype built by modifying some open source deep learning approaches. Rekognition performed so poorly compared to our prototype (w…
interesting data point on its performance but the reason decision makers might be cloud happy is amazon has the resources to scale this to thousands of RPS and develop the backend codebase up to hundreds of engineer contributions for many years, even as key talent comes and goes. The same might not be true of your prototype especially if the core competency of your business is sales or legal compliance not distributed computing platforms.
Re: Amazon Pushes Facial Recognition to Police, Critics See Surveillance Risk
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Courts will say that when you're in public you give certain privacy rights away etc. etc. This is the law of the land right now. As to your next example, I don't see what's wrong with those, as missing a court date or violating parole is a perfectly legitimate reason for you to be arrested.
how will you feel when they start arresting serial jaywalkers?
They already wrongly ticket people at stop lights, it's a racket. They could just mail you a ticket for very small petty "crimes," like not throwing something in the right bin, jay walking, etc. Do people really think police will only use this to solve crime? Solving crimes doesn't pay the bills. Ticketing people does. Then they could also use the facial recognition to get everyone that's at a protest of the government (they already do this somewhat with cell phone signals) then they know who to put on a watch list...even if it's a legitimate protest.
I'm a bit perturbed that people on this board aren't more concerned about the many bad ways that this can be used for, especially since police oversight is notoriously bad, in virtually every country, including the west.
Re: Amazon Pushes Facial Recognition to Police, Critics See Surveillance Risk
#75How long until there's a pay service where private citizens can access the toolkit also?
(Follow-up question: how long until the toolkit is just an open-source library that you can run on a Raspberry Pi? ;) ).
Re: Amazon Pushes Facial Recognition to Police, Critics See Surveillance Risk
#76They are NOT selling a service that identifies people from data sets other than the police's supplied data sets. It is not inappropriate for police to be able to determine who they are interacting with if that person is a known criminal.
The cat is out of the bag and is already something the police could do themselves. The real fear is when they are able to source commercially available information from linked in, facebook, etc to identify everyone's whereabouts.
Pushing back this early will not have mass appeal and will not help to prevent the future, broader concerns IMHO.
Re: Amazon Pushes Facial Recognition to Police, Critics See Surveillance Risk
#77Why? The surveillance is there. I used this with some personal video surveillance to identify some thieves who were casing driveways to find cars to get into. Instead of wasting hours looking at footage, I was able to give the police excerpts that helped them identify the perp. Also, because of the circumstances and footage, they were able to charge him with a more serious crime than petit larceny, which means he won…
How many times do we have to learn this lesson?
Re: Amazon Pushes Facial Recognition to Police, Critics See Surveillance Risk
#78Why? The surveillance is there. I used this with some personal video surveillance to identify some thieves who were casing driveways to find cars to get into. Instead of wasting hours looking at footage, I was able to give the police excerpts that helped them identify the perp. Also, because of the circumstances and footage, they were able to charge him with a more serious crime than petit larceny, which means he won…
"Who's watching the government?"
"Voters" is generally considered the correct answer in democracies and republics, I believe.
Re: Amazon Pushes Facial Recognition to Police, Critics See Surveillance Risk
#79Why? The surveillance is there. I used this with some personal video surveillance to identify some thieves who were casing driveways to find cars to get into. Instead of wasting hours looking at footage, I was able to give the police excerpts that helped them identify the perp. Also, because of the circumstances and footage, they were able to charge him with a more serious crime than petit larceny, which means he won…
Ahh the old "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear" defense for mass surveillance. Don't study history much do you? If you believe this will only ever be used to stop thieves and people that victimize others you are naive at an unfathomable level >The Federal government has been doing this type of surveillance either using facial or LPR data on interstate corridors since at least the 90s. lol... You be…
It does suggest, however, that a slippery-slope argument of "More surveillance plunges us immediately into a 1984-esque dystopia" has a big [citation needed] banner hovering over it though.
Re: Amazon Pushes Facial Recognition to Police, Critics See Surveillance Risk
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you expand on "literally everyone is worse off", and I'll assume you meant literally in the colloquial sense, as an emphasis. OP gave an example where he was better off. Do you mean that the trade-off is not worth risk/down side?
Only if you consider privacy as a means to an end rather than a goal by itself. Facial recognition has a negative effect on literally everyone's privacy.