But alas, both liberal and conservatives have weakened the 1st Amendment to be "only speech we agree with", the 2nd to "Only squirt guns", and the 5th/14th doesn't apply to accusations from 38 years ago.
Amazon Employee: We Shouldn’t Sell Facial Recognition Tech to Police
101–110 of 289 posts
Re: Amazon Employee: We Shouldn’t Sell Facial Recognition Tech to Police
#102What happens when they combine this with image enhancement powered by deep learning?
Re: Amazon Employee: We Shouldn’t Sell Facial Recognition Tech to Police
#103Re: Amazon Employee: We Shouldn’t Sell Facial Recognition Tech to Police
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unless the staff operating the public service receive no compensation at all, then there is profit involved.
This seems like a fundamental misunderstanding of the definition of profit.
Re: Amazon Employee: We Shouldn’t Sell Facial Recognition Tech to Police
#105I would say appeal to the Constitution: facial recognition violates a person's 4th Amendment rights. But alas, both liberal and conservatives have weakened the 1st Amendment to be "only speech we agree with", the 2nd to "Only squirt guns", and the 5th/14th doesn't apply to accusations from 38 years ago.
Meaningless hyperbole.
Re: Amazon Employee: We Shouldn’t Sell Facial Recognition Tech to Police
#106I would say appeal to the Constitution: facial recognition violates a person's 4th Amendment rights. But alas, both liberal and conservatives have weakened the 1st Amendment to be "only speech we agree with", the 2nd to "Only squirt guns", and the 5th/14th doesn't apply to accusations from 38 years ago.
Does it really though? Has there been any sort of court cases confirming this?
Re: Amazon Employee: We Shouldn’t Sell Facial Recognition Tech to Police
#107> Amazon, where I work, is currently allowing police departments around the country to purchase its facial recognition product, Rekognition, and I and other employees demand that we stop immediately. Ok, nod, nod... > The letter also contained demands to kick Palantir, the software firm that powers much of ICE's deportation and tracking program, off Amazon Web Services and to institute employee oversight for ethical…
We already have a mechanism for choosing the leader of these various institutions. And whatever powers we give to these institutions, we have to recognize that they will change leadership as quickly as a single election.
Ultimately, it should be a political issue... first and foremost. We may not have the best political system possible, but its the best that we all can agree to. As such, we should rely upon the culture of this country to provide us the leaders who we would be proud to give these powers to.
Re: Amazon Employee: We Shouldn’t Sell Facial Recognition Tech to Police
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
All well and good until you get visited by men with guns for breaking the law.
if the gov has to physically send someone with guns to someones door to enforce a law, the economic feasibility of enforcing the law has already shifted massively away from the passive data scoop of a mass surveillance system. Why hasnt the gov won the war on drugs by just busting down every door?
Re: Amazon Employee: We Shouldn’t Sell Facial Recognition Tech to Police
#109> Amazon, where I work, is currently allowing police departments around the country to purchase its facial recognition product, Rekognition, and I and other employees demand that we stop immediately. Ok, nod, nod... > The letter also contained demands to kick Palantir, the software firm that powers much of ICE's deportation and tracking program, off Amazon Web Services and to institute employee oversight for ethical…
There are plenty of legal things that I think it’s fine with being non-neutral on. A private company SHOULD be non-neutral based on the whims of the employees! Who else steers their ship?
Re: Amazon Employee: We Shouldn’t Sell Facial Recognition Tech to Police
#110> Amazon, where I work, is currently allowing police departments around the country to purchase its facial recognition product, Rekognition, and I and other employees demand that we stop immediately. Ok, nod, nod... > The letter also contained demands to kick Palantir, the software firm that powers much of ICE's deportation and tracking program, off Amazon Web Services and to institute employee oversight for ethical…
> Second, you risk AWS being seen as non-neutral based on the whims of employees' feelings about a company (as opposed to something illegal). There are plenty of legal things that I think it’s fine with being non-neutral on. A private company SHOULD be non-neutral based on the whims of the employees! Who else steers their ship?