Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. Gov Privacy Watchdog Under Pressure to Recommend Facial Recognition Ban

thehill.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 115 posts

Re: U.S. Gov Privacy Watchdog Under Pressure to Recommend Facial Recognition Ban

#81

Post by killjoywashere »

mattmanser wrote: post #80
TylerE wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Way to miss the point. The invention of the bulldozer didn't change property rights.

We actually had anonymity of the crowds back then, which facial recog tech circumvents. The problem is also that there are a LOT of laws, and it's very easy to manufacture a crime. I would also suggest reading about people who have been subject to unwarranted surveillance just because of their views, and the damage it does them. A good example is the environmental groups in the 90s in the UK.

Or Hemingway.

Re: U.S. Gov Privacy Watchdog Under Pressure to Recommend Facial Recognition Ban

#82

Post by whydoineedone »

anonsivalley652 wrote: post #62
stevehawk wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're out in public then what privacy are you expecting?

"Nothing to hide" is indicative of condoning inverted/actual totalitarianism, until the Chinese-inspired tracking system follows you around every moment of your life and gives you a social credit score that tells you that you can't fly on a plane or take a train. Or looks extra hard for any technicality felonies you commit unwittingly in your professional career as reprisal if you speak out against their abuses. So m…

having a person follow you around is not the same as an AI. you're comparing apples and oranges. I think having laws to control how and when the data is accessed as well as a degree of transparency into that access along with safeguards/oversight is reasonable. to simply say that we shouldn't use the technology is luddite fearmongering.

should we have kept filing cabinets full of papers instead of databases for tracking criminals across state lines as well? see? I can make bullshit comparisons too!

Re: U.S. Gov Privacy Watchdog Under Pressure to Recommend Facial Recognition Ban

#83

Post by tictok4 »

t223 wrote: post #79
tictok4 wrote: post #2

Good but don't exempt the government. Many local cities are building out vast networks. Including my very own Miami Beach Police Department.

Unfortunately ANPR is becoming ubiquitous - especially around A1A. I’d support banning this as well.

I might be content with a large warning sign "LICENSE PLATE READER AHEAD" for each location.

Re: U.S. Gov Privacy Watchdog Under Pressure to Recommend Facial Recognition Ban

#84

Post by tictok4 »

stevehawk wrote: post #11
tictok4 wrote: post #2

Good but don't exempt the government. Many local cities are building out vast networks. Including my very own Miami Beach Police Department.

If you're out in public then what privacy are you expecting?

I'm expecting not to be tracked by 50 axis cameras with analytic software the moment I step out my front door and go for a walk or run in my city. To not have my path tracked or reviewed should someone unaccountable decide to do so.

Re: U.S. Gov Privacy Watchdog Under Pressure to Recommend Facial Recognition Ban

#85

Post by tictok4 »

dathinab wrote: post #32
stevehawk wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're out in public then what privacy are you expecting?

Counter question. Do you expect/are ok with that the moment you leave your house you are constantly followed by a person with a camera recording everything you do. Which shops you visite etc.? Because this is basically what this will sooner or later boil down to, except that's more subtle (i.e. instead of having a person following you you have a innumerable amount of cameras sharing the recording burden, but producin…

>>Counter question. Do you expect/are ok with that the moment you leave your house you are constantly followed by a person with a camera recording everything you do. Which shops you visite etc.?

>>Because this is basically what this will sooner or later boil down to

This exists now in Miami Beach, Florida, USA.

Re: U.S. Gov Privacy Watchdog Under Pressure to Recommend Facial Recognition Ban

#86

Post by Nasrudith »

kick wrote: post #50
umvi wrote: post #30

Facial recognition tech could save so much time and money though. Imagine how many man hours would be saved if teachers no longer had to take attendance? Shoplifting would hit all time lows since you wouldn't be able to get away with it short of wearing a mask into the store.

Students ? You're proposing we track students ? It says something that the first example that's used (not just you, I've seen it many times elsewhere, too) is that we track the only group of people who by-and-large cannot consent, and not only that, but in a way that has permanent implications for their right to privacy. Further, the idea of facial recognition being used in every store is atrocious. Not only can they…

The annoying thing about the emphasis is that there is an obvious use for it that won't suffer from an overload problem - personal usage for those of us who have terrible face memory/recognition and ability to manually enter/assign a string to a face.

That would combine with AR. But that AR has already flopped due to several issues even without the added camera needed. Plus the issues of existing eyeglass combining.

Really that Glass backlash was bizzare along with the post 9-11 "anyone pointing a camera near anything man made must be a terrorist" yet nobody bats an eye or does more than snark at surveillance cameras everywhere. There is probably some psychological principle behind it but the simplest explanation is that "normal people" are fundamentally fucking insane and only care about it conforming to norms instead of actual harm.

Re: U.S. Gov Privacy Watchdog Under Pressure to Recommend Facial Recognition Ban

#87

Post by Nasrudith »

hdydhwhd wrote: post #41
umvi wrote: post #30

Facial recognition tech could save so much time and money though. Imagine how many man hours would be saved if teachers no longer had to take attendance? Shoplifting would hit all time lows since you wouldn't be able to get away with it short of wearing a mask into the store.

As far as I can tell the core axiom of privacy activism is that it's a given that the trade is not worth it. It's why so much of the digital privacy movement is people who don't live in bad neighborhoods.

Of course that is more Mazlowe Hiearchy of needs. The truth is giving away privacy wouldn't help in bad neighborhoods because the reason it is a bad neighborhood is nobody with power cares. You will still get some combination of murder, robbed, and raped before a camera and they might get around to it eventually.

Re: U.S. Gov Privacy Watchdog Under Pressure to Recommend Facial Recognition Ban

#88

Post by Nasrudith »

raxxorrax wrote: post #78
OrgNet wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We need to start tracking government officials... then maybe things will change.

Indeed, since public officials are actually accountable for the things they do, not the other way around. I would be cautious though, because many people just wouldn't want to become public servants anymore.

If they don't want to be tracked performing their job responsibilities I think we don't want them as public servants so good. Power comes with responsibility is a good system.

Re: U.S. Gov Privacy Watchdog Under Pressure to Recommend Facial Recognition Ban

#89

Post by [deleted] »

umvi wrote: post #30

Facial recognition tech could save so much time and money though. Imagine how many man hours would be saved if teachers no longer had to take attendance? Shoplifting would hit all time lows since you wouldn't be able to get away with it short of wearing a mask into the store.

[deleted]

Re: U.S. Gov Privacy Watchdog Under Pressure to Recommend Facial Recognition Ban

#90

Post by nothrabannosir »

mattmanser wrote: post #80
TylerE wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Way to miss the point. The invention of the bulldozer didn't change property rights.

We actually had anonymity of the crowds back then, which facial recog tech circumvents. The problem is also that there are a LOT of laws, and it's very easy to manufacture a crime. I would also suggest reading about people who have been subject to unwarranted surveillance just because of their views, and the damage it does them. A good example is the environmental groups in the 90s in the UK.

MLK comes to mind.
Post reply on HN