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

Face recognition is being banned, but it’s still everywhere

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 145 posts

Re: Face recognition is being banned, but it’s still everywhere

#111

Post by 2468013579 »

spaetzleesser wrote: post #69
trasz wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most countries banned mines, but not US: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottawa_Treaty

That's a fact the US should be deeply ashamed of. I had no idea how bad the land mine and unexploded bomb situation is until I visited Cambodia and Laos where even 50 years after the war people are still getting their limbs blown off.

Read up on the difference between persistent and non-persistent land mines [1]. The US only uses non-persistent mines that last usually 24-72 hours. The issue with 50 years later is not accurate since non-persistent mines haven’t been commonplace for decades and officially outlawed in 2004 [2]. Only place the US allows persistent mines is at the DMZ. There’s also a distinction between anti-personnel mines and anti-vehicle mines, which the US has a clearer distinction about than others. The Ottawa Treaty only bans anti-personnel mines [3], so the US in one of few countries that has a policy banning the use of persistent anti-vehicle mines.

[1] https://sites.duke.edu/lawfire/2021/04/12/understanding-u-s-...

[2] https://2001-2009.state.gov/t/pm/wra/c11735.htm

[3] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottawa_Treaty

Re: Face recognition is being banned, but it’s still everywhere

#112

Post by vngzs »

antris wrote: post #106
VWWHFSfQ wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

did the snowden leaks say they were in every camera

For practical purposes, yes. The leaks showed how NSA has built a multi-layered data harvesting-archiving-searching machine that works not only through compromised hardware (including cameras), but also big company infrastructures, phone/email/SMS/internet browsing records and content, fiber optic cable tapping, hacking, installing bugs, spying and more. If the camera itself is not bugged, it likely is harvested at a…

I don't know how long the records persist, but presumably for things like video surveillance footage the decay period would be quite fast. For full-text contents, less speedy but still fast. I can only truly envision long-term collection and storage of metadata - and even then, it's a big question how much is feasible and reasonable to store indefinitely.

It's likely that for your security camera footage to be accessed you would have to be targeted. It's likely that such targeting would only affect footage in the future or very recent past. But I'd grant that pervasive attackers can probably capture exponentially-decaying single video frames from millions of cameras if they were appropriately motivated, and those single frames could go back quite far.

The real problem here is the existence of such a system creates a kind of panopticon [0], with chilling effects not only on activity and discussion contrarian to the current administration, but also any future administration that may have access to electronic surveillance records. Without knowing how long records are kept, it is quite plausible that a future authoritarian state will misuse past records to target civilians.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panopticon

Re: Face recognition is being banned, but it’s still everywhere

#113

Post by 2468013579 »

trasz wrote: post #50
earthnail wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We banned mines, too, and it‘s been fairly successful. Not 100%, sure, but just imagine a world were mines weren’t banned, and what Europe and the US would look like, and you know the ban was very effective.

Most countries banned mines, but not US: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottawa_Treaty

Ottawa treaty only bans anti-personnel mines, not anti-vehicle or command activated. The US bands persistent anti-personnel mines, but not mines that only last a day or so. This argument gets more convoluted once you read up on it. As I mentioned in spaetzleleeser’s comment below, the US is one of a few countries that has a policy banning persistent anti-vehicle mines (they ban all persistent mines in general), so in some ways is more strict than others.

Re: Face recognition is being banned, but it’s still everywhere

#114

Post by midjji »

Seems rather obvious to me that will remain the case.

Both encryption and face recognition software rely on math and programming simple enough that a single person can make a functional one in less than a year from scratch. However, if using existing open source frameworks anyone can put it together either in a few days, though collecting a face database takes slightly longer, though in most cases anyone with an existing app of some kind can very easily collect the data largely automatically. Arguably I would not trust an encryption framework put together like that, but when it comes to face recognition I would.

So the question of if governments will be able to prevent non-sanctioned face recognition systems from the public sphere is rather similar to the question of if they are able to prevent the use of non-sanctioned encryption.

How is that going these days?

Re: Face recognition is being banned, but it’s still everywhere

#115

Post by midjji »

nirui wrote: post #56
bigodbiel wrote: post #14

Pre-crime facial recognition surveillance is authoritanism. Post-crime facial recognition of surveillance is investigative process. The cat is out of the bag, the only thing that prevents it's inevitable abuse is strict legal framework for its implementation

> strict legal framework for its implementation And that might turn this technology into something that only big company can afford, artificially created a pro-monopoly environment. The problem is complex.

Problem with a strict legal framework for implementation is that it takes 1 person just a few days to get a face recognition system working using generic frameworks for deep learning.

The laws can be as strict as you like, but its like introducing a law saying you cant watch nude cartoons at home. Even if you somehow eliminated all the existing ones, its just a pen and paper away.

Re: Face recognition is being banned, but it’s still everywhere

#116

Post by midjji »

petermcneeley wrote: post #107
14 wrote: post #79

If they ban facial recognition then companies will start using other tech like gait recognition. So are we wanting to ban facial recognition or is it something more like the right to not be tracked(if that even is a right). I think we need to establish what our end goal is because you know clever companies will find a way around such restrictions and find other creative ways. They will use shoe detection instead or s…

This is the same issue I have with 'right to repair' laws. When you create a tangle of specific laws banning or regulating specific things all that you really have done is created a world where he who has the most lawyers wins. What is the end goal with banning face recognition? I think this is all about asymmetry of information.

Switching from defending the right to privacy to the right to not be exploited due to power/information asymmetry would solve a great many problems.

Re: Face recognition is being banned, but it’s still everywhere

#117

Post by alkonaut »

dgfitz wrote: post #109
alkonaut wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which part of the law? That I can’t set up a camera on my house to film a street crossing? That’s almost impossible to get permission for. A private citizen can not get permission to film a Street corner. The difficulty in getting permission obviously isn’t written in the legal text, but individuals don’t get permission and businesses only very rarely do. https://www.riksdagen.se/sv/dokument-lagar/dokument/svensk-f..…

Don’t tell Nest… Seriously, this means every home outdoor security camera is potentially illegal. This can’t be true.

Of course it is. You can’t put up a camera on your porch and shoot your driveway and part of the street. To follow the law you have to point it so it’s only covering your driveway or lawn and no public space. It’s pretty simple restrict the field of view with a screen in front or bit of tape over the camera if needed.

Does everyone do that? Probably not. But that doesn’t change how the law is written.

Re: Face recognition is being banned, but it’s still everywhere

#118

Post by reaperducer »

kotaKat wrote: post #83

Hell. Walmart's security DVRs by Verint all have facial recognition enabled on the firmware, along with other security analytics options.

The apartment building I lived in from 2009-2010 had facial recognition.

When you walked through the main lobby, your face appeared on a screen for the inside doorman so he could grant you access to the elevator lobby. It also showed your name, apartment number, and lease end date.

That was over a decade ago. I can't imagine what new tech must look like.

Re: Face recognition is being banned, but it’s still everywhere

#119

Post by reaperducer »

Nextgrid wrote: post #61
tartoran wrote: post #45

I see us wearing masks as a more general trend in the future. That would probably mess with all facial recognition systems

Gait analysis/recognition covers that.

Gait analysis/recognition covers that.

My wife has a hundred pairs of heels of varying heights and widths. Good luck with that.

Re: Face recognition is being banned, but it’s still everywhere

#120

Post by spaetzleesser »

2468013579 wrote: post #111
spaetzleesser wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a fact the US should be deeply ashamed of. I had no idea how bad the land mine and unexploded bomb situation is until I visited Cambodia and Laos where even 50 years after the war people are still getting their limbs blown off.

Read up on the difference between persistent and non-persistent land mines [1]. The US only uses non-persistent mines that last usually 24-72 hours. The issue with 50 years later is not accurate since non-persistent mines haven’t been commonplace for decades and officially outlawed in 2004 [2]. Only place the US allows persistent mines is at the DMZ. There’s also a distinction between anti-personnel mines and anti-ve…

How many of the non persistent mines will fail to disarm and still be a danger? I would expect quite a few.

In my mind they should have been banned like biological weapons. And the US could take leadership

Post reply on HN