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

Facial recognition tech gets woman booted from Rockettes show due to employer

nbcnewyork.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 683 posts

Re: Facial recognition tech gets woman booted from Rockettes show due to employer

#171

Post by kstrauser »

vleon42 wrote: post #35

I am torn actually unsure on what would be morally correct: 1. I, as an individual, am allowed to deny entry to persons I dislike from my private property. 2. I, as an individual, am allowed to deny entry to persons affiliated with a business I dislike from my private property. 3. I, as a business owner (eg: a restaurant), am allowed to deny entry to persons I dislike (eg: a previous patron who was violent) from my b…

#4 could (and almost certainly would) be used for broadly awful reasons. For example, “I’m not discriminating against minorities! I just don’t want to serve anyone who’s worked in a chicken processing plant.”

Re: Facial recognition tech gets woman booted from Rockettes show due to employer

#172

Post by vorpalhex »

whoopdedo wrote: post #158

What does the Bar have to say about being a customer of a business you're suing. Wouldn't this be more of a concern for the law firm than the venue? But I can see how this has a chilling effect if you can lose access to goods and services because you're taking legal action against the company. Reminds me of the story I heard, though I forget the details (or even if it was true), about someone retaining numerous law f…

As someone not involved in the suit?

Re: Facial recognition tech gets woman booted from Rockettes show due to employer

#173

Post by Apocryphon »

kodyo wrote: post #16
defen wrote: post #7

Radio City Music Hall is a private venue, they can ban or exclude anyone they want, as long as it's not due to membership in a protected class. You don't have a right to attend a Rockettes show, and if she doesn't like this policy she can start her own Christmas Spectacular show.

Amen. Parallel industries will spring up to serve those disenfranchised from establishment dystopian nonsense, and the ongoing ideological self-segregation will accelerate. Best of all possible outcomes.

Parallel industries are hard to spring up when, as mentioned elsewhere in this discussion, entrenched oligopolies like MSGE and Live Nation buy up all of the independent venues. Unchecked corporate interests are the biggest enemies to free market competition and capitalism.

Re: Facial recognition tech gets woman booted from Rockettes show due to employer

#174

Post by gregors »

The reason why we have "protected status" is that people were banning people based on their racist/hate views. Those people used their 5 senses to easily target the people they hated for discrimination. Other variables (such as who you work for) well that's not easily found out...until now. AI is now allowing for new innovating hate and discrimination to drive decisions.

What an absolute cluster. I don't envy the courts. It's going to be interesting if everyone starts weaponizing every aspect of political affiliation, employment, residence location and social status.

Re: Facial recognition tech gets woman booted from Rockettes show due to employer

#175

Post by pfisherman »

crmd wrote: post #117

The legal rights of a corporation should rapidly decrease as it gains market power. My neighborhood bar should be allowed to 86 me for just about anything, but Madison Square Garden Entertainment, Ticketmaster, and Live Nation should not. Same thing with google and Amazon banning people from their platform for a single good faith credit card chargeback.

This is a pretty interesting concept. I think way this is described as “fewer rights” is not precise enough to pass muster. But I agree with the principle that the harm to an individual resulting from a ban is proportional to its scale / reach.

For example, getting banned from all McDonald’s restaurants is qualitatively different from getting banned from one McDonald’s restaurant.

So how does one go about qualifying / quantifying (1) the potential risk or harm caused by an individual violating terms for service and (2) the harm caused to the individual resulting from corrective actions; and then balance the two against each other?

Re: Facial recognition tech gets woman booted from Rockettes show due to employer

#176

Post by monksy »

slingnow wrote: post #85
monksy wrote: post #71

So I have been rejected and "banned" from a MSG venue. It's not fun, and it has nothing to do with your behavior. It was at the Chicago Theather and it was the Chris Rock show back in 2017. I bought the ticket, I don't believe that it had any special restrictions [this was a long time ago], the ticket had no indications about the "phoneless"/phone encasing demand. The event page didn't say anything about this. Howeve…

Quoted post unavailable.

I was assertive and not aggressive. I tried to do friendly chit chat with the security guy trying to corner me against the wall so "I wouldn't escape into their venue". (People dealing with the public have very short fuses when it comes to non-polite language on ejecting you/banning you/etc.. I have no plans to giving them the ability to invoke that policy despite their frequent gas lighting "well this is what the artist demands")

> unclear

This about a venue's (MSG, which also runs the one that the Rockeets played at) overzealous and seedy decisions to deny entry.

Re: Facial recognition tech gets woman booted from Rockettes show due to employer

#177

Post by bmelton »

KptMarchewa wrote: post #65
rrdharan wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually it sounds very European to me - banning known hooligans from soccer stadiums? https://www.wired.com/story/soccer-world-cup-biometric-surve... https://www.theverge.com/2017/4/26/15435620/champions-league...

You don't need any facial recognition for that, just get their ID to check if they are not banned while selling them tickets.

Tickets are transferable. Not-banned persons can give them to banned persons.

Re: Facial recognition tech gets woman booted from Rockettes show due to employer

#178

Post by lscdlscd »

whoopdedo wrote: post #158

What does the Bar have to say about being a customer of a business you're suing. Wouldn't this be more of a concern for the law firm than the venue? But I can see how this has a chilling effect if you can lose access to goods and services because you're taking legal action against the company. Reminds me of the story I heard, though I forget the details (or even if it was true), about someone retaining numerous law f…

You might be thinking of the Sopranos:

SPOILER

When Tony and Carmine are getting divorced, Tony consults with every lawyer in town, creating a conflict of interest and not allowing Carmine to use them.

Re: Facial recognition tech gets woman booted from Rockettes show due to employer

#179

Post by lja »

tomatotomato37 wrote: post #108

Everyone always goes for the discrimination angle, but what frightens me is that like other modern automated tech of this decade the facial recognition used here probably has a horrendous false positive rate which most institutions will none the less treat as the final truth. Unrelated this is also why I fear most of this new AI stuff so much despite working in the field; the accuracy rates on these things in product…

The false positive rate on quality facial recognition is actually very low. I'm not weighing in whether or not it is proper to always use it, just as someone that's deeply experienced in commercial applications of facial recognition.

Re: Facial recognition tech gets woman booted from Rockettes show due to employer

#180

Post by chucksmash »

stickfigure wrote: post #97
advisedwang wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your totally ignore the key element here: a new technology is allowing denying entry at a whole new scale. Nobody really has an objection to organization blocking a single individual who is might cause trouble. But blocking an entire class of people is a) newly enabled* and b) much more harmful to society. If a venue kicked out a lawyer who was actively working on a lawsuit against the venue, nobody would bat an eye.…

Who cares what technology they use? They could also check ids at the door and cross-reference their naughty list. Everything seems to involve an id check these days. Maybe there's some contractual issue here - they sold you a ticket, that establishes a contract, they're breaking the contract by denying you entry. They should have performed the naughty check earlier in the process? I think it's all pretty stupid but o…

> Who cares what technology they use?

As you say, they could accomplish the same thing by checking IDs at the door. Given the choice, I'd personally prefer an explicit ID check that I know is happening and is inconvenient for everybody rather than one that leaves me oblivious to the fact I'm being tracked and researched.

Post reply on HN