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

201–210 of 683 posts

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

#201

Post by btilly »

cortesoft wrote: post #60
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…

In the US, at least, there are restrictions on 3. You can’t deny entry to black people, for example, just because you don’t like black people.

The restrictions in question come from the Civil Rights Act. Which sets a bunch of protected classes, including race, color, religion, sex and national origin.

See https://www.eeoc.gov/statutes/title-vii-civil-rights-act-196....

However federal law does not prevent discriminating on other grounds. Such as political affiliation or profession. For example landlords can choose not to rent to lawyers, and every so often someone gets fired for political views.

State law may disagree. And her liquor license trick is an example of how.

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

#202

Post by bboygravity »

kstrauser wrote: post #162

I’m thrilled to see facial recognition applied against people in a position to speak out loudly against it. A lot of people seem OK with it when it’s policing the bad parts of town. This is their reminder that it can be used against them, too.

I don't think what a lot of people think about facial recognition is very relevant for its adoption or evolution?

CCTV and facial recognition are both used around the world accross cultures and political systems and not 1 citizen voted for (or against) them. Not in totalitarian regimes nor in countries that pretend to be democratic.

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

#203

Post by tyingq »

1970-01-01 wrote: post #169

A lawyer was banned from seeing a popular show for reasons entirely unrelated to physical safety, with an FR twist. She then hit back at their liquor license. Who's got popcorn??

The hit back at the liquor license (which apparently requires admitting the general public, with only very specific exceptions) sounded pretty clever to me.

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

#204

Post by monksy »

notinfuriated wrote: post #102
moloch-hai wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sort of thing, everywhere, is exactly what to expect from "deregulation".

I'm unclear on how this is a regulation or deregulation thing. There could be a regulation that specifically allows for or denies smartphones at such events. It's hypothetical at this point, so why is deregulation to blame in this case now?

You can make the claim that ADA/disability rights were denied by the venue. (See the bluetooth gluclose monitors and people are extremely fragile or blind with the use of aids)

With regulation this a slam dunk.

With deregulation- they're getting away with "per venue's discretion" - But I have heard of medical staff being rejected because they were oncall or parents who had a baby sitter.

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

#205

Post by [deleted] »

skywal_l wrote: post #50
defen wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they are on very shaky ground to ban someone unless they misrepresented who they were when buying the ticket. Then I suppose it will come down to whether the ticket terms included a clause that the purchaser/attendee was not employed by a firm involved in a lawsuit against MSGE.

Yes, that's why every time I buy something I check the list of companies my employers is in litigation with. /s

[deleted]

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

#206

Post by _trampeltier »

vorpalhex wrote: post #172
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?

It was here on HN, but I also don't remember the details. I think it was like a big company had a relationship with almost all layers or something like this.

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

#207

Post by tantalor »

gregors wrote: post #174

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 cou…

> used their 5 senses to easily target the people they hated

No. Very easy to disprove: there are many examples of protected status that is not easy to tell just by looking at someone.

1. Race (esp. mixed race)

2. Religion

3. Pregnancy

4. National origin

5. Sexual orientation

6. Disability

7. Genetics

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

#208

Post by btilly »

rootusrootus wrote: post #150
HarryHirsch wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can, however, deny employment to Dalits, and Oracle argues that it's Just Fine because there's no law.

How is that not an obvious protected class? It should easily fall under the national origin qualifications.

I would think race fits better.

But we'll just have to watch cases like https://thewire.in/caste/cisco-case-caste-discrimination-sil... to see whether the courts agree with us that caste discrimination should be illegal in America. (And if the courts disagree, time to lobby the politicians...)

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

#209

Post by _boffin_ »

Question: if she purchased the ticket under her own name and she held a valid ticket upon entry to the venue, would it be fraud if one doesn’t get access to the event? Even more so if she doesn’t get a full refund?

One would presume that there would be measures in place during checkout that would inhibit transactions that go against their policies to not go through.

Post reply on HN