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

231–240 of 683 posts

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

#231

Post by HWR_14 »

tantalor wrote: post #207
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

In almost all cases, there were people in the protected group who were able to disguise that status. So in those cases just 5 senses weren't perfect. But it was sufficient for at least some cases, which is where the laws came from.

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

#232

Post by commandlinefan »

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.

> it can be used against them, too

Is it facial recognition that's the problem here, or the policy itself? In theory, they could hand out pictures of everybody who wasn't allowed in to the security staff and use low-tech facial recognition to enforce the same policy - assuming it was scalable, would it be OK then? I remember reading that IBM got into trouble when it first computerized its personnel files because some exec noticed that the computer could scan through all the personnel files and fire people who were close to retirement to save on paying out their pensions. It would have been prohibitively expensive to pay a person to do that, but with the computer, it was a quick SQL query (or whatever query language IBM used back then). The problem wasn't that the personnel files were computerized, it was that they were being used in a very evil way.

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

#233

Post by KptMarchewa »

xeromal wrote: post #143
KptMarchewa wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're talking about football games, not a show in this subthread.

They're all the same to me. Entertainment.

Not really, risk profile is totally different between football game and opera.

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

#234

Post by idiocrat »

lja wrote: post #179
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.

The low rate of false positives have been well documented in the Archibald Buttle vs Archibald Tuttle case.

And the government never makes mistakes.

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

#235

Post by NaturalPhallacy »

tyingq wrote: post #203
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.

Hence the popcorn!

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

#236

Post by TomK32 »

KptMarchewa wrote: post #62
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…

Change "dislike" to "actively works against you".

But, even if she did work on cases again the company, would attending an event have to do anything with the court disputes?

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

#237

Post by moonchrome »

tantalor wrote: post #207
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

Just because you can't tell 100% doesn't mean you can't discriminate - and accuracy doesn't factor much in prejudice.

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

#238

Post by acdha »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #222
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…

Quoted post unavailable.

It's an activist court. They'll block anything which could discriminate against their supporters but as we've seen no level of precedent is going to prevent a decision which those supporters want unless there's an extremely clear direct constitutional prohibition.

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

#239

Post by wanderer2323 »

tedunangst wrote: post #215
hnlmorg wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. For me, the issue is that this restriction is upheld at point of entry and not point of sale. I get it’s a harder problem to restrict who tickets are sold to, but if a venue like that wants to get petty about who can attend their shows then the responsibility is on them to communicate that before the event. To flip this another way, in any other normal circumstance, when you get banned from a venue you’d get…

I'm not sure why everyone is assuming she was denied a refund.

They won't be able to refund her missing out on spending time with her kid.

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

#240

Post by NaturalPhallacy »

TomK32 wrote: post #228
kayodelycaon wrote: post #214

This reminds me of an incident that showed up in one of my college courses: A forklift driver who got fired for drinking Budweiser. He worked for a company that Miller Brewing company contacted with and a newspaper took a photo of him at a public event drinking Budweiser. Different situation, same kind of pettiness and retaliation.

https://journaltimes.com/news/local/he-had-a-bud-light-now-h... Fired for driking Bud Light. Is that even beer I ask as a German...

Legally speaking, it is beer.
Post reply on HN