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

531–540 of 683 posts

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

#531

Post by kergonath »

bmitc wrote: post #391
kstrauser wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right: it's the policy that's bad. However, facial recognition is what makes enforcing that policy possible, and society and the law haven't changed quickly enough to deal with the repercussions. For instance, say 18 year old "Joe" gets caught stealing soda from a fast food place. The manager kicks him out and bans him from the store. Fast forward a decade, when Joe walks back into the store with his wife and…

Why is the policy bad? They are preventing employees from a law firm in active litigation with them from attending their venues while the litigation takes place. It's not some draconian thing.

Because employees are not their employers, and have a life outside of work in which they still do stuff? Seriously. Yes, it is draconian.

Besides, if the law firm really wanted someone in there for hand-wavy reasons, why would they not just hire someone for it? Blacklisting is petty, counter-productive, trivial to abuse, and solves nothing.

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

#532

Post by berniedurfee »

briffle wrote: post #272
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.…

I can't help but wonder how they got the pictures of all the employees from this law firm? Perhaps headshots on the 'about us' section of the web site? I can't wait to see yet more legal disclaimers added to everything...

There are many markets where our face is just another data point for sale. At some point most of us have been ‘tagged in a photo’ whether we know it or not.

It’ll be interesting to see if MSG is forced to report the source they used as part of the legal proceedings.

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

#533

Post by azernik »

TheHappyOddish wrote: post #525
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.…

The technology is just means to an end. Would you be ok if security had a big wall with printed pictures of undesirables and kicked her out due to this?

I wouldn't care as much, because that big wall would be purely symbolic and impossible to enforce.

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

#534

Post by berniedurfee »

tomp wrote: post #247
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…

They didn’t ban her on the basis of face recognition. She just got flagged by security, after which they asked for her ID and banned her on the basis of her real identity. So the chance of false positives is minimal.

Is it legal for MSG security to show your ID? That in and of itself seems sketchy.

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

#535

Post by azernik »

xyzzyz wrote: post #212
thih9 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They could also check ids at the door and cross-reference their naughty list. They couldn’t, it seems impractical for an event of that scale. Plus, it’s easier to bypass a door check or even convince the person doing the check to let you in.

This is in fact more practical than setting up face detection system, all you need to do is ID scanner and some simple OCR system to cross check the name on ID against blacklist, each person entering slaps ID against scanners (similar to how you do it with boarding passes at the airport or with public transit passes at gates), after one second either red or green light flashes. Shouldn’t take more than 5 seconds per…

That is not, in fact, how boarding passes at airports work. Identity checking is done by TSA, in a step that is very often the bottleneck and consumes enormous amounts of manpower and physical space.

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

#536

Post by ryandrake »

_carbyau_ wrote: post #497
ryandrake wrote: post #466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think in many contexts this would be desirable. If someone was belligerent and gets banned for starting a fight on Delta airline, I wouldn't want to sit next to him on my United airline flight. Venues should have the freedom to use whatever judgment/algorithm they feel will keep their customers safe, including sharing lists of troublemakers. If the list is too inaccurate, it stops doing its job and becomes a net-no…

Then one day you fart on an airplane and are no longer able to fly due to being a "troublemaker" that people wouldn't want to sit next to. A community of people aren't built around absolutism. They are built around give and take. You can't have your best day, every day.

I didn't say anything about farting. I don't want to board an airplane with someone who has a history of assaulting people. If airlines could build an accurate list, I would have no problem with them sharing the list and effectively banning those people from flying. The "accurate" part I admit is the hard part to get right. As another replier suggested, maybe base it on public arrest records or something. But assuming it could be done accurately, of course it should be implemented. Do you want a loose cannon who has assaulted people in the past on a tin can with you at 50,000 feet?

This isn't about having your best day. I've had many bad days, yet somehow never assaulted anyone.

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

#537

Post by saratogacx »

LarryMullins wrote: post #338
kstrauser wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get the lack of resistance to the TSA thing. I’m not saying my opinion here is the correct one, but here’s how I see it: That ship has sailed. You no longer have a reasonable expectation of privacy in an airport. Courts have ruled that safety concerns override privacy considerations inside them. Alright, well, if this is the system we’re stuck with, then we might as well make it efficient. Now we have TSA PreCheck…

> TSA PreCheck That system was created to avoid what you mention earlier, privileged people in society being inconvenienced and feeling motivated to speak out against these systems. Instead of subjecting the movers and shakers to the full brunt of the TSA, such people are allowed to opt out of the tyranny for a small (to them) fee.

You're overselling this a bit. TSA Precheck is $78 for 5 years. If you are able to afford to travel by air and do so more than a few times a decade, it isn't that cost prohibitive.

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

#538

Post by azernik »

bluelightning2k wrote: post #443

On the one hand this sounds super dystopian. On the other hand it does kind of make sense that they would refuse service to people actively suing their company. I would do that too. I mean it's kind of common sense

It's not refusing service to "people actively suing" MSG.

Some people are suing MSG.

Those people hired lawyers.

Those lawyers work at a firm.

MSG is banning not just the plaintiffs (the people "actively suing"), and not just their lawyers, but every lawyer at the firm.

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

#539

Post by azernik »

Nifty3929 wrote: post #397

I think it would be helpful in the comments to separate the issue of using facial recognition for public identification and entry, from the other issue of whether this person should have been allowed in regardless of the policy. Personally I don't think facial recognition should be allowed for public identification. On the other hand, I think it's perfectly fine to bar opposing attorneys actively working against you…

Her firm is not suing them. People who were customers are suing them. Her firm is representing those people.

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

#540

Post by FractalParadigm »

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.

When I was driving transport truck I applied for a job at Coca-cola, and was told after the interview I wouldn't be getting the job, because their security cameras saw me drinking a Pepsi while driving in the parking lot. Apparently it's against policy and a firable offense to be caught drinking a non-Coca-cola product on-property or in-uniform anywhere.
Post reply on HN