Facial recognition: It’s time for action • Hacker News Board

Re: Facial recognition: It’s time for action

#91

Post by _bfhp » Fri, Dec 07, 2018, 8:41 PM UTC

jessriedel wrote: post #47

dontreact wrote: post #18

This is the first instance I've seen of the tech industry calling for regulation. I admire this and the idea that people running a corporation can understand that despite their best intentions, in the long run the corporation will act to maximize profit via legal means, even if an action is not in the best interest of society. And so in some cases we need to make certain things illegal. I would love to see a company…

Companies calling for more regulation is a ubiquitous phenomenon. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture More regulation generally gives an advantage to larger companies over smaller ones since it creates barriers to entry; compliance costs usually increase sublinearly with revenue. (E.g., it's a lot easier for Microsoft to hire a dedicated lawyer than it is for a garage start-up.) This idea that "companies…

Maybe if you can't do business without making sure you're not causing harm, you shouldn't do business at all.

Of course anti-competitive lobbying happens all the time. But if it's not economically feasible for a Scrappy Gang of Dropouts in The Garage follow to regulations that protect people's lives and freedom in this country, I'm cool with them finding another country, or their own deserted island perhaps.

Re: Facial recognition: It’s time for action

#92

Post by sib » Fri, Dec 07, 2018, 8:42 PM UTC

Beefin wrote: post #43

So MSFT was actually ranked the most accurate facial algorithm company in the world by NIST. It’s interesting they’re just now talking about this (after these results were published)

That's the perfect time to call for regulations to make it harder for your competitors to catch up.

cf Regulatory Capture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture)

Re: Facial recognition: It’s time for action

#93

Post by zoul » Fri, Dec 07, 2018, 8:43 PM UTC

PaulKeeble wrote: post #26

Biometrics are creeping into everyday life. One of my local gyms this week switched to requiring fingerprints or you were barred from access. Another local gym uses facial recognition for entrance, although you can choose to have a member card instead if you ask for it directly, they don't list it as an option. Thankfully in the EU we have GDPR. It considers biometrics as a similar sensitivity to medical data, so unl…

If consent is not given then that can not bar you from service.

What’s the reasoning for this? Shouldn’t I have the freedom to pick the conditions under which I offer my services, except for discrimination? Is it discrimination if I only offer biometric ID, say for business convenience?

Re: Facial recognition: It’s time for action

#94

Post by pixl97 » Fri, Dec 07, 2018, 8:50 PM UTC

BowBun wrote: post #65

vorpalhex wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He also denied that Amazon had any responsibility for the negative impacts of their AI/ML technologies, or role to play in industry efforts to self-regulate. For a period of time, there was a lot of chatter about all developers having some kind of professional oath, like doctors. Many of the approaches that were taken have issues (preclude working on smart weapons program or legal surveillance). I wonder if what we…

I don't know if the oath comparison works out so well for development. Let us not forget that each physician is directly responsible for a life every time they see someone. They also have a more direct effect on the success or failure of the procedure as they tend to produce a large portion of the work. I'd argue few companies ever reach this level of risk, and those that do are so large that the individual contribut…

No snowflake is responsible for the avalanche, therefore I must pile on as much snow as possible -- The modern developer.

Re: Facial recognition: It’s time for action

#95

Post by DavidAdams » Fri, Dec 07, 2018, 8:50 PM UTC

mc32 wrote: post #5

This is where the ACLU should spend their time and effort rather than their political meanderings. This is politically neutral, it affects everyone and Americans should enjoy some basic rights in this realm. Govern how private entities use this tech and data. Regulate official use so it’s not abused, etc.

Every single time someone says "where was the ACLU when X happened?" (Usually in the context of a conservative's civil rights being violated) a quick search shows that the ACLU was defending that person or at least speaking out against it. They're pretty consistent in their principles, even when arrayed against liberals, as comes up from time to time when political correctness is on the line.

Re: Facial recognition: It’s time for action

#96

Post by whatshisface » Fri, Dec 07, 2018, 8:52 PM UTC

pixl97 wrote: post #94

BowBun wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if the oath comparison works out so well for development. Let us not forget that each physician is directly responsible for a life every time they see someone. They also have a more direct effect on the success or failure of the procedure as they tend to produce a large portion of the work. I'd argue few companies ever reach this level of risk, and those that do are so large that the individual contribut…

No snowflake is responsible for the avalanche, therefore I must pile on as much snow as possible -- The modern developer.

No individual litterer is responsible for a trashed park.

Re: Facial recognition: It’s time for action

#97

Post by leetcrew » Fri, Dec 07, 2018, 8:53 PM UTC

seanf wrote: post #54

PaulKeeble wrote: post #26

Biometrics are creeping into everyday life. One of my local gyms this week switched to requiring fingerprints or you were barred from access. Another local gym uses facial recognition for entrance, although you can choose to have a member card instead if you ask for it directly, they don't list it as an option. Thankfully in the EU we have GDPR. It considers biometrics as a similar sensitivity to medical data, so unl…

My gym also uses facial recognition, but does it via a person sitting behind a desk checking that my member ID matches my face. I don't think many people are uncomfortable with this process, and this biometric method has been used for a long time.

the gym thing seems like a bit of a red herring. certainly when you're in your own home you have a reasonable expectation of privacy. even in a shared public space, you ought to have some legal protection against being arbitrarily tracked/surveiled. but on the literal physical premises of a private business, I'm not sure it's such a reasonable expectation.

Re: Facial recognition: It’s time for action

#98

Post by ryandrake » Fri, Dec 07, 2018, 8:54 PM UTC

sib wrote: post #88

vorpalhex wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He also denied that Amazon had any responsibility for the negative impacts of their AI/ML technologies, or role to play in industry efforts to self-regulate. For a period of time, there was a lot of chatter about all developers having some kind of professional oath, like doctors. Many of the approaches that were taken have issues (preclude working on smart weapons program or legal surveillance). I wonder if what we…

So, if I'm an assembly line worker at GM and someone buys a pickup truck and intentionally drives it into a crowd, murdering 20 people, I should get the death penalty as a serial killer? Obviously hyperbolic, but not very different at the core.

A car’s primary function is not to kill people. If you are an engineer and develop a tool whose primary purpose is mass surveillance, you should bear that ethical burden.

Re: Facial recognition: It’s time for action

#99

Post by freehunter » Fri, Dec 07, 2018, 8:55 PM UTC

vorpalhex wrote: post #53

geephroh wrote: post #11

This is a laudable first step in advocacy for real regulation of a technology that already has huge impacts on privacy and civil society. I was in the room for one of the meetings with Microsoft's senior leadership as a representative of a Seattle-based civil liberties group. While our coalition would like to see MS go further, it was quite clear that they take their commitment to corporate responsibility and ethics…

> He also denied that Amazon had any responsibility for the negative impacts of their AI/ML technologies, or role to play in industry efforts to self-regulate. For a period of time, there was a lot of chatter about all developers having some kind of professional oath, like doctors. Many of the approaches that were taken have issues (preclude working on smart weapons program or legal surveillance). I wonder if what we…

I'm not arguing for or against that oath, but that would 100% kill Open Source dead the minute it becomes a requirement. Absolutely no one would share their code if they could be held responsible for its misuse.

Re: Facial recognition: It’s time for action

#100

Post by skybrian » Fri, Dec 07, 2018, 8:58 PM UTC

vorpalhex wrote: post #53

geephroh wrote: post #11

This is a laudable first step in advocacy for real regulation of a technology that already has huge impacts on privacy and civil society. I was in the room for one of the meetings with Microsoft's senior leadership as a representative of a Seattle-based civil liberties group. While our coalition would like to see MS go further, it was quite clear that they take their commitment to corporate responsibility and ethics…

> He also denied that Amazon had any responsibility for the negative impacts of their AI/ML technologies, or role to play in industry efforts to self-regulate. For a period of time, there was a lot of chatter about all developers having some kind of professional oath, like doctors. Many of the approaches that were taken have issues (preclude working on smart weapons program or legal surveillance). I wonder if what we…

If this effort succeeds, the end result will be something like "know your customer" for cloud providers. So, just like with app stores, you'll have to worry about getting your service approved.

There seems to be an eternal cycle of abstraction creating and breaking, in both finance and software.

- Someone builds a general-purpose abstraction that becomes popular.

- Inevitably, the abstraction gets abused.

- To prevent abuse, the abstraction gets violated. It's not general-purpose anymore because some usages are disallowed.

(This seems to be why open API's to online services tend not to last very long.)