Are you ready for facial recognition everywhere? Is it good for you/America?

[ThatOwlWoman]

Damn, 1962. I liked that band. Didn't know they were that long ago.

[CFM]

Well, he finally is being honest.. All my patience & work is paying off........

Let it all out...

That's sad if you think that was a meaningful response. I guess that all you can expect from a nl.

[CFM]

Feeling young again?? Digging back in the cranial archives for some cuts from 62'.....

Hopefully it's not signs of early onset....

Just stating a fact about you, boy. When are you going to learn you can't run from what you are?

[Bill]

What is the big deal?

Some ppl are afraid it will be abused, like in china were they track many ppl..

[Bill]

Damn, 1962. I liked that band. Didn't know they were that long ago.

Yea, I liked some of their songs.. I thought it was 66', something like "Brazil 66" Herb Alpert..

[evince]

When YOUR ass looks like YOUR face, it's called telling the truth.

Is the reason black guys fuck you in the ass because they can't tell the difference between the two holes?

you speaking from experience ?


your nose?


your ears?

did you have to pay them extra for it?

[Bill]

That's sad if you think that was a meaningful response. I guess that all you can expect from a nl.

Aaawweee, poor boy, working himself up into another PoutRage.........

Chill, do your chores, take your meds, you can always throw two childish fits tomorrow to make up for taking the day off today.

[evince]

Yea, I liked some of their songs.. I thought it was 66', something like "Brazil 66" Herb Alpert..

oh man do I love horns


latino jazz
awesome

the soundtrack of my childhood includes these talented players

[Into the Night]

It has been banned already in SF & now Oakland..

Oakland City Council takes steps in banning facial recognition use
Duration: 04:34 1 day ago (AUDIO)

It's already here. It has been here for some time. All that's happening now in the industry is better quality recognition.

It is heavily used in casinos, for example, as a method to identify problem people on the floor before they can become a problem again, giving security a chance to escort them off the property yet again. It is also part of the Voluntary Exclusion Program (a program in Nevada allowing a person to voluntarily ban himself from casinos because he feels he has a gambling problem).

It is used as a security pass in some locations. It is not widespread because it's so easily fooled.

For use as a generic security device, it's quite worthless. There is nothing wrong with a released felon from walking down the street, for example. Using it for marketing purposes makes the mistake of presupposing that the presence in a certain area indicates an interest in a particular market.

[Kaleb108]

Facial recognition scares me. After seeing a documentary about surveillance in China, it's scarred me for life.

[Bill]

It's already here. It has been here for some time. All that's happening now in the industry is better quality recognition.

It is heavily used in casinos, for example, as a method to identify problem people on the floor before they can become a problem again, giving security a chance to escort them off the property yet again. It is also part of the Voluntary Exclusion Program (a program in Nevada allowing a person to voluntarily ban himself from casinos because he feels he has a gambling problem).

It is used as a security pass in some locations. It is not widespread because it's so easily fooled.

For use as a generic security device, it's quite worthless. There is nothing wrong with a released felon from walking down the street, for example. Using it for marketing purposes makes the mistake of presupposing that the presence in a certain area indicates an interest in a particular market.

Yep... Their ban really isn't much more than a gesture..

[Bill]

Facial recognition scares me. After seeing a documentary about surveillance in China, it's scarred me for life.

It can be used for the negative as well, but it is quite prevalent in England & don't hear any complaints & they have caught terrorist using it...

[Bill]

Facial recognition software mistook 1 in 5 California lawmakers for criminals, says ACLU

California Assemblyman Phil Ting has never been arrested, but he was recently mistaken for a criminal.

He's not surprised.

Ting (D-San Francisco), who authored a bill to ban facial recognition software from being used on police body cameras, was one of 26 California legislators who was incorrectly matched with a mug shot in a recent test of a common face-scanning program by the American Civil Liberties Union.

About 1 in 5 legislators was erroneously matched to a person who had been arrested when the ACLU used the software to screen their pictures against a database of 25,000 publicly available booking photos. Last year, in a similar experiment done with photos of members of Congress, the software erroneously matched 28 federal legislators with mug shots.

The results highlight what Ting and others said is proof that facial recognition software is unreliable. They want California law enforcement banned from using it with the cameras they wear while on duty.

"The software clearly is not ready for use in a law enforcement capacity," Ting said. "These mistakes, we can kind of chuckle at it, but if you get arrested and it's on your record, it can be hard to get housing, get a job. It has real impacts."

Ting's proposal, Assembly Bill 1215, could soon be on the governor's desk if it passes the Senate. Sponsored by the ACLU, the civil rights organization hopes its recent test will grab attention and persuade legislators to put the technology on hold.

There is little current federal regulation of facial recognition technology. Recently, members on both sides of the aisle in Congress held oversight hearings and there has been a strong push by privacy advocates for federal action. But concrete measures have yet to materialize.

That has left states and local jurisdictions to grapple with the complex technology on their own. New Hampshire and Oregon already prohibit facial recognition technology on body-worn cameras, and San Francisco, Oakland and Somerville, Mass., also recently enacted bans for all city departments as well as police.

"I think it's extremely important for states to be regulating the use of technology by police," said Barry Friedman, a privacy expert and professor of law at New York University. "It is the Wild, Wild West without a regulatory scheme. Regulation is what we need."

Friedman serves on an ethics committee for Axon, one of the largest manufacturers of body-worn cameras. The company has publicly said it will not put facial recognition technology on its cameras because it doesn't have confidence in its reliability. Microsoft, which makes a facial recognition product, also recently said it had refused to sell it to a California law enforcement agency. The moves mark an unusual position from corporations seeking boundaries for their products.

"The body camera technology is just very far from being accurate," Friedman said. "Until the issues regarding accuracy and racial bias are resolved, we shouldn't be using it."

But other companies are moving ahead with facial recognition, including Amazon, developer of Rekognition, the software used in the ACLU tests. Government agencies including ICE have also reportedly used the technology, culling through databases of driver's licenses.

Proponents of the technology contend it could be an important law enforcement tool, especially when policing large events or searching for lost children or elderly people. The bill is opposed by many law enforcement groups.

Amazon said it could not immediately comment on the most recent ACLU test, but has previously disputed that the Rekognition software was unreliable, questioning the group's methods of scanning members of Congress. In its developer guide, Amazon recommends using a 99 percent confidence threshold when matching faces, and criticized the ACLU for using a lesser bar — the factory setting for the software, according to Matt Cagle, an attorney with the Northern California chapter of the ACLU — when testing it.

The Ting proposal would make California the largest state to ban the software, potentially having a "ripple" effect, Cagle said. The bill would ban not just facial recognition, but other "biometric surveillance systems" such as those that analyze a person's gait or log tattoos.

Critics contend that the software is particularly problematic when it comes to identifying women, people of color and young people. Ting said those demographics were especially troubling to him, since communities of color have historically often been excessively targeted by police, and immigrant communities are feeling threatened by federal crackdowns on illegal immigration.

more @ source

[PostmodernProphet]

he was recently mistaken for a criminal

bullshit......the article clearly states he's a demmycrat.......no mistakes here......

[Bill]

bullshit......the article clearly states he's a demmycrat.......no mistakes here......

lol.....

I was shocked it was that bad......