Backlash grows for police use of facial recognition (The 3:59, Ep. 562)

The 3:59


The. Welcome to three fifty nine I'm Ben FOX Ruben, I'm as actually on Tuesday, San Francisco became the first city to ban. Police use of facial recognition tech proponents of the ban say the tech offers a slippery slope for Massar Valence while proponents facial recognition say that it's a useful policing tool. I as guess, do you expect more cities to follow suit with San Francisco? I think the outright ban is a little bit much. I don't think cities will do that right away. I did see somebody talk about a moratorium maybe they don't use it as, as, as primary method of dentist. Maybe it's the secondary. Or maybe it's used in a very light way. But the outright ban, I think, is a little bit much. There must be a different way to regulate something like this. Well, it's also interesting that this is obviously, not a federal ban. It's still being used in a variety of other places right? Yeah. So I was looking at an article about this, and this does apply to San Francisco police and agencies, but the San Francisco, please does not use this currently. So nothing's changed. There plus facial detect is available at airports, international airports and ports. But that's jurisdiction, which means this ban has no effect on those areas, which means that if I went to the airport, and San Francisco, San Francisco International airport, they could use facial recognition in theory. So it's not like the entire municipality everything in your, the federal you can't can use this. So some additional information about this. The Georgetown Law Center on privacy and technology, which has been looking into facial recognition technology for quite some time came out with a study today, this morning, saying police are using flawed data to run facial recognition searches those include using artist's sketches editing images to add is in lips and searching for look alike. So to me, this seems like if people are already a little shaky on the USA facial recognition tack, this is obviously another point to say, hey, maybe this isn't the best thing. I mean if you were. Night witness go. Hey, get a little, Ben FOX Ruben, this should be able to show a picture of Ben FOX and since he's so well known. Maybe of course, one of the cases actually was Harrelson, David Schwimmer look, lot of people like that. So the idea of saying, this person looks like another person would be usable in the police sense. The idea that computers doing it and potentially getting wrong. Again. It's that final step if, if for some reason, the police are deploying arresting drones. Yeah. I think there's a real problem there. But if there's a person Dan going, this is completely wrong, or this is completely right? At least it should be due process after that. Yeah. I think that, you know, the, the idea that this was proposed in the first place is facial, recognition tech is supposed to be more accurate or more credible than the human, I'd sometimes or it's able to pick certain things up, like, for instance, if you're wearing a different pair of glasses if you have longer hair, dyed, your hair. There are all sorts of different ways to maybe mess with the human eye, which facial, recognition tech is expected to be able to just kind of. Sift through unfortunately with this study seems that, you know, hey, maybe they're messing around with it a little too much. Next up one. Switch to a different subject. We are happy to report, the no Facebook, certainly not listening to your conversations. Not that important seen it actually tested out, this urban legend. I was forced to talk into my phone for about a week and a half trying to get advertisements about chainsaws. And no. I didn't get any advertisements about chainsaws new found no evidence that this is actually real love. The article about this, the point that this would be crazy illegal. Let's not forget that illegal, forget the idea that oh yeah. This would be creepy. It would cost Facebook trillions of dollars and ruining their model entirely that have been breaking the law, this Hauer amount of time that would be just amazingly bad for Facebook. When it comes to the press. So if they're crazy enough to do it, then, yeah, they should be. It's a good point that you mentioned that this would actually cost the company, a lot of money, and there would in fact, be some sort of footprint to show that Facebook is digesting that information that it's actually gobbling up audio recordings from two billion of its users you even several hundred million of those users, there would be some sort of data process that we, we would be able to notice, and unfortunately, security, researchers haven't found that if the accuracy aspect of these ads. I think that's what makes people scared, but it's links to your friends searches that you're, you're looking for, because your friends are looking for friends of friends that kind of weird amazing profile that can create all this data on top of that just reminds me I was going to buy car. All of a sudden it's thinking about buying a Honda Accord. They were everywhere, didn't mean that they weren't there all the time. I just didn't notice them as much right? Wonder if there's a psychological element of I was just talking about cookies and others ads for cookies. But you might not have noticed it before because you're talking about pizza. Yeah. And it's a good point. Alfred ING in his story talked about the. Fact that Facebook doesn't actually have to listen to you at already has a ton of data about you already. But anyway, if you want to read more about these stories, check them out on CNN Ben FOX river on that bridge. Carey. Oh, jeez. All right. You threw me off. Thanks for listening.

Coming up next