Facial recognition faces a rethink?
Read the damn article before you retweeted. That's not may saying that by the way that's literally twitter. They would very much like it. If you read the news out before you re, tweet it and they're actually rolling out functionality to do just that about this week. On this show he's had enough, and we'll have a meaningful impact on the sheer amount of misinformation. There is online plus they are incredibly convincing. computer-generated fight faces real people. People that can be animated, safe and do anything. The cold deep fakes and I have huge repercussions for everything from politics to porn thought one social media giant has a plan to stop them, and why major tech companies are pulling their facial recognition software back from police all that much more coming up? This is your God to the week in media, technology and culture. My name is Marc Fennell and welcome to download this shy. Yes, indeed, it is brand new episode of download this Shar and she is founder of go GEIC Academy Moran Thank you so much having to be here and he's a software developer with access informatics, Betamax. It's been far too long. Welcome back hit has my good to see you again. I want to start with actual recognition. given the circumstances blast few weeks. We've seen IBM Microsoft an Amazon. All sort of slow down their roll out of facial recognition, particularly in relation to. Law Enforcement so we might go through the individually specifically with Amazon. What have they changed? Well Amazon did make some statements decrying police, brutality and systematic racism that came up in the protests about after the killing of George Floyd and they were criticized by people quite rightly because they supply the police with facial recognition software. It's called Rick. Spelled with a K. critics pointed out the hypocrisy of what they were doing. Supplying the police with face recognition, and then criticizing the police for the brutality, so they have responded to that and pulled back format IBM also have made statements about the justice in Policing Act, and they've also followed by agreeing not to sell their software. The blaze Microsoft, I think they have face recognition services in the cloud, but they so far have not sold them to the police so that they've said that they do that at the moment machine learning. Learning of course allows Massar violence at things like demonstrations, and potentially it means that people who go to a demonstration of course pays for process. Protest is a right in a democracy, but if everyone is able to be recognized by software, L. Mass it really, it's like having your votes. Being counted in democracy, it's just anti-democratic, so I think it's being used disproportionately. And of course there is research that shows that doc skins lead to more errors in Feis recognition, so you could say that the software biking in the privilege this sounds. Weird, but does it make any difference at these handful of big companies have stopped when they're awes-. Facial. Recognition stops around it. Do you think it has a? Meaningful Impact Sarah impact happens is the messaging and the public acceptance or rejection of what facial recognition technology means for us a society so are if there's big companies went supplies with that Tech Shaw some little upstart somewhere. We'll definitely go in do it. In dock rooms in DOT, com is. But I think what having a public compensation you know. The three of us now are talking about this, which talking about what it means and I I think that it's actually pot of those big companies social licensed to operate. To allow us to be able to talk about it as a community, sorry, a social license is the idea that when a big company operates in the community need to give them permission to do certain things, and I think that as a community at the moment whistled of a bit sketchy on what Algorithm, ICK, profiling and data recognition. Of facial technology actually means for us, and so that's why the debate is happening right now. Social Essences is such an interesting concept and. The interesting thing about it as a as a notion is that it's not really enshrined. It only really comes into effect when people get up and talk about it and criticize companies, and I guess the interesting thing about these particular companies paid, or is that some of the loudest voices decrying the use of facial recognition for these purposes? We're actually employees particularly at Amazon. Who I think had been quite vocal about the way they are in company was be using technology. Yes, so the have been some Amazon employees who who spoken out and There are rumors that they may be punished. As a result of that certainly Amazon cracks down. It seems on things like any ideas of unit unionizing or protests, and that sort of thing so yeah, they can use their own abilities. to control their own staff, and this is really disturbing I mean. I think if if the revelations from it would snowden tell us anything it's that if if government's or large organizations can use a technology for mass violence, they will do it, and even in the face of. Of Laws that try to prevent it, so it's very disturbing that these capabilities are out of the bag. The cats out of the bag if you like, and of course, if even if Amazon doesn't supply to the police is nothing to stop a third party buying the Amazon, service and then on selling it to the police, so it's really a you know. It's not something that we can simply control by. These vendors agreed to do something. I think it's GonNa be. It's going to be regulation. It's gotTa to be. Privacy. Regulation has got to be amped up. They've gotta be big penalties for abusing that trust given the prevalence of face masks. The current facial recognition technology to market does it work despite having the bottom half you face covered. Thousand particularly some of the technology. That's available in China. Wear masks are very. Mostert they get used to your face, wearing a mosque. It may feel like you're being a little bit more snaky and a little bit more private by popping that mosque on, but I. Tell you what the computers they just know that it's in a mosque you without a mosque same. Apples extra. Point Year. Apples updated the advice ID to handle mosques better in the latest version of IOS. And of course there's other technologies to in China. They have gate recognition, which recognizes people by the way they walk, so they really don't. They say they face at all. The only thing that we could do is have some sort of the their patents. You can use on a on your. Your face on like printed on a mask that are deliberately designed upset facial recognition so I guess you could wear a mask of a celebrity or someone else, but it's possible maybe to doing something like having glasses which have fake is on them in different spicing them may be some ways to counter this, but the recognition as I said using things like your gate. Your hides other things about you than by that will continue to get better. I mean the thing about all of this object, detection and face recognition is. Continuing to improve, and the right of improvement is improving, so it's a real battled to beat it at the end of the day. This technology easy to actually inevitable otherwise we can temper and control its roll out at the moment. Painter I can't say why to do it I. mean unless the laws become really strict. Government seems to be the ones that are using it. The Muslim in England apparently is completely covered in cameras in the streets. The the the recognition. The face recognition is now being baked into camera sensors. Security cameras and things so this technology is extremely wads bread. It's it's An individual can run up. Vice recognized. Originals aquatic easy and quite easily, and this companies like clearview I who have built a database of I'm sure you've talked about this before, but they built a database of millions of faces and their names, which they've ripped from social media sites from the publicly available websites, and they built this big database and I believe it has been to place forces around the world including federal police in Queensland and South Australia. So this is something that affects us directly here in Australia Sarah what our relationship with facial recognition technology bay like if you designing laws, what a year as a citizen comfortable with! As a citizen I'm comfortable about US having a conversation about this as opposed to. The law paper will deal with that. I think that's that's the danger. Right we think the main people who speak about this stuff, a digital rights activists and to your average person. They don't want to be digital rights activists. That's not that's not a career ambition for most people. It's a tough slog, and so for the average person. We need to be talking about this in our harms. We need to be talking about it. You know on the rig it just. Just needs to be something that we have a conversation about and then policy it shouldn't base that the government make a policy, and then everything falls into line behind it way as individuals, citizens should be taking action and demonstrating what we care about and having the low following that because I think that's the danger riot. You've gotTA hape of policy nodes in a room who aren't up to speed with what we feel comfortable with his family as a school is. All these different things and they're gonNA. Make policies that will outdate very quickly and not stay up to date with social mores, and I think that's I don't know it's going to suck. All right. Here enough. Take. The data. What is what do you think our relationship with respect to recognition technology should look like. Well I actually I think the whole face mask. Thing is really interesting, because it has normalized the ability to disguise you Faisal. Cover your face in public and and. Maybe, this social distancing is something that should go forward into the future I feel like we're getting less calls the. Powder covert, and and maybe shaking hands, always a bad idea, but but look if you wanna go to a demonstration, I think the message is clear. I've been demonstrations myself. Where the have been people filming the crowd, and it's clear what they doing trying to suck up all of the people who went along, and you can bet that information is being used for. For ill whether it's for election targeting whether it's for I, don't know I would bit, but yeah, it's such an easy thing to sweep a camera around a demonstration and recognize all the people there and then use that information for for bad things. I think the fact of the matter is we? HAVE WE WALK OUT IN PUBLIC DAME? We Guide to be recognized. The, problem of course is if you disguise your face, you then become targets like people who run tour browser at home to protect their privacy. Then they become recognized as someone who is trying to hide, and that's just as damaging download. The show is what you're listening to. It is your God to the wake in media, technology and culture. We are joined by Peter Mocks software developer from access informatics and found found rather of Academy Sarah Moran and date fakes stunningly convincing. Artificial faces and facebook have just released a database one hundred thousand date fakes. To teach. You how to spot them Sarah what exactly is going on? So when you will looking online and you see a video as a human, you recognize as a date fake. Algorithms spot, and so they've notoriously bad at working out the difference between a human you know, a fake and a real human video, and so what facebook is doing is saying well. Let's let's get better at this. Let's build up muscle and so they have the largest collection update type videos, and so the training the I to be able to split it just like a human would, and what's really fascinating is the techniques you would think they would use to spot a date fag. What proven not to work, so you know like? Different types of technical information in the video and Training around that they're actually trying to train the I to think more like a human in the way that we as a human spot areas, it has been talked about for longtime this idea of the uncanny valley something that looks stunningly close to a real human vice, but there's just something a little bit. The Human Brian Goes. ooh, that's nasty like that. There's like a psychological sort of actually makes you feel a bit sick exactly. Is that how this is working, or is it working on a different level? Yes so the fakes up pretty good now and at a cursory glance. Videos of Barack, Obama, saying something ridiculous, and of course have been used in pornography, so it looks like a celebrity is in a pornographic film or something, but there's something weird, and currently the flaws things like flickering around the edges of the face or The background looks a bit weird, because the whole thing is about tuning making a face, look like another face so that it's kind of a loop of artificial intelligence face recognition, so a person can pick them, but of course it's so easy to create these vikes ending and election running up to an election. It could be extremely damaging to have say. Joe Biden, or we could bring into Australia appearing to say something really objectionable that could then spread varley through social media. People don't concentrate if they want to believe what they're seeing. That may just say Yep, that's what he said that I. Don't like it I'm not gonNa vote for that person, so facebook is trying to improve the automatic recognition of deep fakes, and that's why I've been running this competition with one hundred thousand. Dave fake videos so far. People who've been building recognizes for it. The Best I can do is sixty five percent accuracy, and that's of course not good enough to let them run automatically to flag date fakes, and it does seem like the best of those. Those, are using the the artifacts that we recognize like the flicker rule, the funny backgrounds and things, and of course defect technology is getting better and better and eight. Eventually, those out effects will go away so it is going to be a difficult problem into the future I mean and the end of the day I think people have really got to be careful, too closely, evaluate where they sourced something, and is that a trustworthy source? Can I believe even this very realistic looking video, and at the moment we're all on a learning curve and I. Guess The the lesson learned over the last few years. People just pay attention to what they raid on the Internet. That's a quick look. DO I agree with this headline. Does this headline align with my values? Great Senate on, and I think one of the interesting points. The technology officer facebook say basically date. Vikes, currently, not a big issue, but we let the. Few used to not be caught flat-footed, and I have to say that is bang on when it comes to facebook's recent experience, and I do think it's I do think it's worthwhile that they're investing in it. Why is this particularly issue for facebook? Though Sarah? It's the gateway to the Internet for so many people. In developing nations, that's that's the browser like that's actually how they get their information. And so. FACEBOOK has a news fade, so people think it is news, and so you know it doesn't matter who says the content if it presents as though it is legitimate for the people who don't have. High levels of Media Literacy, which let's face, it is most people. they going to believe those things and. A risk to democracy. It's a risk to Sar many different things because we actually can't find the truth anymore. And for facebook themselves. You know I I am appreciating that they are recognizing this social responsibility in that respect, but basically also that comes back to advertises like you know. FACEBOOK is largely funded by advertising, and if facebook becomes as a source of untruth or misinformation, we're all GONNA leave. It happened to my space. It became uncle and we left. See I don't know the issue much people, deleting accounts, and much as these advertisers being a little bit sauce on running ads on in that context. Oh totally. You. I've placed massive campaigns on facebook, and you know you really you are conscious of. Where is my brand being placed? We'll facebook damage. My brand like that's not worth giving them. My money and I'll go back to advertising in newspapers. Bring it on, bring it on. Bring it on. To one of the things you said there was really interesting, which is the the model at the forefront has sixty five percent accuracy and facebook said they don't actually plan to use any of the winning models because the accuracy isn't. They decide that some of their models have achieved eighty percent accuracy, but it was only with training data, and then they put that against unseen clips. It's sort of dropped again. Why would they be that disparity? Well, when when you try to machine learning model, you generally petition up the data sets, so you say in this guy's got one hundred thousand videos. What you would do is trying it on nine hundred thousand of them, and then tested on ten thousand that it's never seen and yeah. This sounds a bit strange, but it does sound like the best algorithms were looking for rather. They were looking for glitches in the in the date fake, rather than actually recognizing this as you were saying the Uncanny valley in the face and so. A something that it's a battle because the date fake is going to get better over time and I. Think they'll quickly learn. This is the white works now on non on all social media that has automatic blocking. If things like you know nudes and things like that is people play with the Algorithm and figure out a way to get around what it's looking for. You know bid. Bid To large areas of of ski or something like that, and they'll do the same with this, so yeah, none of a good enough, and that means icon automatically tag, and that means they can't possibly have humans looking at all of the video that's being uploaded to any of these platforms, just overwhelmingly large amounts of video to look at which is the perennial problem with everything that. Is such a fire hose of of content that it's really hard to to keep up with the fact that they are actually thinking about being responsible with their fire hose of data that they're sitting on Maine's thinking about you know what what responsibility they have and I. think that's a good news, but I also wonder if the more aware people become a date fakes. We'd lead the less trust. They'll have just everything across the one. It'll be another thing. It'll be like the equivalent of fake news. It'll just be another thing. You can say against anything that you disagree with. Do you know what I mean like? You could see how people are going to use it in that way. Yes lieutenant done trust any information. If you get this point and that's that's I guess the genius of trump is that he basically cast doubt on all media, says all media relying, and then people will. How do they actually find out any information? That's it. You become this society where people don't trust anything. Even the most authoritative sources untrustworthy if If you count, believe video. You can't believe what do you? Maybe a solution is to actually have some way of digitally signing video clips and audio clips Maybe this is a role for the blockchain, and saying this is not just you know. This is from my campaign I endorse it, but actually digitally signing it so if it gets edited or or or date faked or something then you can go back and like you do with a browser. You got a website and has a little grain padlock on it. That shows you that it really has come from the demand that kind from something like that might be technically possible, but who's GonNa. Pay For that infrastructure now. I just WanNa for a touch of optimism I hide in little places around the Internet, and I've mentioned this before, but Tiktok. I think facebook is such a millennial. Pace of of software I think that the next generation one. They'll think it's oncle to. They're going to rebel. And so my faith is in the young people to rebel against all of this, and you never know they may be the ones who you know and bring truth and real inflammation and daughter integrity, and all those things back and so I'm going. Going to hang out on talk a little bit longer with young kids and my optimism light will shine, Sarah, Moran is the Voice of optimism there. She is the CO founder of go. GEICO KADEMI and you're also hearing. The voice paid a mock software development with access informatics. Marc Fennell was my name, and this is download the show your God to the. The week in media, technology and culture and twitter would very much like it if you read the bloody articles before you re tweeted them out of testing new features specifically on android phones, Sarah that well does what and a little pop up comes up and says hey, you should read this I have you read it before you can spam it out to your friends, and the main purpose of that is that people read the headline it goes with what they want to share, and so they'll just tweet re tweet the headline without actually reading the article. It's an interesting step by twitter I. Don't know why they're particularly choosing now to do that because they could have done that a long time ago. But obviously that there's there's a lot going on twitter in terms of. Changes to different things you can. You can turn off replies now. They're actually starting to think about their role in misinformation bullying, and all of those things and this is this is one step that's contributing to that large movement by twit up paid. How do they know of read the article on on? I don't believe I've actually done anything to check that you've read read through the article at the moment. This of course has been a big problem on other platforms where really nasty things have gone viral WHATSAPP. In twenty eighteen had a problem in two of the biggest markets Brazil and India with people were sending out. Out, false messages about child molestation, or or some something terrible that and mobs these were going incredibly viral, and then mobs were actually hunting down the person who had been blamed with it and people were actually killed now what whatsapp did was they put a limit on how many people you could forward a message onto because groups could have huge numbers of people and say something could go viral exponentially by put a limit on that, and that does appear to work. Twitter has assigned problem with Fake News, and you know part of it is is clicked by the headlines on things. The headline might not represent what's actually in the article. Often, it's quite misleading or doesn't fully tell the story. People say the headline forward on the article to other people, and they sing can very quickly take off and go viral, and just you keep saying this. Is You know there's effect in in the human brain? Where if you see the same thing started over and over again eventually you start to assume that it's true, and so these platforms have a duty to actually slow down the viral nature of news because of the damage that can be done as I said, lives can be lost. Is it enough Sarah what else would you like to say be done? I am so glad you. affiliates. Let Okay! How about if you'RE GONNA? Be So worried about people writing the article. Why don't you get to the reply US US AKA? The people who reply about the article without having read it that is one of the things that drives me bonkers is you'll tweet an article and someone will reply just based on their opinion of the headline and not actually read the article at all. Most famously among women of the Internet, it happens often when. The journalist who wrote the article? And I, it gets a reply about the article and she has to say yeah on our Reuter, and so this happens that the way that we engage shorts to say read before you re tweet it, but there's more to it than that the other thing for me. My forever bugbear is that when I, click on a link if it's behind a paywall I'm not logged in on twitter so I have to open it out to another Balbuena remember, and by the time it happens, I'm Kinda over it like I'm not that desperate to read the article that I'm going to make ten clicks, and so that is my pool media literacy like even may here's a median. I, know I feel guilty that I just can't be bothered. Rating the article, and so just because twitter has putting so many hoops for me to get there particularly for things like the New York Times. Yeah I have to go from twitter to browser. Then into the APP that I've actually looked on. I think maybe that is an argument to suggest that really what's going viral is a headline, because the headline is the thing that's immediately visible that you can get a dopamine hit from people saying yes, you right to re tweet that maybe that speaks to a broader systemic problem. Yeah, look I think today media studies in in primary school education needs to be talking about critical rating, looking at sources evaluating you know. Know, what you're saying the fact that The you know, sources vary wildly. This'll comes back to the problem that we need to pay for news. We need to pay for journalism and we need to have respected sources that we recognize and we need to know that they're not being faked. Because you do see fake stories, you know looking like they've come from a well known journal and yet don't believe everything you see on Social Media but the problem is the business model at the moment is completely shot. and. We need to find a new one in the past. We never really hide for news. It was on the back of the rivers of gold of advertising and and now that all gone away we need to find another way to do it as some associated, it is our struggle to actually follow links because every time I go to a page you get pop signed. You agree to the cookies you get another one saying you're going to subscribe to a newsletter. You'RE GONNA. Get another one signed this four out of five articles. You've read this month that you want to subscribe and by that Tomoko Nice screen real estate. Have a look often find myself. looking at the dolman dealing Dev's to try and get to the story underneath it, but Yeah, it's too hard to actually read on the side, so I can see why people just read summaries year. I mean I. Guess The issue, though is, it's one thing to say. We should pay more for for news and journalism, which obviously I agree with. All of those things way describing they are the tools with which they make us pay for journalism. So how do you? How do you balance those through things out and also recognizing that you know one of the advantages of things like social media is that it can bring a can draw a huge audience to random pieces of continental journalism, so there is power and potential positively the comes from fast retweeting of an article. Like how do you balance those two things than? Great, you're asking me and well. You you solve this problem. You will be a hero. I don't think we found the solution yet. The interesting thing is actually not so much about the news itself like I. Don't think this is a play by twitter to actually advertise. Please go check out the actual article I think. What would it is is twitter is headlines. Twitter was one hundred forty characters announced to eighty characters like it is short shop discussion, and what this move is about is trying to redirect you to have a deep more nuanced conversation and I think those things are like sort of at conflict with each other, and that's that's why. I'm kind of confused by doing it. But in terms of hey, if it turns out that through this way that twitter advertisers, every amazing publication in the world and people actually drive their traffic to it and a wife from twitter. What a wonderful world! We live in huge! Thank you to Sam. RANCO FOUND GO GEIC Academy. Thanks for joining us a gain Navarrese and pay them ox access informatics, so for develop extraordinary. Thanks for joining us again. Thanks good to see and with that I shall leave you. My name has been knocked Fanilo. Thanks for listening to another episode of download the shot.