Facial Recognition

[LarrylLix]

It's not always easy to convince the authorities that they made a mistake.  The cops hear that argument all the time from people they arrest, whether it is true or not.  Even when pictures don't match, fingerprints don't match, witnesses tell them they've got the wrong guy, the cops are reluctant to cut anyone loose.
 
Here's a recent example of a facial recognition screw up.  It took 30 hours before they finally let him go.
 
https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/24/tech/aclu-mistaken-facial-recognition/index.html

Horrible racist comment in that article so I have to regard the source in disgust, but...
 
"The guard, the complaint says, identified Williams as the suspect."
Another example of the news opinion mobsters attempting to create trouble, just to sell their disgusting wares as the truth.
 
Legal charges should be laid against the writers of this garbage Brian Fung and Rachel Metz, CNN Business
for attempting to create a civil disturbance.

 

[pete_c]

Personally facial recognition is being optimized and will be utilized (and is today).  Just like finger prints, retinal scanning and genome databases.
 
Face pictures have been on passports / drivers licenses now for years.   
 
 

 

[upstatemike]

Trying to suppress technology is rarely a viable solution. Usually it results in it being developed anyway but exclusively by and for wrongdoers. Better to adapt to the new paradigm with strong legal penalties for misuse that are actively enforced and large financial settlements in civil suits for victims of "mistakes" to incentivize makers and users of the technology to develop and use strong safeguards that protect against anyone being harmed by  misidentification.
 
I also expect it will be easy enough to circumvent these systems using "Mission Impossible" style masks etc. I don't see the future application being used too much in law enforcement except for trying to pick people out of crowds for further attention from more reliable means of identification before action is taken. I do see a lot of value in commercial uses such as tracking employees and visitors within a large business facility. Has guest A entered a restricted area? Are they still within close proximity of their assigned host/guide? Have they left the premises without signing out and turning in their visitor badge? Is anybody unaccounted for during a fire drill?
And so on. 
 
No matter how good the technology gets it will never be accurate enough to be the only basis for high stakes decisions like unlocking doors or arresting people. Realistic masks are too easy to make and statistically too many people look alike for this to work as single factor authentication in anything critical.

 

[ano]

Personally facial recognition is being optimized and will be utilized (and is today).  Just like finger prints, retinal scanning and genome databases.
 
Face pictures have been on passports / drivers licenses now for years.   

The facial recognition in the airport is much different from that the police are using. In the airport you have a boarding pass, which only you should have, and the face is verifying its you.  With passports, you have already given the fingerprint, and again, the facial picture is just an extra measure.   Police are attempting to use facial recognition as the SOLE means of identification, and that is the part where you have problems.  Anytime you have technology, people expect it to be 100% accurate, and it certainly isn't. 

 

[sic0048]

I'm not sure how state-of-the-art Apple's and Google's Facial Recognition is in their photo organization programs, but its more funny than anything else.  You basically start naming the people in your pictures, and the programs attempt to identify the remaining people. I say "people" lightly because both Google's and Apple's program often identify dogs in the picture as people. The programs identify some, but they are more wrong than correct.

 
I haven't used Apple's version, but Google's facial recognition in the Google Photos app is scary accurate.  I think you misunderstand how it works.  You identify a person in a couple of pictures and Google will scan all of your other pictures and tell you which ones that person is also found.  I will be looking at pictures and it will say "John" is in an image and I won't believe it until I look closer.  Sure enough, "John" will be in the background of the image with only a side view of his face - the recognition is that accurate.  Age doesn't seem to matter either.  I identified my kids in pictures when they were in High School and Google will correctly identify them in images from Elementary School and they look very different.
 
As far as it identifying dogs, that is a stated feature that Google has built in - it identifies pets too.  It can correctly tell the difference my friends black lab and my black lab too. (I've never seen it identify a dog as a person or vice versa if that is what you mean).

 

[xlurkr]

LarryLix:
 
What is the horribly racist comment in the article?  I've read it 3 times now, and nothing jumps out at me.  I really do want to know.
 
-Tom
 

Horrible racist comment in that article so I have to regard the source in disgust, but...

 

[LarrylLix]

LarryLix:
 
What is the horribly racist comment in the article?  I've read it 3 times now, and nothing jumps out at me.  I really do want to know.
 
-Tom

There was several pointed statements about the race of the victim, but the final statement either implied that white people think people of colour all look the same, or the victim was subjected to more than usual harassment due to his colour. It is not clear why the writer intended to exemplify his colour with several mentions of it. Skin colour was not even relavent to the point of the article other than to point out some different or unfair treatment, based on race.
 
"Mr. Williams, a lifelong resident of the Detroit area, owns no such hat, and is not a Cardinals fan," the complaint said. "He's not even a baseball fan. He is, however, Black."

 

[TrojanHorse]

Facial recognition on photos is not the same as real time video.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LarrylLix]

Facial recognition on photos is not the same as real time video. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do you think there is some motion element to it?

 

[ano]

I haven't used Apple's version, but Google's facial recognition in the Google Photos app is scary accurate.  I think you misunderstand how it works.  You identify a person in a couple of pictures and Google will scan all of your other pictures and tell you which ones that person is also found.  I will be looking at pictures and it will say "John" is in an image and I won't believe it until I look closer.  Sure enough, "John" will be in the background of the image with only a side view of his face - the recognition is that accurate.  Age doesn't seem to matter either.  I identified my kids in pictures when they were in High School and Google will correctly identify them in images from Elementary School and they look very different.
 
As far as it identifying dogs, that is a stated feature that Google has built in - it identifies pets too.  It can correctly tell the difference my friends black lab and my black lab too. (I've never seen it identify a dog as a person or vice versa if that is what you mean).

I would say sometimes it is incredibly accurate, and many others, its incredibly wrong.  

 

[TrojanHorse]

Larry when read through this I understood some concern about real-time facial recognition which my point was simply that that’s a different animal than a static photo where people are looking and smiling at a close camera. I don’t claim to know the details but presumably doing real time facial recognition of a moving crowd in an airport let’s say is different. Presumably even more challenging for a wireless body camera on an officer.

Maybe that’s what 5G is for??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LarrylLix]

Larry when read through this I understood some concern about real-time facial recognition which my point was simply that that’s a different animal than a static photo where people are looking and smiling at a close camera. I don’t claim to know the details but presumably doing real time facial recognition of a moving crowd in an airport let’s say is different. Presumably even more challenging for a wireless body camera on an officer. Maybe that’s what 5G is for?? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The testing I have seen in online editorials have found test people attempting to hide, within a few hours in London England, where it is stated there isn't a square metre you cannot be seen by a camera. It was a test game of hide and seek and the hider was always  arrested on the same day after a few hour head start.
 
This technology is scary accurate, apparently.

 

[upstatemike]

The testing I have seen in online editorials have found test people attempting to hide, within a few hours in London England, where it is stated there isn't a square metre you cannot be seen by a camera. It was a test game of hide and seek and the hider was always  arrested on the same day after a few hour head start.
 
This technology is scary accurate, apparently.

What were the conditions of the test? Was the hider allowed to alter or cover their face to try to defeat the system? Real bad guys don't usually don't play fair if they really want to defeat the system.

 

[LarrylLix]

What were the conditions of the test? Was the hider allowed to alter or cover their face to try to defeat the system? Real bad guys don't usually don't play fair if they really want to defeat the system.

That's why we are all wearing masks. It demonstrates defiance of the powers that be!    h34r:

 

[bbrendon]

New York Times : The End of Privacy as we know it?

An unregulated facial recognition app can probably tell the police your name, and help them find out where you live and who your friends are.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/10/podcasts/the-daily/facial-recognition-surveillance.html