EFF: Americans may not realize it, but many are in a face recognition database now
People are not going to, nor should they have to, start walking around outside with a bag over their head to avoid security cameras capturing images of them. Yet "face recognition allows for covert, remote and mass capture and identification of images -- and the photos that may end up in a database include not just a person's face but also how she is dressed and possibly whom she is with. This creates threats to free association and free expression not evident in other biometrics," testified EFF Staff Attorney Jennifer Lynch about What Facial Recognition Technology Means for Privacy and Civil Liberties.
Probabilistic inference is the fundamental computational model for the UPSIDE program. An inference process uses energy minimization to determine a probability distribution to find the object that is the most likely interpretation of the sensor data. It can be implemented directly in approximate precision by traditional semiconductors as well as by new kinds of emerging devices.
FBI To Give Facial Recognition Software to Law-Enforcement Agencies
The FBI has been keen to emphasize that the 12.8 million images stored on the database will only include “criminal mug shot photos” taken during the booking process. Last week, in a bid to quell privacy concerns, the bureau said in a podcast that it will not “store photographs obtained from other sources such as social media.”
Stubby wrote:what about social media accounts of known criminals?
bet they use those
I included the quote above as a sort of comic relief. Anyone who believes that all existing information is not going to be used is being incredibly naive.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
Us foreigners traveling to the states a lot are pretty much used to this. They have been taking biometric pictures of us for a decade now.
Also the new passport photos are biometric. So as soon as you get a passport you are in the biometric (face recognition) database.
It is interesting that americans are only concerned about human rights when it starts to affect them, even though the constitution speaks about "persons" not "americans", when it comes to human rights.
Skipjack wrote:
It is interesting that americans are only concerned about human rights when it starts to affect them, even though the constitution speaks about "persons" not "americans", when it comes to human rights.
I've noticed this too.
We've been fingerprinting visiting foreign nationals since shortly after 9/11. Also, there is a safe travel or some other such program where people from countries that normally do not require visa (e.g. Japan, Western Europe) can avoid the hassles at immigration if they divulge all kinds of personal information on the state department website prior to travel to the U.S.
I've never liked this stuff and consider it "security theater" that actually does very little to prevent future terrorist attacks.
I also think these security measures are often used for law enforcement purposes having nothing to do with prevention of terrorism.
Skipjack wrote:Us foreigners traveling to the states a lot are pretty much used to this. They have been taking biometric pictures of us for a decade now.
Also the new passport photos are biometric. So as soon as you get a passport you are in the biometric (face recognition) database.
It is interesting that americans are only concerned about human rights when it starts to affect them, even though the constitution speaks about "persons" not "americans", when it comes to human rights.
It is not a human right to be able to visit the United States. Sorry.
You can't possibly really think that biometric scans of aliens entering our country is an indication that the ONLY human rights we care about are our own. Your indiscriminate usage of the word "only" is as inappropriately offensive as usual.
Skipjack wrote:
It is interesting that americans are only concerned about human rights when it starts to affect them, even though the constitution speaks about "persons" not "americans", when it comes to human rights.
I've noticed this too.
We've been fingerprinting visiting foreign nationals since shortly after 9/11. Also, there is a safe travel or some other such program where people from countries that normally do not require visa (e.g. Japan, Western Europe) can avoid the hassles at immigration if they divulge all kinds of personal information on the state department website prior to travel to the U.S.
I've never liked this stuff and consider it "security theater" that actually does very little to prevent future terrorist attacks.
I also think these security measures are often used for law enforcement purposes having nothing to do with prevention of terrorism.
I agree. After 911, the Gate Guards reappeared at Fort Sill, and to my knowledge have yet to catch a terrorist. They do create massive traffic Jams in and out of the base, and I suppose they successfully hassle people over drugs and contraband, but for all the legitimate benefit they preform, they are just "security theater" as you have so aptly put it.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
Skipjack wrote:
It is interesting that americans are only concerned about human rights when it starts to affect them, even though the constitution speaks about "persons" not "americans", when it comes to human rights.
I've noticed this too.
We've been fingerprinting visiting foreign nationals since shortly after 9/11. Also, there is a safe travel or some other such program where people from countries that normally do not require visa (e.g. Japan, Western Europe) can avoid the hassles at immigration if they divulge all kinds of personal information on the state department website prior to travel to the U.S.
I've never liked this stuff and consider it "security theater" that actually does very little to prevent future terrorist attacks.
I also think these security measures are often used for law enforcement purposes having nothing to do with prevention of terrorism.
I agree. After 911, the Gate Guards reappeared at Fort Sill, and to my knowledge have yet to catch a terrorist. They do create massive traffic Jams in and out of the base, and I suppose they successfully hassle people over drugs and contraband, but for all the legitimate benefit they preform, they are just "security theater" as you have so aptly put it.
Base security was certainly useless at preventing the Ft. Hood shooting, which was clearly inspired by Islamist ideology.
Stubby wrote:what about social media accounts of known criminals?
bet they use those
I included the quote above as a sort of comic relief. Anyone who believes that all existing information is not going to be used is being incredibly naive.
Do not store and do not utilizes are two different things. The raptor program demonstrates this well. Raptor program looks for sexual predators trying to enter school property by comparing your id photo against a list of know photos of predators. That is a good thing but it also can look for anyone listed as wanted by law enforcement and checks for people with multiple identifications/ drivers licenses as well as identifies anyone behind on child support and the state is looking for them.It also scans social media. Had the privilege of being scanned to attend my granddaughters graduation.
Last edited by paperburn1 on Wed Aug 29, 2012 12:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
It is not a human right to be able to visit the United States. Sorry.
I never said it was.
You can't possibly really think that biometric scans of aliens entering our country is an indication that the ONLY human rights we care about are our own. Your indiscriminate usage of the word "only" is as inappropriately offensive as usual.
I was probably generalizing a bit too much. I meant "many americans". I remember how some were trying to calm the waves after the signing of the NDAA by saying "this only affects the others, not americans" and a lot of people feeling false relieve about that. That was what I was actually thinking of, when I wrote that.
The point, I was trying to make was that the whole "being entered into a biometric database" thing is something I have come to accept. You obviously seem to think that this is the right thing to do, so you should come to terms with it.
Also, since 9/11 we are all required to have biometric pictures in our passports (americans too). So there really is no way to avoid being in a facial recognition database for anyone.
It is not a human right to be able to visit the United States. Sorry.
I never said it was.
You can't possibly really think that biometric scans of aliens entering our country is an indication that the ONLY human rights we care about are our own. Your indiscriminate usage of the word "only" is as inappropriately offensive as usual.
I was probably generalizing a bit too much. I meant "many americans". I remember how some were trying to calm the waves after the signing of the NDAA by saying "this only affects the others, not americans" and a lot of people feeling false relieve about that. That was what I was actually thinking of, when I wrote that.
The point, I was trying to make was that the whole "being entered into a biometric database" thing is something I have come to accept. You obviously seem to think that this is the right thing to do, so you should come to terms with it.
Also, since 9/11 we are all required to have biometric pictures in our passports (americans too). So there really is no way to avoid being in a facial recognition database for anyone.
People have been worried about loosing jobs to machines since the beginning of the industrial revolution. But despite advances in labor saving machines, human labor remains a resource of value.
Machine slave-overseers would be quite another matter.
