3 ms·

Since you're comparing facial recognition to guns and guns are regulated by law and have strict rules for use, perhaps facial recognition should as well? I thi

by d4l3k 8y ago

Since you're comparing facial recognition to guns and guns are regulated by law and have strict rules for use, perhaps facial recognition should as well? I think there should be a discussion about laws/regulations about facial recognition use. Even if Amazon removes their service there will always be companies that don't care about the ethics as much. Strict rules instead of public shaming seems like the better approach

RhodesianHunter 8y ago
If you screw up with a gun someone dies. If you screw up with facial recognition a human double-checks and nothing happens. Scissors are dangerous but we don't regulate those either.
- syshum 8y ago
  ummm no... First of it is not a given if you "screw up with a gun someone dies" that is not the only result Further it is laughable to believe that with facial recognition a "human double-checks" we have seen time and time again that new technology entering the realm of criminal justice can be used to wrongfully convict people at an alarming rate. See Hair and Bite mark controversy or the number of Labs that have been compromised in recent years The fact is that a "humans" that are suppose to be "double checking" do not in reality, if the computer spits out "Well the computer says it is person X" that is what the Jury will hear, and the Jury will not question the technology and the person will end up in prison until such time as someone like the Innocent project comes along to invalidate either the technology on the whole or the application of the technology
- sangnoir 8y ago
  > If you screw up with facial recognition a human double-checks and nothing happens. You have too much faith in humanity: a lot can be, and will be done "because the system says so". Nevermind integrators who will create processes that assume recognition is 100% correct "Yes, I know you're not the wanted criminal, but now that I have tagged you, I have to take you to the station and process you out...Monday morning because that's when Jim is in"

by d4l3k 8y ago

RhodesianHunter 8y ago

If you screw up with a gun someone dies. If you screw up with facial recognition a human double-checks and nothing happens. Scissors are dangerous but we don't regulate those either.

syshum 8y ago
ummm no... First of it is not a given if you "screw up with a gun someone dies" that is not the only result Further it is laughable to believe that with facial recognition a "human double-checks" we have seen time and time again that new technology entering the realm of criminal justice can be used to wrongfully convict people at an alarming rate. See Hair and Bite mark controversy or the number of Labs that have been compromised in recent years The fact is that a "humans" that are suppose to be "double checking" do not in reality, if the computer spits out "Well the computer says it is person X" that is what the Jury will hear, and the Jury will not question the technology and the person will end up in prison until such time as someone like the Innocent project comes along to invalidate either the technology on the whole or the application of the technology
sangnoir 8y ago
> If you screw up with facial recognition a human double-checks and nothing happens. You have too much faith in humanity: a lot can be, and will be done "because the system says so". Nevermind integrators who will create processes that assume recognition is 100% correct "Yes, I know you're not the wanted criminal, but now that I have tagged you, I have to take you to the station and process you out...Monday morning because that's when Jim is in"