13 ms·

30k unsuspecting Rose Bowl attendees scooped up in a facial recognition test

203 points by TakakiTohno 6y ago

rootsudo 6y ago
Why is football such a big deal? It isn't worth it to give up your identity or privacy to see other people wrestle on the grass for a ball.
- s_y_n_t_a_x 6y ago
  You can apply that to literally every recreational activity/hobby. Entertainment is subjective and I doubt you stare a blank wall all day so we could make fun of how you spend your time. The football stadium is like the colosseum down here. It brings a lot of revenue to the towns and something to do. Sports helps keeps kids out of trouble as well.
  - AlexandrB 6y ago
    Sports in general may help keep kids out of trouble, but I'd argue football is trouble: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronic_traumatic_encephalopathy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronic_traumatic_encephalopat...
    - eeZah7Ux 6y ago
      > Sports in general may help keep kids out of trouble Citation needed.
- wyldfire 6y ago
  > It isn't worth it to give up your identity or privacy From the article: >Three fans who attended the Rose Bowl game and spoke to OneZero said they didn’t remember seeing any notice that they were being surveilled. It's unlikely that anyone knew enough to be able to make an informed decision. Sadly, legally, "privacy" is something you're not generally entitled to when outside in public (in the US AFAIK).
  - DLA 6y ago
    Correct. There is no expectation of privacy in public spaces. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expectation_of_privacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expectation_of_privacy
- throwjulyjuly 6y ago
  I think there are a couple things to unpack here. 1) They didn't know about the surveillance. To quote from the article: > “I actually had no idea they were using that type of tech at the game nor was I informed that I would be recorded or analyzed by such tech,” said California resident Benjamin Mercke. “Actually, that’s incredibly concerning to me.” 2) Any entertainment can be reduced to being considered pointless. I don't think it's a big stretch to accept that people are entertained by different things. I personally find concerts / music festivals unbelievably boring, but it's obvious that people love them, so I have no opinion on whether it's "worth it" to them.
kevsim 6y ago
Inevitably when GDPR comes up, there are always HN commenters talking disparagingly about the "nanny state" in Europe. However, I'll take some annoying cookie banners over an ad tech company scanning my face any day of the week. If this was in Europe, they would've gotten hit with a fine of 4% of their revenue.
- youeseh 6y ago
  Issue with the banners is that my answer is always, "no". Yet, I have to do a lot of work to say, "no" on every single website. This makes it inconvenient to explore the web at large. The banners should be opt-in not opt-out, but this is against many of the website owner's current interests - including many news sites. So, I've stopped visiting them.
  - hadrien01 6y ago
    It's actually illegal to have opt-out GDPR banners, but enforcement so far has been non-existent (two years later!).
    - kevin_thibedeau 6y ago
      When the banner fills the screen, the 'X' is the unconditional opt out.
      - anon98356 6y ago
        You would think so, but if you read these notices carefully a lot of them will say by either hit "Accept" or closing this pop-up you are consenting. So by hitting the 'X' you are unconditionally opting in. Unless your talking about the 'X' to close the tab at which point, yes it is
    - blaser-waffle 6y ago
      Start talkin to some lawyers then, be the change you want to see, etc.
  - 6y ago
cardiffspaceman 6y ago
This somehow doesn't violate any ethics concerning experimentation on humans?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- gruez 6y ago
  Ethics =/= law. You can experiment all you want on humans without consent for your A/B tests, for instance.
- jeffbee 6y ago
  Can you make an ethical argument against it? What ethical principle is violated by photographing people in public? By classifying those photographs?
  - kick 6y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_privacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_privacy
    - jeffbee 6y ago
      In the United States, a right to privacy has not ever been used by courts to restrict photography of people in public places. Not even once.
      - ganstyles 6y ago
        That sounds like a legal argument, but you were asking about an ethical argument, right?
        jeffbee 6y ago
        I am asking for an ethical argument, and I haven't heard one yet. All I see is bluster and exaggeration.
jb775 6y ago
Facial recognition tech should really have more regulations in place. What if this was done at the recent protests and there's now a database full of facial data that associates those people with likely political affiliations, etc. Imagine in hitler had access to this tech and simply purchased a database of "Likely Jewish" facial data?
- 1over137 6y ago
  >What if this was done at the recent protests Seems more likely than not that it was done at recent protests, no?
  - jb775 6y ago
    I actually think it's currently being done all over the place. For example, every time I merge on and off of a tolled highway (I live outside Philadelphia), there's a camera with a flash that takes a picture as I drive by. I don't believe for a second they aren't building a facial image database.
    - hundchenkatze 6y ago
      I always assumed the toll cameras were there to capture the license plate numbers of drivers that don't pay the toll / don't have the RFID toll sticker. edit: I'm not suggesting that you're skipping out on the toll. They may be taking a photo at the same time as the attempt to scan the RFID sticker. And then sending a ticket to the scanned plate number if it fails to scan a RFID.
      - jb775 6y ago
        As of 2 or so years ago, there's a bright flash every time a car drives through (taking the pic from the front). In PA, license plates aren't required on the front of cars...so what's the point of taking the pic from the front? I also haven't noticed any pictures being taken from the back. My assumption of why they're doing this is to compile nice clean labeled facial recognition data for ML training. Not only that, they can scan other faces in the car to see who you're traveling with.
arpinum 6y ago
This can't be stopped. Better to stop resisting tech advancements and instead learn to adapt. Airports are starting to do this scanning as well, and they won't go away; travellers don't know they exist and have few rights when in secure environments.
- umvi 6y ago
  The "right to not be observed" is not a natural right, nor should it be. The "right to absolute privacy in all places at all times" is also not a natural right, nor should it be. People should only be entitled to privacy in their own homes/current dwelling. That's it (with a few exceptions). People should not be entitled to privacy in public. I get that privacy zealots have to take extreme stances in order to counter-balance anti-privacy trends, but in real life, a world where absolute perfect privacy is the 24/7 default (public and private), is a world devoid of meaningful interactions between humans and also a world where criminals flourish.
  - reaperducer 6y ago
    The "right to not be observed" is not a natural right Rights are granted through legislative processes. What is not a right today may be a right tomorrow. The "right to absolute privacy in all places at all times" is also not a natural right Is anybody asking for that? I haven't seen that anywhere. Can you provide a link?
    - umvi 6y ago
      > Rights are granted through legislative processes. What is not a right today may be a right tomorrow. There's a difference between "natural rights" (rights that are not dependent on the laws or customs of any particular culture or government) and what you describe. The type of right you describe is capricious and whimsical. GP was complaining that airport travelers don't have privacy. So it seems like people are asking for it. Can you name some places you believe right to privacy should not apply?
      - 6y ago
kyle_morris_ 6y ago
I was at the Rose Bowl this year and something I noticed was how much of the game was spent staring at the jumbotron rather than watching the game live. Sitting in the stands no longer feels like you're watching an incredible game. Instead it feels like you're watching the game live on ESPN(given the level of advertisements) but sitting in the stands. I'm certainly not the first to point out how commercialized sports have become, but it's disconcerting seeing stadiums try to hook you into staring at an ad for four hours instead of enjoying a once-in-a-lifetime experience. Another example was the flyover: A B2 flew over just before kickoff[0] and I, along with almost everyone else, had never seen one before. An announcement over the loudspeakers asked that everyone hold up a small sign so that the stadium looked like the American flag from above. This was great for viewers at home and horrible for anyone in the stands because all you could see was the back of the sign you and everyone else were holding up. We seem to have gotten so far away from what sports are about(two teams competing to see who's best) that we've landed on milking as much money out of the fans as they possibly can. Facial recognition, in this context, seems to be doing the same. Rather than giving fans a fantastic experience, the folks running these games are trying to monetize them instead. [0] - https://www.oregonlive.com/ducks/2020/01/check-out-this-aerial-photo-of-the-b-2-bomber-flyover-at-the-2020-rose-bowl.html https://www.oregonlive.com/ducks/2020/01/check-out-this-aeri...
- etrabroline 6y ago
  >that we've landed on milking as much money out of I take issues with your use of the word "we". If you asked them, 95% of people would say this should stop. In the past, economic and political leaders were drawn from the nation as a whole, and had a sense of loyalty and social obligation to their fellow countrymen, even if it meant leaving a few dollars on the table. Globalization and the increasing cultural and ethnic divide between the upper and lower classes in western countries has ended that fealty. May it soon return.
  - js2 6y ago
    99% of people also hate how airlines treat them and think appliances should last more than a few years, but then when faced with a purchase decision, choose whatever is cheapest. Unfortunately, money talks and bullshit walks. :-(
rst 6y ago
Not the first such tests -- there was a trial in Boston in 2013, at a music festival on municipal property (City Hall plaza). https://digboston.com/boston-used-face-recognition-before-despite-potential-ban-it-likely-will-again/ https://digboston.com/boston-used-face-recognition-before-de...
dawnerd 6y ago
I think people might be freaked out if they learned just how many stores/attractions already have similar tech implemented. Ah who am I kidding, the average person doesn’t seem to care all that much - quite unfortunate. https://www.aclu.org/blog/privacy-technology/surveillance-technologies/are-stores-you-shop-secretly-using-face https://www.aclu.org/blog/privacy-technology/surveillance-te...
watertom 6y ago
Sports attendance is way down, I don't care what the sports themselves say. During the NFL Playoffs they couldn't show crowd shots because there were enough empty seats that it was noticeable. I saw empty seats at the super bowl. I saw highlight on ESPN of an NBA game before the lock down, and it looked like a high School basketball game because of the number of empty seats. Considering every player in the NBA, MLB, NFL, and NHL are all part of the 1% I'm done contributing to the rich. I'll go see minor league baseball games, they are much more fun anyway.
- colinmhayes 6y ago
  It's always been pretty common to see a lot of empty seats at NBA games depending on the home team.
- llsf 6y ago
  Might depend on the team. Even the Lakers vs. Clipper on March 8 2020 (days before lockdown in California), was packed at Staples Center. No idea if after COVID there would be the same attendance...
- what_ever 6y ago
  > During the NFL Playoffs they couldn't show crowd shots because there were enough empty seats that it was noticeable. I saw empty seats at the super bowl. I am pretty sure the Superbowl was sold out. People just didn't show up or were stuck in traffic. I believe this will be true for any NFL playoff games. > Sports attendance is way down Citations needed. Other than baseball, I highly doubt this is true for any sports in the US. Unless it's a team like Phoenix Suns.
cbsmith 6y ago
It seems a bit weird to say that something hasn't been reported in the mainstream media, and then link to a Rolling Stone article on it from two years ago...
vincentmarle 6y ago
Guess what happens with the data in all those apps people download to attend big festivals (e.g. Coachella). User data is a big business.
canyon289 6y ago
I emailed a CCPA request to their info email. Will report back with what I hear.

203 points by TakakiTohno 6y ago

Why is football such a big deal? It isn't worth it to give up your identity or privacy to see other people wrestle on the grass for a ball.

s_y_n_t_a_x 6y ago
You can apply that to literally every recreational activity/hobby. Entertainment is subjective and I doubt you stare a blank wall all day so we could make fun of how you spend your time. The football stadium is like the colosseum down here. It brings a lot of revenue to the towns and something to do. Sports helps keeps kids out of trouble as well.
- AlexandrB 6y ago
  Sports in general may help keep kids out of trouble, but I'd argue football is trouble: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronic_traumatic_encephalopathy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronic_traumatic_encephalopat...
  - eeZah7Ux 6y ago
    > Sports in general may help keep kids out of trouble Citation needed.
wyldfire 6y ago
> It isn't worth it to give up your identity or privacy From the article: >Three fans who attended the Rose Bowl game and spoke to OneZero said they didn’t remember seeing any notice that they were being surveilled. It's unlikely that anyone knew enough to be able to make an informed decision. Sadly, legally, "privacy" is something you're not generally entitled to when outside in public (in the US AFAIK).
- DLA 6y ago
  Correct. There is no expectation of privacy in public spaces. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expectation_of_privacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expectation_of_privacy
throwjulyjuly 6y ago
I think there are a couple things to unpack here. 1) They didn't know about the surveillance. To quote from the article: > “I actually had no idea they were using that type of tech at the game nor was I informed that I would be recorded or analyzed by such tech,” said California resident Benjamin Mercke. “Actually, that’s incredibly concerning to me.” 2) Any entertainment can be reduced to being considered pointless. I don't think it's a big stretch to accept that people are entertained by different things. I personally find concerts / music festivals unbelievably boring, but it's obvious that people love them, so I have no opinion on whether it's "worth it" to them.

kevsim 6y ago

Inevitably when GDPR comes up, there are always HN commenters talking disparagingly about the "nanny state" in Europe. However, I'll take some annoying cookie banners over an ad tech company scanning my face any day of the week. If this was in Europe, they would've gotten hit with a fine of 4% of their revenue.

youeseh 6y ago
Issue with the banners is that my answer is always, "no". Yet, I have to do a lot of work to say, "no" on every single website. This makes it inconvenient to explore the web at large. The banners should be opt-in not opt-out, but this is against many of the website owner's current interests - including many news sites. So, I've stopped visiting them.
- hadrien01 6y ago
  It's actually illegal to have opt-out GDPR banners, but enforcement so far has been non-existent (two years later!).
  - kevin_thibedeau 6y ago
    When the banner fills the screen, the 'X' is the unconditional opt out.
    - anon98356 6y ago
      You would think so, but if you read these notices carefully a lot of them will say by either hit "Accept" or closing this pop-up you are consenting. So by hitting the 'X' you are unconditionally opting in. Unless your talking about the 'X' to close the tab at which point, yes it is
  - blaser-waffle 6y ago
    Start talkin to some lawyers then, be the change you want to see, etc.
- 6y ago

cardiffspaceman 6y ago

This somehow doesn't violate any ethics concerning experimentation on humans?

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
gruez 6y ago
Ethics =/= law. You can experiment all you want on humans without consent for your A/B tests, for instance.
jeffbee 6y ago
Can you make an ethical argument against it? What ethical principle is violated by photographing people in public? By classifying those photographs?
- kick 6y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_privacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_privacy
  - jeffbee 6y ago
    In the United States, a right to privacy has not ever been used by courts to restrict photography of people in public places. Not even once.
    - ganstyles 6y ago
      That sounds like a legal argument, but you were asking about an ethical argument, right?
      - jeffbee 6y ago
        I am asking for an ethical argument, and I haven't heard one yet. All I see is bluster and exaggeration.

jb775 6y ago

Facial recognition tech should really have more regulations in place. What if this was done at the recent protests and there's now a database full of facial data that associates those people with likely political affiliations, etc. Imagine in hitler had access to this tech and simply purchased a database of "Likely Jewish" facial data?

1over137 6y ago
>What if this was done at the recent protests Seems more likely than not that it was done at recent protests, no?
- jb775 6y ago
  I actually think it's currently being done all over the place. For example, every time I merge on and off of a tolled highway (I live outside Philadelphia), there's a camera with a flash that takes a picture as I drive by. I don't believe for a second they aren't building a facial image database.
  - hundchenkatze 6y ago
    I always assumed the toll cameras were there to capture the license plate numbers of drivers that don't pay the toll / don't have the RFID toll sticker. edit: I'm not suggesting that you're skipping out on the toll. They may be taking a photo at the same time as the attempt to scan the RFID sticker. And then sending a ticket to the scanned plate number if it fails to scan a RFID.
    - jb775 6y ago
      As of 2 or so years ago, there's a bright flash every time a car drives through (taking the pic from the front). In PA, license plates aren't required on the front of cars...so what's the point of taking the pic from the front? I also haven't noticed any pictures being taken from the back. My assumption of why they're doing this is to compile nice clean labeled facial recognition data for ML training. Not only that, they can scan other faces in the car to see who you're traveling with.

arpinum 6y ago

This can't be stopped. Better to stop resisting tech advancements and instead learn to adapt. Airports are starting to do this scanning as well, and they won't go away; travellers don't know they exist and have few rights when in secure environments.

umvi 6y ago
The "right to not be observed" is not a natural right, nor should it be. The "right to absolute privacy in all places at all times" is also not a natural right, nor should it be. People should only be entitled to privacy in their own homes/current dwelling. That's it (with a few exceptions). People should not be entitled to privacy in public. I get that privacy zealots have to take extreme stances in order to counter-balance anti-privacy trends, but in real life, a world where absolute perfect privacy is the 24/7 default (public and private), is a world devoid of meaningful interactions between humans and also a world where criminals flourish.
- reaperducer 6y ago
  The "right to not be observed" is not a natural right Rights are granted through legislative processes. What is not a right today may be a right tomorrow. The "right to absolute privacy in all places at all times" is also not a natural right Is anybody asking for that? I haven't seen that anywhere. Can you provide a link?
  - umvi 6y ago
    > Rights are granted through legislative processes. What is not a right today may be a right tomorrow. There's a difference between "natural rights" (rights that are not dependent on the laws or customs of any particular culture or government) and what you describe. The type of right you describe is capricious and whimsical. GP was complaining that airport travelers don't have privacy. So it seems like people are asking for it. Can you name some places you believe right to privacy should not apply?
    - 6y ago

kyle_morris_ 6y ago

I was at the Rose Bowl this year and something I noticed was how much of the game was spent staring at the jumbotron rather than watching the game live. Sitting in the stands no longer feels like you're watching an incredible game. Instead it feels like you're watching the game live on ESPN(given the level of advertisements) but sitting in the stands. I'm certainly not the first to point out how commercialized sports have become, but it's disconcerting seeing stadiums try to hook you into staring at an ad for four hours instead of enjoying a once-in-a-lifetime experience. Another example was the flyover: A B2 flew over just before kickoff[0] and I, along with almost everyone else, had never seen one before. An announcement over the loudspeakers asked that everyone hold up a small sign so that the stadium looked like the American flag from above. This was great for viewers at home and horrible for anyone in the stands because all you could see was the back of the sign you and everyone else were holding up. We seem to have gotten so far away from what sports are about(two teams competing to see who's best) that we've landed on milking as much money out of the fans as they possibly can. Facial recognition, in this context, seems to be doing the same. Rather than giving fans a fantastic experience, the folks running these games are trying to monetize them instead. [0] - https://www.oregonlive.com/ducks/2020/01/check-out-this-aerial-photo-of-the-b-2-bomber-flyover-at-the-2020-rose-bowl.html https://www.oregonlive.com/ducks/2020/01/check-out-this-aeri...

etrabroline 6y ago
>that we've landed on milking as much money out of I take issues with your use of the word "we". If you asked them, 95% of people would say this should stop. In the past, economic and political leaders were drawn from the nation as a whole, and had a sense of loyalty and social obligation to their fellow countrymen, even if it meant leaving a few dollars on the table. Globalization and the increasing cultural and ethnic divide between the upper and lower classes in western countries has ended that fealty. May it soon return.
- js2 6y ago
  99% of people also hate how airlines treat them and think appliances should last more than a few years, but then when faced with a purchase decision, choose whatever is cheapest. Unfortunately, money talks and bullshit walks. :-(

rst 6y ago

Not the first such tests -- there was a trial in Boston in 2013, at a music festival on municipal property (City Hall plaza). https://digboston.com/boston-used-face-recognition-before-despite-potential-ban-it-likely-will-again/ https://digboston.com/boston-used-face-recognition-before-de...

dawnerd 6y ago

I think people might be freaked out if they learned just how many stores/attractions already have similar tech implemented. Ah who am I kidding, the average person doesn’t seem to care all that much - quite unfortunate. https://www.aclu.org/blog/privacy-technology/surveillance-technologies/are-stores-you-shop-secretly-using-face https://www.aclu.org/blog/privacy-technology/surveillance-te...

watertom 6y ago

Sports attendance is way down, I don't care what the sports themselves say. During the NFL Playoffs they couldn't show crowd shots because there were enough empty seats that it was noticeable. I saw empty seats at the super bowl. I saw highlight on ESPN of an NBA game before the lock down, and it looked like a high School basketball game because of the number of empty seats. Considering every player in the NBA, MLB, NFL, and NHL are all part of the 1% I'm done contributing to the rich. I'll go see minor league baseball games, they are much more fun anyway.

colinmhayes 6y ago
It's always been pretty common to see a lot of empty seats at NBA games depending on the home team.
llsf 6y ago
Might depend on the team. Even the Lakers vs. Clipper on March 8 2020 (days before lockdown in California), was packed at Staples Center. No idea if after COVID there would be the same attendance...
what_ever 6y ago
> During the NFL Playoffs they couldn't show crowd shots because there were enough empty seats that it was noticeable. I saw empty seats at the super bowl. I am pretty sure the Superbowl was sold out. People just didn't show up or were stuck in traffic. I believe this will be true for any NFL playoff games. > Sports attendance is way down Citations needed. Other than baseball, I highly doubt this is true for any sports in the US. Unless it's a team like Phoenix Suns.

cbsmith 6y ago

It seems a bit weird to say that something hasn't been reported in the mainstream media, and then link to a Rolling Stone article on it from two years ago...

vincentmarle 6y ago

Guess what happens with the data in all those apps people download to attend big festivals (e.g. Coachella). User data is a big business.

canyon289 6y ago

I emailed a CCPA request to their info email. Will report back with what I hear.