4 ms·

"Okay, we will send all our video surveillance to a third party intelligence partner with whom we own stock and they will do facial recognition and send us a li

"Okay, we will send all our video surveillance to a third party intelligence partner with whom we own stock and they will do facial recognition and send us a list of suspects." - Most police and government entities. If the ban doesn't prevent 3rd party data access the above will likely happen.

bluecalm 5y ago
You can have a government owned database and not send anything to a third party. The way it works with fingerprints and DNA data, at least in my country.
Luker88 5y ago
No, that is still banned. The problem is not whether it's private or government. The problem are multiple, but the main two problems found in an experiment with public facial rec. in an Italian city (Como, and now in Udine, too) are: * municipalities should not have the power to conduct an investigation. That is a clear breach of the separation of powers. At least in Italy every access to information for investigation must be logged, from why it was collected to who requested access to it. Most of the initial deployments of facial rec are way too broad * Our laws require consent before gathering information on people, and biometric has even stricter rules. Just going around in public is hardly giving consent
- throwawaysea 5y ago
  Do you need consent to be photographed or filmed in public spaces? At least in the US, there is no expectation of privacy in public spaces and if someone wants to film you - whether an amateur photographer, a journalist, or a police officer - they are permitted to, simply because it is their constitutional right to do so.
  - ginko 5y ago
    >Do you need consent to be photographed or filmed in public spaces? You do in Europe. You essentially own the copyright to your face.
    - master_lincoln 5y ago
      That's not true. At least in Germany you can take pictures of people in public places without consent (with certain restrictions). Publishing these pictures is where the "copyright" on your face part comes into play.

bluecalm 5y ago

You can have a government owned database and not send anything to a third party. The way it works with fingerprints and DNA data, at least in my country.

Luker88 5y ago

No, that is still banned. The problem is not whether it's private or government. The problem are multiple, but the main two problems found in an experiment with public facial rec. in an Italian city (Como, and now in Udine, too) are: * municipalities should not have the power to conduct an investigation. That is a clear breach of the separation of powers. At least in Italy every access to information for investigation must be logged, from why it was collected to who requested access to it. Most of the initial deployments of facial rec are way too broad * Our laws require consent before gathering information on people, and biometric has even stricter rules. Just going around in public is hardly giving consent

throwawaysea 5y ago
Do you need consent to be photographed or filmed in public spaces? At least in the US, there is no expectation of privacy in public spaces and if someone wants to film you - whether an amateur photographer, a journalist, or a police officer - they are permitted to, simply because it is their constitutional right to do so.
- ginko 5y ago
  >Do you need consent to be photographed or filmed in public spaces? You do in Europe. You essentially own the copyright to your face.
  - master_lincoln 5y ago
    That's not true. At least in Germany you can take pictures of people in public places without consent (with certain restrictions). Publishing these pictures is where the "copyright" on your face part comes into play.