7 ms·

European Parliament calls for ban on facial recognition

138 points by maxwell 3y ago

retrocryptid 3y ago
It's nice to ban random facial recognition, but it's still a non-binding resolution. And I'm sure European cops would get around it the same way we get around it here in the states: just use a corporate / commercial entity as an intermediate.
- kolinko 3y ago
  I may be wrong, but I think EU already has a soft ban on private entities doing facial recognition in public. Even if it hadn’t, if a government entity is banned from doing something, it doesn’t matter if it’s hiring employees or contractors to do it - I think that is the spirit of the law in EU. In US it’s obviously different.
- onetokeoverthe 3y ago
  [dead]
xapata 3y ago
How would banning facial recognition databases work? Would there be a limit to the variety of photographs one can have? To the metadata one could associate with them? What would happen if a general image and video recognition module for a robot began to recognize different people? This seems like a slippery slope to me.
- Daishiman 3y ago
  It isn't. As with everything, intent, records and lawyers will sort it out.
- hooverd 3y ago
  Presumably, you couldn't sell them or offer third party facial recognition services or deploy facial recognition systems in your stores. You could probably try and be coy and "well, actually" your way out of it, but the courts generally don't like that.
MrBuddyCasino 3y ago
[flagged]
fwlr 3y ago
The article mentions the AI Act and claims it “restricts the use of remote biometric identification — including facial recognition technology — in public places unless it is to fight “serious” crime, such as kidnappings and terrorism”, which I am afraid seems rather hollow as that is basically how it is already used. I’m not sure whether it’s the reporting that’s confused or the politicians, but this distinction between three different things (“facial recognition technology”, “private facial recognition databases”, and “predictive policing”) is very strange. Modern facial recognition algorithms are just clustering vectors, and facial recognition databases are just lots of pictures of faces, neither seems well-defined enough to easily ban. And predictive policing is just plain bizarre - what relationship does that have with facial recognition at all?
- counttheforks 3y ago
  As always the law is about intent. It doesn't care about your technical arguments.
  - pixl97 3y ago
    "Well the laws of Australia prevail in Australia, I can assure you of that. The laws of mathematics are very commendable, but the only law that applies in Australia is the law of Australia." Attempting to ignore physics and mathematics when making the law tends to not work out well....
    - johannes1234321 3y ago
      At the same time a law can't narrowly target a specific technology, which then is bypassed easily by changing some technicality, but must be broad enough to cover different technical implications, while specific enough to catch the case you want to catch.
    - counttheforks 3y ago
      If a company wants to do business abroad they'll have to conform to those laws. And the law cares about intent.
hiAndrewQuinn 3y ago
Perhaps facial recognition should merely be taxed
seydor 3y ago
It's a resolution aka thoughts and prayers. At the same time that the same parliament is outlawing encryption I wouldn't do that with a straight face
Animats 3y ago
Strange. The EU wants to prohibit facial recognition, which humans can still do, but wants backdoors into encryption. I'd rather allow facial recognition in public places but have communications privacy.
- hooverd 3y ago
  We could prohibit facial recognition in public and backdoors into encryption. Also, humans can't do facial recognition at scale.
  - pleb_nz 3y ago
    And humans are error prone and their memories can fade very fast. But even a comparison really...
- johannes1234321 3y ago
  Different players in the EU push for different things. Some people in the commission push for surveillance tools. Some people in the parliament push for privacy.
  - type0 3y ago
    And the parlament is mostly toothless, it's usefull to provide us plebs a spectacle of democracy
    - johannes1234321 3y ago
      It is missing the right for own initiative and doesn't have budget powers, which is consequence of EU not being a state, but a union of independent states. However it has to vote and agree on all EU regulations and changes the proposed initiatives quite a lot. However EU parliament politics are ... complicated between party family and national interests. A big problem is that its negotiations happen outside the spotlight. News focus on national parliaments and national governments and following EU debate is painfulnkt only, but also due to the multilinguality.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
Ekaros 3y ago
I wonder how some cases work then. Like passport controls. That to my understanding look like biometrics and facial recognition.
- przemub 3y ago
  Excluded from the ban.
jabradoodle 3y ago
I see almost no value in companies deploying facial recognition software at will, and lots of room for abuse. It's a shame that while the EU is considering banning facial recognition they are mandating it for non EU residents to enter the region. https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/schengen-borders-and-visa/smart-borders/entry-exit-system_en https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/schengen-borders-...
powera 3y ago
(2021)
cft 3y ago
[flagged]

138 points by maxwell 3y ago

It's nice to ban random facial recognition, but it's still a non-binding resolution. And I'm sure European cops would get around it the same way we get around it here in the states: just use a corporate / commercial entity as an intermediate.

kolinko 3y ago
I may be wrong, but I think EU already has a soft ban on private entities doing facial recognition in public. Even if it hadn’t, if a government entity is banned from doing something, it doesn’t matter if it’s hiring employees or contractors to do it - I think that is the spirit of the law in EU. In US it’s obviously different.
onetokeoverthe 3y ago
[dead]

xapata 3y ago

How would banning facial recognition databases work? Would there be a limit to the variety of photographs one can have? To the metadata one could associate with them? What would happen if a general image and video recognition module for a robot began to recognize different people? This seems like a slippery slope to me.

Daishiman 3y ago
It isn't. As with everything, intent, records and lawyers will sort it out.
hooverd 3y ago
Presumably, you couldn't sell them or offer third party facial recognition services or deploy facial recognition systems in your stores. You could probably try and be coy and "well, actually" your way out of it, but the courts generally don't like that.

MrBuddyCasino 3y ago

[flagged]

fwlr 3y ago

The article mentions the AI Act and claims it “restricts the use of remote biometric identification — including facial recognition technology — in public places unless it is to fight “serious” crime, such as kidnappings and terrorism”, which I am afraid seems rather hollow as that is basically how it is already used. I’m not sure whether it’s the reporting that’s confused or the politicians, but this distinction between three different things (“facial recognition technology”, “private facial recognition databases”, and “predictive policing”) is very strange. Modern facial recognition algorithms are just clustering vectors, and facial recognition databases are just lots of pictures of faces, neither seems well-defined enough to easily ban. And predictive policing is just plain bizarre - what relationship does that have with facial recognition at all?

counttheforks 3y ago
As always the law is about intent. It doesn't care about your technical arguments.
- pixl97 3y ago
  "Well the laws of Australia prevail in Australia, I can assure you of that. The laws of mathematics are very commendable, but the only law that applies in Australia is the law of Australia." Attempting to ignore physics and mathematics when making the law tends to not work out well....
  - johannes1234321 3y ago
    At the same time a law can't narrowly target a specific technology, which then is bypassed easily by changing some technicality, but must be broad enough to cover different technical implications, while specific enough to catch the case you want to catch.
  - counttheforks 3y ago
    If a company wants to do business abroad they'll have to conform to those laws. And the law cares about intent.

hiAndrewQuinn 3y ago

Perhaps facial recognition should merely be taxed

seydor 3y ago

It's a resolution aka thoughts and prayers. At the same time that the same parliament is outlawing encryption I wouldn't do that with a straight face

Animats 3y ago

Strange. The EU wants to prohibit facial recognition, which humans can still do, but wants backdoors into encryption. I'd rather allow facial recognition in public places but have communications privacy.

hooverd 3y ago
We could prohibit facial recognition in public and backdoors into encryption. Also, humans can't do facial recognition at scale.
- pleb_nz 3y ago
  And humans are error prone and their memories can fade very fast. But even a comparison really...
johannes1234321 3y ago
Different players in the EU push for different things. Some people in the commission push for surveillance tools. Some people in the parliament push for privacy.
- type0 3y ago
  And the parlament is mostly toothless, it's usefull to provide us plebs a spectacle of democracy
  - johannes1234321 3y ago
    It is missing the right for own initiative and doesn't have budget powers, which is consequence of EU not being a state, but a union of independent states. However it has to vote and agree on all EU regulations and changes the proposed initiatives quite a lot. However EU parliament politics are ... complicated between party family and national interests. A big problem is that its negotiations happen outside the spotlight. News focus on national parliaments and national governments and following EU debate is painfulnkt only, but also due to the multilinguality.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

Ekaros 3y ago

I wonder how some cases work then. Like passport controls. That to my understanding look like biometrics and facial recognition.

przemub 3y ago
Excluded from the ban.

jabradoodle 3y ago

I see almost no value in companies deploying facial recognition software at will, and lots of room for abuse. It's a shame that while the EU is considering banning facial recognition they are mandating it for non EU residents to enter the region. https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/schengen-borders-and-visa/smart-borders/entry-exit-system_en https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/schengen-borders-...

powera 3y ago

(2021)

cft 3y ago

[flagged]