4 ms·

Can't the government already do the same using images from identity cards, passports, etc.? Is the problem mainly because it's a private company doing it? I gen

by fsndz 2y ago

Can't the government already do the same using images from identity cards, passports, etc.? Is the problem mainly because it's a private company doing it? I genuinely want to better understand this issue.

piva00 2y ago
Yes, the problem is that a private company doing it against data privacy regulations in the EU; collecting personally identifiable information and biometrics is regulated through the GDPR, the article clearly states the issue: > The Dutch agency said that building the database and insufficiently informing people whose images appear in the database amounted to serious breaches of the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR.
- fsndz 2y ago
  Okay I get it now, GDPR. But is it bad if it is used to catch criminals ? What's a potential misuse of that technology ? Maybe I watched too much of Person Of Internet...
  - arlort 2y ago
    > What's a potential misuse of that technology ? Off the top of my head it telling that someone is a criminal when they aren't and ruining their lives
    - salawat 2y ago
      Holocaust. Manhunts. Witch hunts. Having created the systems an unscrupulous psychopathic wannabe autocrat needs to cement their position of power. Don't expect anyone here to understand that though.
    - fsndz 2y ago
      even without tech, justice system is already ruining people's lives unjustly. so maybe we have to discuss failure rate, processes in place to correctly use the tech, instead of just saying it has to be bad ? the question is will the tech help ruin more people lives that was already the case or not or improve the odds in some cases even
      - arlort 2y ago
        then you should not ask "what is a possible misuse of this [facial recognition to catch criminals] technology?" but some more nuanced question As for the rest of your argument, even if we take as a given that there is cases where facial recognition could be helpful, I'd say that if a company can't be trusted not to illegally develop their products it can hardly be trusted to respect strict standards when their products are in use
      - rsynnott 2y ago
        > even without tech, justice system is already ruining people's lives unjustly Sure, but as with a lot of this stuff, this allows that to be done _at scale_. "[bad thing] happens anyway" isn't a great argument against "we should ban this thing where [bad thing] is likely to happen at massive frequency".
        amy-petrik-214 2y ago
        >> even without tech, justice system is already ruining people's lives unjustly >Sure, but as with a lot of this stuff, this allows that to be done _at scale_. EXACTLY. The US wastes over 8 billion dollars a year inefficiently ruining peoples' lives and burning tax dollars. With the advent of facial recognition AI software, we can ruin lives 90% more efficiently at three times the scale!
        fsndz 2y ago
        meanwhile police departments are already using that around the world, and they seem conscious about the limitations, and not using it as a 100% accuracy tool. "Assistant Chief of Police of Miami, Armando Aguilar, said in 2023 that Clearview's AI tool had contributed to the resolution of several murder cases, and that his team had used the technology around 450 times a year. Aguilar emphasized that they do not make arrests based on Clearview's matches alone, and instead use the data as a lead and then proceed via conventional methods of case investigation" https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-65057011 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-65057011
        piva00 2y ago
- swyx 2y ago
  > "Clearview AI does not have a place of business in the Netherlands or the EU, it does not have any customers in the Netherlands or the EU, and does not undertake any activities that would otherwise mean it is subject to the GDPR," he said. what limits do we place on countries randomly being able to make supranational claims like this? do you want every online business checking the passport of their customer? because sure this case is fine but its a pretty dangerous precedent to accept without limits. for all its good intentions, GDPR has also resulted in cookie banner spam on the rest of us. as with all government power - u may be fine when its used against things you dont like, but try to imagine when its used to against things you do...
  - hcfman 2y ago
    So does that mean it’s intelligence services never get a face match done ? How would you know if they have no customers here, do you think their intelligence services would tell you ? In the past the head of Dutch intelligence lied to the government about mass surveillance. Even if it was true, guaranteed they would simple send their photos to American counterparts to run. This is just democracy theatre in reality.
  - mikae1 2y ago
    > what limits do we place on countries randomly being able to make supranational claims like this? Randomly? EU or other nations act because their citizens have their rights violated. I assume Clearview has collected Dutch faces en masse and thereby violated laws. Obey by GDPR or don't deal with the data of EU citizens.
  - piva00 2y ago
    > do you want every online business checking the passport of their customer? Is the business selling to a EU citizen? If so they have to deal with the rights that citizen has. If a company in some fictitious jurisdiction where fraud is not a crime defrauds an American citizen, should they not face American justice for it? It might be they don't have legal representation in the USA but that shouldn't stop an American citizen on bringing the issue to authorities to deal with. It's not random, if you make business with someone in the EU or deal with the information of someone in the EU then you need to follow EU's regulations. Can't do that? Don't deal with EU's citizens data or business, it's pretty simple. I really don't think this is a hard concept to grasp.
- slg 2y ago
  It isn't shocking that an American company would run into issues like this in the EU as it is one of the fundamental differences between American and European society. By and large, Europeans would rather this type of thing be in the hands of the government over a private company while Americans would prefer the reverse.
  - dvngnt_ 2y ago
    this falls apart in america when the government just buys the private data.
  - rsynnott 2y ago
    I mean, I think many people would rather that this was in the hands of _neither_, tbh. The AI Act (note that this fine was under prior legislation, not the rather new AI Act) bans this except for specified national security purposes, but I'd certainly have preferred to see it ban it entirely.
  - mikae1 2y ago
    > By and large, Europeans would rather this type of thing be in the hands of the government over a private company while Americans would prefer the reverse. Well, you can vote for politicians that align with your values. The American replies: you can vote with your wallet. I'd like to see a company like Clearview get boycotted away. It has few customers that pays well and the citizens that they subject to violations are not their customers and have no say. Also, Re: vote with your wallet. The fact that the richest gets the most ballot papers is not so democratic.
fsndz 2y ago
interesting debate around surveillance capitalism, reminded me of this: https://medium.com/discourse/defending-freedom-in-the-era-of-surveillance-capitalism-99d1fc2946f9 https://medium.com/discourse/defending-freedom-in-the-era-of...

by fsndz 2y ago

piva00 2y ago

Yes, the problem is that a private company doing it against data privacy regulations in the EU; collecting personally identifiable information and biometrics is regulated through the GDPR, the article clearly states the issue: > The Dutch agency said that building the database and insufficiently informing people whose images appear in the database amounted to serious breaches of the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR.

fsndz 2y ago
Okay I get it now, GDPR. But is it bad if it is used to catch criminals ? What's a potential misuse of that technology ? Maybe I watched too much of Person Of Internet...
- arlort 2y ago
  > What's a potential misuse of that technology ? Off the top of my head it telling that someone is a criminal when they aren't and ruining their lives
  - salawat 2y ago
    Holocaust. Manhunts. Witch hunts. Having created the systems an unscrupulous psychopathic wannabe autocrat needs to cement their position of power. Don't expect anyone here to understand that though.
  - fsndz 2y ago
    even without tech, justice system is already ruining people's lives unjustly. so maybe we have to discuss failure rate, processes in place to correctly use the tech, instead of just saying it has to be bad ? the question is will the tech help ruin more people lives that was already the case or not or improve the odds in some cases even
    - arlort 2y ago
      then you should not ask "what is a possible misuse of this [facial recognition to catch criminals] technology?" but some more nuanced question As for the rest of your argument, even if we take as a given that there is cases where facial recognition could be helpful, I'd say that if a company can't be trusted not to illegally develop their products it can hardly be trusted to respect strict standards when their products are in use
    - rsynnott 2y ago
      > even without tech, justice system is already ruining people's lives unjustly Sure, but as with a lot of this stuff, this allows that to be done _at scale_. "[bad thing] happens anyway" isn't a great argument against "we should ban this thing where [bad thing] is likely to happen at massive frequency".
      - amy-petrik-214 2y ago
        >> even without tech, justice system is already ruining people's lives unjustly >Sure, but as with a lot of this stuff, this allows that to be done _at scale_. EXACTLY. The US wastes over 8 billion dollars a year inefficiently ruining peoples' lives and burning tax dollars. With the advent of facial recognition AI software, we can ruin lives 90% more efficiently at three times the scale!
      - fsndz 2y ago
        meanwhile police departments are already using that around the world, and they seem conscious about the limitations, and not using it as a 100% accuracy tool. "Assistant Chief of Police of Miami, Armando Aguilar, said in 2023 that Clearview's AI tool had contributed to the resolution of several murder cases, and that his team had used the technology around 450 times a year. Aguilar emphasized that they do not make arrests based on Clearview's matches alone, and instead use the data as a lead and then proceed via conventional methods of case investigation" https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-65057011 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-65057011
        piva00 2y ago
swyx 2y ago
> "Clearview AI does not have a place of business in the Netherlands or the EU, it does not have any customers in the Netherlands or the EU, and does not undertake any activities that would otherwise mean it is subject to the GDPR," he said. what limits do we place on countries randomly being able to make supranational claims like this? do you want every online business checking the passport of their customer? because sure this case is fine but its a pretty dangerous precedent to accept without limits. for all its good intentions, GDPR has also resulted in cookie banner spam on the rest of us. as with all government power - u may be fine when its used against things you dont like, but try to imagine when its used to against things you do...
- hcfman 2y ago
  So does that mean it’s intelligence services never get a face match done ? How would you know if they have no customers here, do you think their intelligence services would tell you ? In the past the head of Dutch intelligence lied to the government about mass surveillance. Even if it was true, guaranteed they would simple send their photos to American counterparts to run. This is just democracy theatre in reality.
- mikae1 2y ago
  > what limits do we place on countries randomly being able to make supranational claims like this? Randomly? EU or other nations act because their citizens have their rights violated. I assume Clearview has collected Dutch faces en masse and thereby violated laws. Obey by GDPR or don't deal with the data of EU citizens.
- piva00 2y ago
  > do you want every online business checking the passport of their customer? Is the business selling to a EU citizen? If so they have to deal with the rights that citizen has. If a company in some fictitious jurisdiction where fraud is not a crime defrauds an American citizen, should they not face American justice for it? It might be they don't have legal representation in the USA but that shouldn't stop an American citizen on bringing the issue to authorities to deal with. It's not random, if you make business with someone in the EU or deal with the information of someone in the EU then you need to follow EU's regulations. Can't do that? Don't deal with EU's citizens data or business, it's pretty simple. I really don't think this is a hard concept to grasp.
slg 2y ago
It isn't shocking that an American company would run into issues like this in the EU as it is one of the fundamental differences between American and European society. By and large, Europeans would rather this type of thing be in the hands of the government over a private company while Americans would prefer the reverse.
- dvngnt_ 2y ago
  this falls apart in america when the government just buys the private data.
- rsynnott 2y ago
  I mean, I think many people would rather that this was in the hands of _neither_, tbh. The AI Act (note that this fine was under prior legislation, not the rather new AI Act) bans this except for specified national security purposes, but I'd certainly have preferred to see it ban it entirely.
- mikae1 2y ago
  > By and large, Europeans would rather this type of thing be in the hands of the government over a private company while Americans would prefer the reverse. Well, you can vote for politicians that align with your values. The American replies: you can vote with your wallet. I'd like to see a company like Clearview get boycotted away. It has few customers that pays well and the citizens that they subject to violations are not their customers and have no say. Also, Re: vote with your wallet. The fact that the richest gets the most ballot papers is not so democratic.

fsndz 2y ago

interesting debate around surveillance capitalism, reminded me of this: https://medium.com/discourse/defending-freedom-in-the-era-of-surveillance-capitalism-99d1fc2946f9 https://medium.com/discourse/defending-freedom-in-the-era-of...