6 ms·

It's better that the alternative which is humans. Unless you think enforcing laws or ever having the need to establish identity should never take place

by bko 1y ago

dngzafigot 1y ago
[flagged]
estimator7292 1y ago
[flagged]
jMyles 1y ago
Humans are great at identifying each other. As the internet matures (and ease of long-distance communication obviates the need for massive nation states), we can constrain state authority to geographic batches small enough that people are known to one another.
watwut 1y ago
It is not better if it ends up harrasing and harning more people and is unaccountable. You can eventually punish humans abusing power. Cant do that wuth software designed to be abusive.
sennalen 1y ago
It's humans. This is like TSA's fake bomb detectors with nothing inside the plastic shell
- bko 1y ago
  You think the person at the TSA that gets paid 40k a year is better at facial recognition than a computer?
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - snovv_crash 1y ago
    Having worked in this space (ID verification of live-humans to ID documents), yes, I absolutely think people are better at the 1:1 person:document yes/no question than I think an AI model is at saying which of 200M people this face is. Just having a prior of a physical document with their name and likeness on it already makes up 1 factor of the N-factor authentication.
    - bko 1y ago
      If you really worked in this space you would know that AI models don't scan 200M people because... why would they? Seems kind of weird.
      - snovv_crash 1y ago
        The database of potential US citizens that could be matched to a face scan is where the 200M comes from.
      - queenkjuul 1y ago
        So the model is verifying faces against ... A database of zero faces? Surely there's 200M faces in there, or else how does it work?
        ThrowMeAway1618 1y ago
        >So the model is verifying faces against ... A database of zero faces? Surely there's 200M faces in there, or else how does it work? No. The model is, "Hey! this guy is being a pain in the ass. He even claimed that The President wasn't blessed with superintelligence and doesn't actually smell really good! We need to get this terrorist off the streets! He sure looks a whole lot like that illegal on the FBI most wanted list, doesn't he? Off to CECOT with him! What's that? He's a twelfth generation citizen? No way! Look, the app I used to claim this guy matches an illegal who's also a child rapist! Your papers are all fake (if, as a citizen he's even carrying them). Onto the plane with you Senor. That's the model. Feel free to disagree, but come back and reread this comment in 18 months. I hope you read it then and think "what a paranoid guy! Nothing like that could ever happen here!" But I'm not holding my breath. :(
  - Larrikin 1y ago
    Stop presenting your opinion with no evidence as obvious facts on the ground that people need to argue against with sources.
  - tchalla 1y ago
    Are you saying that a computer should be trusted without human intervention? If so, I have a computer right now that says you should be banned on the Internet.
  - novemp 1y ago
    Yes.
  - atmavatar 1y ago
    It's likely the TSA employee's five year old child is better at facial recognition than a computer, too.
    - bko 1y ago
      Please don't spread unscientific misinformation. You can say ICE bad, or you don't believe in borders, but saying computer facial recognition is inaccurate compared to humans is just factually incorrect. https://pages.nist.gov/frvt/html/frvt11.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://pages.nist.gov/frvt/html/frvt11.html?utm_source=chat...
      - Kinrany 1y ago
        Better-than-human facial recognition existing doesn't mean that all facial recognition technology is that good.
      - esseph 1y ago
        https://abc7ny.com/post/man-falsely-jailed-nypds-facial-recognition-surveillance-tech-failed/17664671/ https://abc7ny.com/post/man-falsely-jailed-nypds-facial-reco... https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/12/rite-aid-banned-using-ai-facial-recognition-after-ftc-says-retailer-deployed-technology-without https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/12/... https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/jan/24/met-police-begin-using-live-facial-recognition-cameras https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/jan/24/met-polic... https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00146-023-01634-z https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00146-023-01634-z https://www.mozillafoundation.org/en/blog/facial-recognition-bias/ https://www.mozillafoundation.org/en/blog/facial-recognition... https://surface.syr.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2479&context=honors_capstone https://surface.syr.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2479&con... Yeah it's pretty fucking shit, actually. Here's the science.
        verdverm 1y ago
        Looks like GP is using ChatGPT (see the utm_source in their link) to find the first result that supports their viewpoint rather than doing a broad discovery and analysis
  - rpdillon 1y ago
    People are exceptionally good at facial recognition because of the Fusiform face area, which is a specialized portion of the temporal lobe optimized for it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusiform_face_area https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusiform_face_area
gessha 1y ago
As a computer vision engineer, I wouldn’t trust any vision system for important decisions. We have plenty of established process for verification via personal documents such as ID, birth certificate, etc and there’s no need to reinvent the wheel.
- bko 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - ToucanLoucan 1y ago
    I love how you're contrasting the credibility of demonstrably-proven-to-be-unreliable face recognition tech against MERELY government-issued documents that have been the basis for establishing identity for more than a century. Perfect? Of course not, nothing we make ever is. A damn bit better than racist security cameras though.
  - shadowgovt 1y ago
    That is, generally, how it works in most contexts, yes. > Why do we even have photos on licenses and passports To protect against trivial theft-and-use, mostly. Your mention of licenses, in particular, was interesting given how straightforward it is for a relatively-dedicated actor to forge the photo on them (it's tougher to forge the security content in the license; the photo is one of the weakest pieces of security protection in the document).
  - bryanrasmussen 1y ago
    (using he as gender neutral here) he didn't say he didn't want to have photos on licenses and passports, indeed it seems to me as the support is for standard ids that he would want these things as they are part of the standard id set. He said he was against computer vision identifying people, and gave as a reason that they are a computer vision engineer implying that they know what they are talking about. Although that was only implied without any technical discussion as to why the distrust. Then you say they trust a piece of paper you hand them, which they never claimed to do either, they discussed established processes, which a process may or may not be more involved than being handed a piece of paper, depending on context and security needs. >You can't be serious. I sort of feel you have difficulties with this as well.
01HNNWZ0MV43FF 1y ago
The real alternative would be the inalienable human rights we were promised
- pfannkuchen 1y ago
  This sort of thinking is kind of a retcon, no? The people who wrote the line you’re referencing also decided that none of the people ICE is involved with were even eligible for citizenship. If their rules held out, this wouldn’t even be a thing. I’m not arguing that their rules were correct, just that picking and choosing things they said feels intellectually dishonest.
  - _yb2s 1y ago
    It’s more complex than that- initial drafts of the declaration of independence were more explicit about literally covering all people, and even had a rant about how slavery was unethical, and they compromised by cutting these in order to get enough consensus to make it happen at all. Thomas Jefferson himself was a hypocrite- he wrote a lot about how slavery was wrong and should be ended, all the while owning slaves himself. Anyways, I think it’s perfectly reasonable to nowadays take that philosophy and apply it universally. Just because it was done unfairly and hypocritically in the past is no excuse for us to also be hypocrites nowadays.
    - pfannkuchen 1y ago
      Sorry is ICE going around enslaving Africans? I thought the topic was people being targeted for removal based on looking like a Native American. What does Jefferson’s view on slavery have to do with anything?
      - deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
      - _yb2s 1y ago
        The context is the question of if human rights are universal or only for certain privileged groups
anigbrowl 1y ago
Your subsequent comments like 'If you deny the need to know anything about anyone at any time, you're just so far gone that there is no discussion that could be had' indicate that you're sarcastically trolling people, and I suggest you do that somewhere else in future.
array_key_first 1y ago
Literally how is it better than humans. You can't just say that, you have to justify it.
queenkjuul 1y ago
I would much rather have a forgetful, error-prone human, who has empathy and intelligence to assess a situation beyond the metrics put into a computer
Arrath 1y ago
Bullshit! The alternative is mentioned in the article, trust the official documents presented by the 'suspect', as that's the purpose of the documents. As in OP's quote: “ICE officials have told us that an apparent biometric match by Mobile Fortify is a ‘definitive’ determination of a person’s status and that an ICE officer may ignore evidence of American citizenship—including a birth certificate—if the app says the person is an alien,” "Trust the word of the black box" is pure technocratic dystopian nonsense.

It's better that the alternative which is humans. Unless you think enforcing laws or ever having the need to establish identity should never take place

by bko 1y ago

It's better that the alternative which is humans. Unless you think enforcing laws or ever having the need to establish identity should never take place

dngzafigot 1y ago

[flagged]

estimator7292 1y ago

[flagged]

jMyles 1y ago

Humans are great at identifying each other. As the internet matures (and ease of long-distance communication obviates the need for massive nation states), we can constrain state authority to geographic batches small enough that people are known to one another.

watwut 1y ago

It is not better if it ends up harrasing and harning more people and is unaccountable. You can eventually punish humans abusing power. Cant do that wuth software designed to be abusive.

sennalen 1y ago

It's humans. This is like TSA's fake bomb detectors with nothing inside the plastic shell

bko 1y ago
You think the person at the TSA that gets paid 40k a year is better at facial recognition than a computer?
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- snovv_crash 1y ago
  Having worked in this space (ID verification of live-humans to ID documents), yes, I absolutely think people are better at the 1:1 person:document yes/no question than I think an AI model is at saying which of 200M people this face is. Just having a prior of a physical document with their name and likeness on it already makes up 1 factor of the N-factor authentication.
  - bko 1y ago
    If you really worked in this space you would know that AI models don't scan 200M people because... why would they? Seems kind of weird.
    - snovv_crash 1y ago
      The database of potential US citizens that could be matched to a face scan is where the 200M comes from.
    - queenkjuul 1y ago
      So the model is verifying faces against ... A database of zero faces? Surely there's 200M faces in there, or else how does it work?
      - ThrowMeAway1618 1y ago
        >So the model is verifying faces against ... A database of zero faces? Surely there's 200M faces in there, or else how does it work? No. The model is, "Hey! this guy is being a pain in the ass. He even claimed that The President wasn't blessed with superintelligence and doesn't actually smell really good! We need to get this terrorist off the streets! He sure looks a whole lot like that illegal on the FBI most wanted list, doesn't he? Off to CECOT with him! What's that? He's a twelfth generation citizen? No way! Look, the app I used to claim this guy matches an illegal who's also a child rapist! Your papers are all fake (if, as a citizen he's even carrying them). Onto the plane with you Senor. That's the model. Feel free to disagree, but come back and reread this comment in 18 months. I hope you read it then and think "what a paranoid guy! Nothing like that could ever happen here!" But I'm not holding my breath. :(
- Larrikin 1y ago
  Stop presenting your opinion with no evidence as obvious facts on the ground that people need to argue against with sources.
- tchalla 1y ago
  Are you saying that a computer should be trusted without human intervention? If so, I have a computer right now that says you should be banned on the Internet.
- novemp 1y ago
  Yes.
- atmavatar 1y ago
  It's likely the TSA employee's five year old child is better at facial recognition than a computer, too.
  - bko 1y ago
    Please don't spread unscientific misinformation. You can say ICE bad, or you don't believe in borders, but saying computer facial recognition is inaccurate compared to humans is just factually incorrect. https://pages.nist.gov/frvt/html/frvt11.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://pages.nist.gov/frvt/html/frvt11.html?utm_source=chat...
    - Kinrany 1y ago
      Better-than-human facial recognition existing doesn't mean that all facial recognition technology is that good.
    - esseph 1y ago
      https://abc7ny.com/post/man-falsely-jailed-nypds-facial-recognition-surveillance-tech-failed/17664671/ https://abc7ny.com/post/man-falsely-jailed-nypds-facial-reco... https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/12/rite-aid-banned-using-ai-facial-recognition-after-ftc-says-retailer-deployed-technology-without https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/12/... https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/jan/24/met-police-begin-using-live-facial-recognition-cameras https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/jan/24/met-polic... https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00146-023-01634-z https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00146-023-01634-z https://www.mozillafoundation.org/en/blog/facial-recognition-bias/ https://www.mozillafoundation.org/en/blog/facial-recognition... https://surface.syr.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2479&context=honors_capstone https://surface.syr.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2479&con... Yeah it's pretty fucking shit, actually. Here's the science.
      - verdverm 1y ago
        Looks like GP is using ChatGPT (see the utm_source in their link) to find the first result that supports their viewpoint rather than doing a broad discovery and analysis
- rpdillon 1y ago
  People are exceptionally good at facial recognition because of the Fusiform face area, which is a specialized portion of the temporal lobe optimized for it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusiform_face_area https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusiform_face_area

gessha 1y ago

As a computer vision engineer, I wouldn’t trust any vision system for important decisions. We have plenty of established process for verification via personal documents such as ID, birth certificate, etc and there’s no need to reinvent the wheel.

bko 1y ago
[flagged]
- ToucanLoucan 1y ago
  I love how you're contrasting the credibility of demonstrably-proven-to-be-unreliable face recognition tech against MERELY government-issued documents that have been the basis for establishing identity for more than a century. Perfect? Of course not, nothing we make ever is. A damn bit better than racist security cameras though.
- shadowgovt 1y ago
  That is, generally, how it works in most contexts, yes. > Why do we even have photos on licenses and passports To protect against trivial theft-and-use, mostly. Your mention of licenses, in particular, was interesting given how straightforward it is for a relatively-dedicated actor to forge the photo on them (it's tougher to forge the security content in the license; the photo is one of the weakest pieces of security protection in the document).
- bryanrasmussen 1y ago
  (using he as gender neutral here) he didn't say he didn't want to have photos on licenses and passports, indeed it seems to me as the support is for standard ids that he would want these things as they are part of the standard id set. He said he was against computer vision identifying people, and gave as a reason that they are a computer vision engineer implying that they know what they are talking about. Although that was only implied without any technical discussion as to why the distrust. Then you say they trust a piece of paper you hand them, which they never claimed to do either, they discussed established processes, which a process may or may not be more involved than being handed a piece of paper, depending on context and security needs. >You can't be serious. I sort of feel you have difficulties with this as well.

01HNNWZ0MV43FF 1y ago

The real alternative would be the inalienable human rights we were promised

pfannkuchen 1y ago
This sort of thinking is kind of a retcon, no? The people who wrote the line you’re referencing also decided that none of the people ICE is involved with were even eligible for citizenship. If their rules held out, this wouldn’t even be a thing. I’m not arguing that their rules were correct, just that picking and choosing things they said feels intellectually dishonest.
- _yb2s 1y ago
  It’s more complex than that- initial drafts of the declaration of independence were more explicit about literally covering all people, and even had a rant about how slavery was unethical, and they compromised by cutting these in order to get enough consensus to make it happen at all. Thomas Jefferson himself was a hypocrite- he wrote a lot about how slavery was wrong and should be ended, all the while owning slaves himself. Anyways, I think it’s perfectly reasonable to nowadays take that philosophy and apply it universally. Just because it was done unfairly and hypocritically in the past is no excuse for us to also be hypocrites nowadays.
  - pfannkuchen 1y ago
    Sorry is ICE going around enslaving Africans? I thought the topic was people being targeted for removal based on looking like a Native American. What does Jefferson’s view on slavery have to do with anything?
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    - _yb2s 1y ago
      The context is the question of if human rights are universal or only for certain privileged groups

anigbrowl 1y ago

Your subsequent comments like 'If you deny the need to know anything about anyone at any time, you're just so far gone that there is no discussion that could be had' indicate that you're sarcastically trolling people, and I suggest you do that somewhere else in future.

array_key_first 1y ago

Literally how is it better than humans. You can't just say that, you have to justify it.

queenkjuul 1y ago

I would much rather have a forgetful, error-prone human, who has empathy and intelligence to assess a situation beyond the metrics put into a computer

Arrath 1y ago

Bullshit! The alternative is mentioned in the article, trust the official documents presented by the 'suspect', as that's the purpose of the documents. As in OP's quote: “ICE officials have told us that an apparent biometric match by Mobile Fortify is a ‘definitive’ determination of a person’s status and that an ICE officer may ignore evidence of American citizenship—including a birth certificate—if the app says the person is an alien,” "Trust the word of the black box" is pure technocratic dystopian nonsense.