Florida Surveillance Cameras Claim a Victim

kris_lang writes: "The St. Petersburg Times has an article that describes how an innocent man was tracked down because he was used as a "demo" face for Visionics Face-It face recognition software with their on-the-street video surveillance system in Tampa's Ybor City district. The "demo" image was printed in the St. Pete Times, and then sold to U.S. News and World Report which used it in an article. A USN&WR reader in Oklahama misidentified the face as being that of her ex-husband wanted on felony child neglect charges. The Tampa Police tracked him down to his job site and interrogated him. Now here's a question: how did they identify him in the first place to be able to track him down? Well, Florida has also been using digital photos for their newer driver's licenses. So they already have a handy-dandy database to work with."

Comments

Re:I have plenty to hide

[Zalgon 26 McGee]

My visits to ... my girlfriend's house should not be monitored by the government, period.

Or by your wife, for that matter...

Irony

[Patrick]

A USN&WR reader in Oklahama misidentified the face as being that of her ex-husband wanted on felony child neglect charges.

So the technology is already better at face recognition than a woman in Oklahoma. Technology: 1. Humanity: 0.

Re:Irony

[unformed]

yeah, but she's from Oklahoma that's not fair for the rest of us

Re:Irony

[Bob McCown]

Considering it was USN&WR, I assume she recognized him right after Elvis gave her a haircut on a UFO.

Re:Why the SPTimes printed this

[rholland356]

A model release for a photo in a newspaper story? Not necessary! I think cameras on lamp posts will revitalize the broad-brimmed hat industry. Panama hat, anyone?

Re:1984 is finally here?

[Mr. Flibble]

1984 is finally here?

No.

Now please proceed down the hall into room 101.

Thank you citizen.

Idea

[qslack]

If you ever walk around in a Florida city with cameras, wear a clear plastic bag around your head. If they identify you, sue them under the DMCA for circumvention of an encryption device (the plastic bag).

Re:Idea

[Bob McCown]

You first, but dont forget to tape it tight around the neck. Faster than chlorene in the gene pool.

Re:Idea

[Dr. Prakash Kothari]

Or better yet, you could wear a tinfoil hat whenever you go out in public. The reflection of the sunlight off the foil would disrupt the camera, preventing it from getting a clear shot of you.

Plus, it keeps out "the voices" and the alien Carnivore anal probe mind control rays.

Gee

[Defender2000]

The woman couldn't identify her ex. Any wonder why they aren't together any more?

Heh...

[Anonymous Coward]

I expected this 17 years ago... I wonder what took them so long.

Of course, If I were here husband...

[walnut]

Of course, if I were here husband, now would be a good time to move to Florida AND take on the fake identity of the man accidentally questioned. Lightening rarely strikes twice - and the legal suits which (undoubtedly) this guy will try to put forth against the police will deter them from ever investigating him regarding some event even remotely related to this trial for a while.

Masquerade

[zook]

I'd like to see someone start selling cheap masks of the folks on the FBI 10 most wanted list. We could wear them while walking/driving around cities that use this technology.

Re:RIGHT against unreasonable search and siezure?

[Anonymous Coward]

Umm, a public place is just that, a PUBLIC place. If you're afraid of being seen then stay in your house with the window blinds drawn and your aluminum foil hat securely fastened to your head. Things in plain site are always open to search. If a cop stops you and sees drugs or a handgun in the back seat you are screwed. Nothing illegal about that "search" since it's in plain site.

Then explain this.

Only they are allowed to record you at radom. When you do it, it's illegal.

Your position appears to be fucked. Please effect repeir.

Turbans

[loydcc]

How does a system like this identify Muslem women who completely cover their faces? Perhaps we should all think about converting. But wait we can't cover our faces anymore thanks to a ruling against the KKK.

I don't suport the ideals of the Clan but no one came to their defense in the 80's to keep their faces covered. Now there's jurisprudence and precedence to force us all to show our faces in public.

Do you think this is what they had in mind when they went after the KKK? We'll force them to face the cameras and be identified. Make sure they all stay in line!

Re:Your ignoring the facts

[Anonymous Coward]

How do you know what the tourist does in his/her own home on his/her own time with their vacation tapes! If we're gonna be over paranoid...let's get serious about it!

'They made me feel like a criminal'

[talleyrand]

He has a mullet.
Statute 1380 of the Florida Fashion code outlawed mullets in addition to acid-washed jeans, spiked jewelry and mesh shirts.