Slashdot Mirror
No Face-Scanning Tech at San Diego Super Bowl
b3n writes "From our local paperspace fishwrap this article (http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/uniontrib/mon/ business/news_mz1b20snoope.html) ... "San Diego police have rejected the use of a controversial face-scanning technology for Sunday's Super Bowl, saying it's too costly and ineffective.
Face-scanning technology that compares faces in a crowd with digital photos of criminals, fugitives and suspected terrorists gained national attention and sparked an outcry when it was used at the 2001 Super Bowl in Tampa, Fla.""
I guess it's safe for me to go now :)
...looks kind of suspicious.
He's bloated, gosh, I think he's actually dead!!
Who wheeled him in here? Is he a victim of anthrax, smallpox sent to infect the crowd?
No, wait. He's just an Oakland Raiders fan.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
Maybe the organizers and police think the Super Bowl will be more interesting with the threat of an explosion in the stands.
They're right. Beats watching Celine Dion warble "Are You Ready For Some Football?" with the Muckanut High School Marching Band.
~D:
You've got it all wrong. The deciding issue wasn't the legality or morality of using a system such as this one. It was based on cost and effectiveness.
...who are stealing football by attending the game and not watching the ads on television?
Me, I'll be TiVoing the game, then fast-forwarding through the game just to see the ads. That'll absolve one attendee of their contractual responsibility to see the ads. (Is there an alt.binaries.multimedia.commercials.superbowl group yet? Cause if there's any multimedia files that should be free to distribute, it's ads!)
Seriously you'd think that the tongue-and-cheek tone of the post would clue people in to the fact that a joke is indeed being made.
Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
The first rule of an organization like this would be to make people believe it doesn't exist.
Of course...this being an Oakland Raider game, it would be hard to recognize anyone's face, given the extremes to which Raider fans paint their faces...
Seeing as the Dallas Cowboys weren't playing, the system probably wouldn't have found anyone!
I am still on the fence as to the danger posed by systems such as these. Although I agree that having face recognition systems at events such as these might catch a few criminals, I am concerned that law-abiding citizens' rights may be trampled upon in the process. These systems are not foolproof, and will "catch" a certain percentage of innocents. How many peoples' Super Bowl have to be ruined by a quick trip downtown before the system is rejected by the public?
I'd be PISSED if it were me being wrongfully detained.
Scott
They Quote the police Cheif saying that it is too costly and ineffective. They also mention the ACLU's objections to it as unreliable, if not worse than useless, and a vast privasy invasion. Then they spend the bulk of the article taking quotes from the makers of the systems and discussing how popular it is.
The feeling that I get from the article is that this is really a nonissue, yes one of the makers mentions "privacy concerns" but there is little mention made of the consequences of "False Positives" or even of how many false positives there were in Tampa Bay.
Interesting.
You should read up on Nazi and soviet propaganda. You don't get tyranny overnight, and we must learn to guard ourselves vigilantly.
Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.