Slashdot Mirror
Privacy Advocates Leave In Protest Over U.S. Facial Recognition Code of Conduct
Taco Cowboy writes: Nine privacy advocates involved in the Commerce Department process for developing a voluntary code of conduct for the use of facial recognition technology withdrew in protest over technology industry lobbyists' overwhelming influence on the process. "At a base minimum, people should be able to walk down a public street without fear that companies they've never heard of are tracking their every movement — and identifying them by name — using facial recognition technology," the privacy advocates wrote in a joint statement. "Unfortunately, we have been unable to obtain agreement even with that basic, specific premise." The Commerce Department, through its National Telecommunications and Information Administration, brought together "representatives from technology companies, trade groups, consumer groups, academic institutions and other organizations" early last year "to kick off an effort to craft privacy safeguards for the commercial use of facial recognition technology."
The goal was "to develop a voluntary, enforceable code of conduct that specifies how the Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights applies to facial recognition technology in the commercial context." But after a dozen meetings, the most recent of which was last week, all nine privacy advocates who have participated in the entire process concluded that they were thoroughly outgunned. "This should be a wake-up call to Americans: Industry lobbyists are choking off Washington's ability to protect consumer privacy," Alvaro Bedoya, executive director of the Center on Privacy & Technology at Georgetown Law, said in a statement. "People simply do not expect companies they've never heard of to secretly track them using this powerful technology. Despite all of this, industry associations have pushed for a world where companies can use facial recognition on you whenever they want — no matter what you say. This position is well outside the mainstream."
The goal was "to develop a voluntary, enforceable code of conduct that specifies how the Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights applies to facial recognition technology in the commercial context." But after a dozen meetings, the most recent of which was last week, all nine privacy advocates who have participated in the entire process concluded that they were thoroughly outgunned. "This should be a wake-up call to Americans: Industry lobbyists are choking off Washington's ability to protect consumer privacy," Alvaro Bedoya, executive director of the Center on Privacy & Technology at Georgetown Law, said in a statement. "People simply do not expect companies they've never heard of to secretly track them using this powerful technology. Despite all of this, industry associations have pushed for a world where companies can use facial recognition on you whenever they want — no matter what you say. This position is well outside the mainstream."
I think their point is that they would have had zero say in the outcome anyway, and this way the public can be aware of that.
At a base minimum, people should be able to walk down a public street without fear that companies they've never heard of are tracking their every movement — and identifying them by name — using their employees eyes and ears. When I walk up to a receptionist he/she better ask for my id. And how dare that fast food employee remember my normal order. Big Brother is here.
The goal was "to develop a voluntary, enforceable code of conduct
Because they work for/with the government, those privacy advocates are -- by definition -- adults. Yet they are so fucking naive as to make me wonder whether or not they are mentally retarded.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Maybe they could object by pointing out that various congress critters have a habit of being seen (and now recognized) with women other than their wives in locations other than their offices. That might strike closer to home for some of them. Just a thought.
By pulling out of the process, they're basically ensuring they will have zero say in the outcome.
Not quite. They're finally recognizing the plain fact that in the United States today, if a "corporate citizen" wants something badly enough, they get it, and the little people can go fuck themselves. /s
Is this a great country, or what?
If corporations are people as the US Supreme Court and former candidate for President Mitt Romney have said, then they are obviously people who can ignore laws and customs they don't like. If a human person were to use facial recognition on a widespread scale to follow the public movements of and to gain personal information about another individual, they would run afoul of several anti-stalking measures, at least.
Not so for our corporate ubermenschen