Slashdot Mirror
Should Facial Recognition Cameras Be In Schools? (nyclu.org)
Facial recognition technology is making its way into schools, raising privacy concerns among parents and officials. The New York Civil Liberties Union issued a report on the matter that focuses on one public school district in particular: Western New York's Lockport School District. "News reports indicate the district plans to have the invasive and error-prone technology installed by next school year," reports NYCLU. The Union sent a letter (PDF) to the New York State Education Department urging it to consider students' and teachers' privacy in reviewing the use of surveillance technology by school districts. They also "sent a freedom of information request to the district seeking details of how and where the technology will be used as well as who will have access to the sensitive data that gets collected."
The report highlights some of the concerns/negatives of such a system. For starters, it costs millions of dollars (Lockport spent almost $4 million), which could be used for things like Wi-Fi, new computers, or 3D printers. It has the "potential to turn every step a student takes into evidence of a crime." The databases could include those used for immigration enforcement, making parents of immigrant students afraid to send their children to school for fear that they or their children could end up on ICE's radar. Last but not least, since facial recognition is notoriously inaccurate, "innocent students are likely to be misidentified and punished for things they didn't do."
Of course, it isn't all bad. Proponents of the system say it can be used to alert officials to whenever sex offenders, suspended students, fired employees, suspected gang members, or anyone else placed on a school's "blacklist" enters the premises. Do you think facial recognition cameras belong in schools?
The report highlights some of the concerns/negatives of such a system. For starters, it costs millions of dollars (Lockport spent almost $4 million), which could be used for things like Wi-Fi, new computers, or 3D printers. It has the "potential to turn every step a student takes into evidence of a crime." The databases could include those used for immigration enforcement, making parents of immigrant students afraid to send their children to school for fear that they or their children could end up on ICE's radar. Last but not least, since facial recognition is notoriously inaccurate, "innocent students are likely to be misidentified and punished for things they didn't do."
Of course, it isn't all bad. Proponents of the system say it can be used to alert officials to whenever sex offenders, suspended students, fired employees, suspected gang members, or anyone else placed on a school's "blacklist" enters the premises. Do you think facial recognition cameras belong in schools?
Then they can graduate and get real jobs.
No.
Should they belong? That doesn't seem like the right word....Do they belong? Should they be in schools? The headline just bugs me too much to read the rest and I'm usually not that worried about that sort of thing.
Do you think facial recognition cameras belong in schools?
Short answer? Very rarely if ever.
Of course, it isn't all bad. Proponents of the system say it can be used to alert officials to whenever sex offenders, suspended students, fired employees, suspected gang members, or anyone else placed on a school's "blacklist" enters the premises.
I'm sure there are all sorts of corner cases that can be used to distract us from the big picture. Yes you can come up with unusual circumstances where facial recognition might help. But if you are worried about sex offenders or gang members coming onto school grounds you're going to need to secure the entrances and hire a guard anyway which renders the technology redundant and/or unnecessary. If a suspended student shows up I don't really see that as a huge problem worthy of violating the civil rights of the other students. Same with fired employees. This is massive and expensive overkill for what generally are non-existent or minor problems.
The real question is whether there is a compelling state interest to justify violating civil rights (4th amendment and others) of students, staff and others. Remember that most schools in the US are government funded so this isn't private property. My take on it is that there is no compelling state interest that would justify the cost or the rights violations that would ensue.
Yes.. it could be used for recognizing fired employees and suspected gang members. But why on earth are we discussing face recognition cameras FIRST and only THEN what they could be used for?
"Hey! Let's install a few face recognition cameras at $SOMEWHERE."
"Cool. Should those belong there? What could we do with them?"
"Uhmm... let's think of something. Something with Sex offenders?"
Solution in search of a problem.
Does your school HAVE AN ACTUAL PROBLEM with suspended students or fired employee entering school grounds? If yes, could it be solved better and cheaper with a retired cop sitting at a front desk/gate? THEN we could discuss about pros and cons.
In a related aspect..... why would ICE need face recognition? Wouldn't it be easier to check if known illegal immigrants (They have to be known if their face would be searched for by camera) have enrolled? I don't think it's possible to visit schools in the US anonymously, is it?
bickerdyke
The arguments are always the same: We need to implement a persistent and total invasion of privacy that applies to everyone at every minute of the day, "just in case" some very unlikely thing might happen in the future. The more likely scenario is the school superintendent got a nice kickback for some percentage of the cost.
Why are we not resisting this panopticon bullshit? Just because we can, doesn't mean we should install cameras and facial recognition everywhere there are groups of people. Why? Because basic privacy is a human right. Who wants to trade that for "security", "think of the children" or "", can do it in their own house, garage, office, business, toilet and bedroom, on their own dime. Don't force this shit on everyone, including children, because you chose to live in fear of some bogeyman that's coming to get you. As a taxpayer, I do not fucking consent to blowing my tax money on this shit. Fix the eduction system, road, bridges and other infrastructure first, then we can talk about your spying toys. Also, watch less TV and get out every once in a while. Get a passport and leave the country when you can. The world is not as scary as the talking heads are telling you it is. Their interest is in having you glued to the screen, so the less you step outside, the happier and wealthier they are. Feel free to mod this down - I've got karma to burn.
You don't want this...
You don't want armed teachers who can pass a CCW process...
We can't afford to station multiple police officers strategically at every school... (most depts would see an extreme increase in manpower costs)
So what is your solution? The status quo, which is draw a magic line around the school, declare "this be a circle of protection, no demons, ghouls or criminals shall cross its magical boundaries" and hope for the best?
Don't you mean WHEN? Oh, you can bet schools will be the first to adopt these, for the "safety" of the children. Once kids grow up with that technology, as adults, they won't scoff at the idea of them being everywhere, because they are use to it. It's called CONDITIONING.
If they grow up thinking it's normal, it will be.
You already took away their lives.
Your totalitarian control removed their existences. You went waaaay overboard with your pathological fear. Like giving somebody such a big "loving" hug that his rib cage gets crushed and he suffocates.
They are now merely avatars of you.
Nothing against swarm lifeforms... but regarding individual lifeforms, YOU are the one who murdered them.
Besides ... without treating each other like business ... err, I mean anti-social psychopathic asshoke shit ... warmongering, stock trading, terrorist breeding drug selling to kids, healthcare destroying, education ruining, forced labor (aka jobs as we know them) and no social net to speak of, there wouln't be so man fucked-up potentially dangerous people!
(Hmm, didn't the statistic say that crime actually went *down* since the 90s?)
So why don't you do something in that regard?
Like go cure a Goldman Sachs employee. Or a general. Or just a single bum on the street.
Putting camera's up in public makes no sense unless you are planning to spy on and inventory people's comings and goings. People like to be semi-anonymous in their outings.
But in a school, if you are supposed to be there, then your identity is known exactly and for good reasons. You are a Student or a parent or teacher or staff.
SO there's no anonymity issue.
And since the school is responsible for keep track of students (attendance sheets, hall passes, fences are all about limiting people's whereabouts and egress.)
It makes total sense for them to have both cameras and face recognition.
On the otherhand the one thing I don't like is the feeling I'm being watched and not trusted. So I also dont really like kids feeling they are being watched all the time by cameras.
But of all places to put cameras, schools do make sense.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
sex offenders, suspended students, fired employees, suspected gang members, or anyone else placed on a school's "blacklist" enters the premises.
Every school in my state has the doors locked and you have to buzz in. Problem solved, not cameras required.
Should Facial Recognition Cameras Belong In Schools?
No. "Should Facial Recognition Cameras Be In Schools" or "Do Facial Recognition Cameras Belong In Schools". Not trying to be pedantic, but I'd really like to think the editors have a command of the language when they construct the titles. ESPECIALLY for an article that involves education.
- First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
If you value children's lives then yes.
Schools have too many entrances and exits. Cameras can help with this. Potential killers can be identified, and those entraces automatically locked down.
Anyone who is against this does not value the lives of children.
So automatically lock the '...many entrances and exits' once a killer is already inside?
Or... you could just manually lock the doors ahead of time and save Millions of dollars.
Proponents of the system say it can be used to alert officials to whenever sex offenders, suspended students, fired employees, suspected gang members, or anyone else placed on a school's "blacklist" enters the premises. Do you think facial recognition cameras belong in schools?
More likely it will be used to alert officials whenever the system mis-identifies random students as sex offenders, suspended, fired employees, or gang members.
In fact, if these are in jr. high and high schools, remember that you have a building full of mischievous teenagers that will probably not miss an opportunity to subtly troll the algorithms. If you want to cause disruptions without getting in trouble, what better way than to have the authorities cause the disruption for you? Couple a few of those with parents that have the resources to hire lawyers, and it'll probably cost a lot more than $4M.
...that this is an excellent investment.
Computer says:
This is NOT Count Olaf.
This is NOT Count Olaf....neeext
This is NOT Count Olaf...
What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
I'm not explicitly against this, there are already cameras in most schools in Erie and Niagara county anyway so adding the facial recognition is kind of an inevitable next step. The problem with this move is that this is an unconscionable waste of money. Lockport N.Y. has 20K people, the high school has less than 2K students enrolled with something like a 10-1 student teacher ratio. My point is that this isn't some high density area where kids are crammed 30 to a classroom and the teacher barely know their names. It's actually a kind of idyllic suburb where nothing happens especially compared to Niagara Falls or Buffalo. So the idea that this is where we want to crank up security is really what has people around here laughing.
Is it a public area? Mostly. Is there a reasonable expectation of privacy? Not really.
Visual recognition is actually not as error-prone as the ACLU would like to believe, and it's substantially better than eyewitnesses. There probably aren't a lot of benefits to installing it, but there aren't really a lot of negatives either.
Make sure the person is listed on other databases in the nation. A legal citizen enjoys a free education. Illegal citizens using fake paperwork get detected.
So a smart person does not take a test for another person.
A student takes their exams and a university can be confident the results match the student.
A university can be assured their intake of students can study, all passed the same tests to a set standard and are educatable.
This will ensure every student that graduates from a US university got a great education and is able to be hired given the qualifications presented.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Just wait until a school district has yet another shooting happen, which could have been prevented by facial recognition.
Please detail a plausible scenario where that could possibly happen. Since school shooters essentially never announce their intentions ahead of time it's unclear what value facial recognition would have in preventing such a scenario.
China is doing it right, as their cameras can tell emotions and get the school to step in if a student is depressed or always showing anger.
Ahh, trolling again I see... Well played.
This is what is needed here in the US. China doesn't have mass shootings for a good reason.
China doesn't have school shootings because few people have access to guns. Kind of hard to shoot up a school if you cannot get the gun in the first place.
One good use would be to make certain that the real person is taking a major exam like an SAT. Keep in mind that surveillance not only keeps tract of where you are but also keeps track of where you are not. We know of many cases that have very odd outcomes and often find the wrong party as guilty. Imagine the OJ trial if a really good surveillance system was focused on that spot. There is a belief among some that a fourth party was the bad actor. OJ now says that he was struck from behind and went down and came back up stunned beyond being able to identify anyone and admits that he was in some sort of fight. His lawyer also said before he passed away that he thought another killer was involved and that there was much evidence to support that notion. Most people have never been hit hard enough to be half out of their senses and presenting that to a jury, even if true, could cause a false conviction. In his football career OJ clearly would have been hit hard enough at times to get up half out of his ability to see or think much at all. That is why from time to time we see a player, with the ball, running the wrong way. Yet how would one hope to prove that such a thing has happened. OJ even admits that in that state of disability he could have killed people he had no intention of harming.
People aren't convicted based on "the camera says it's John Smith"; rather, the camera says "the person committing the crime might be John Smith" and then real people compare actual photos of John Smith against the pictures taken by the camera.
Why would immigrants be afraid of ICE? As an immigrant, you're supposed to carry your green card at all times.
How else do the plebs learn that surveillance is ok? If you think it is the norm, you will not doubt it.
Oh! FYI: we have always been at war with Eurasia.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
this kind of small scale corruption is usually the school board. There was tons of it in the small city I lived in. The school admins don't have any power, they just do what the board tells them.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
wages aren't climbing but we're at full employment and 40% of Americans can't come up with $400 bucks (down from 60% a few years ago).
I keep saying this but the best way to fight tyranny is with a robust middle class. People ignore injustice when they're too busy trying to keep their heads above water. It's been that way for thousands of years of recorded history. Nothing's changed except we have the capacity to take care of everybody if we choose.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I'm guessing this idea is born from the ashes of the recent school shootings and is a technological attempt to identify and / or alert about individuals on campus that do not belong. Ex students / staff, parents, contractors, etc.
I would guess that visitors to the school would have to check in via the main office to get their photo taken so they can be entered into the system as a temporary guest otherwise the system would send an alert about a non-authorized individual once the camera is unable to match their face with its database. Hell, it could even be used to operate entry doors.
The question I would have is how accurate are these things and would they be chasing around ghosts from constant false triggers ?
It does nothing for a student who IS allowed to be on campus who wakes up one day and decides to shoot / burn / blow up / $mayhem the facility because his girl friend dumped him last week. Or who has been picked on / bullied during the school year(s) by other students too fucking stupid to understand what the consequences of their actions can lead to. ( Eg: Student pokes bear with stick all year -> Bear has enough and eats student -> Everyone mad at Bear -> Students are the victim of terrible Bear )
" For starters, it costs millions of dollars (Lockport spent almost $4 million), which could be used for things like Wi-Fi, new computers, or 3D printers. "
I did get a good laugh at that line. The high school in my town recently spent somewhere close to $100M for new Football, Basketball arenas and other sports related venues. It basically boils down to the fact that schools don't want to spend money on security because, for them, it's not as important as a new Football Stadium. :|
If they were serious about it, $100M pays for an awful lot of security for quite a long time.
"sex offenders, suspended students, fired employees, suspected gang members, or anyone else placed on a school's "blacklist" enters the premises."
Why not just have a list of people _allowed_ to be there, then the rest of the 7 billion people will raise an alert if they try to sneak in.
Unless they are afraid that students who dolled up, discovered Emo or Punk will trigger an alarm.
If you value students' lives, build smaller schools so that the students know each other and so that the adults can recognize all their faces. We didn't have school shootings before schools got so large that the adults no longer were able to know not only their students but the whole school population. Drawing students from many neighborhoods to a distant, alien school doesn't help. Go back to a 1960's-era model of small, neighborhood schools.
Research indicates that school size is a predictor of mass shootings: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0362331917300241
If you need facial recognition tech to police your students, you have already failed by creating schools so large that human beings cannot recognize students' faces.
In a generation, we've gone from, "Cameras everywhere are Big Brother!", to, "Cameras are a key tool to increasing personal safety!"
I've seen people pull out cameras as if they're going to stop people from saying or doing something, as if they are some kind of bulletproof vest that can stop others from doing them harm. In reality, they're as useless as a car window in stopping a murderer from shooting you with a gun. I wouldn't be surprised if people being chased by a killer would opt to pull out a cellphone rather than pick up a club to defend themselves.
"I'll video you and shame you on (fill in social media outlet here)!!" Shame doesn't stop someone that doesn't share your fears and doubts.
You'd think we would've learned from the UK's ring of steel and general surveillance environment (bad things still happen to people there).
Otherwise, hell no. Update textbooks, get supplies in the classroom, boost teacher wages, maybe do an efficiency study to see how many "administrators" can be chopped. IOW, there are other things with higher-priorities than the latest opportunity for graft and control.
Wouldn't "firearm recognition" be of more direct utility to preventing shootings?
Not unless you have a means to rapidly and decisively deal with the individual carrying the firearm. It will do nothing to prevent shootings. Best case it might marginally improve response times to shootings already in progress. Doesn't help those who are already dead though.
And in other news, school-shooters are usually identified pretty fast after they have entered the building and they usually were not on any blacklist before that. Does exactly nothing to stop them though. Forget about "locking down" any entrances automatically either. Not compatible with fire-codes and for good reason. Also, face-recognition is _unreliable_.
On the plus-side, the earlier children learn they live in a surveillance-society and not a free one, the better.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Nazi Germany 2.0 was the DDR surveilance state. This is at least version 3.0!
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
We don't need to be treating schoolchildren like convicts in prison. School is tough enough an experience for some of them as-is, socially speaking, we do NOT need to be adding shit like this.
No I'm not going to train my children to live in a dystopian hellscape without privacy. They're not prisoners, and principle aren't wardens, and school should not be a panopticon. While the school system teaches an important lesson about how to deal with authority, the authority figure should not be an authoritarian tyarant with complete knowledge.
Holy shit republicans are fucking assholes.
Not all of you, but the wing-nuts are astoundingly bad. I guess we have our own wingnuts as well.
But sure, hey, lay it on me. How do you suggest we:
-Help kids learn
-Reduce "single motherhood"
-Keep inner city social environment from failing
Come on, you can't just say "this shit sucks" without suggesting some alternative.
Set the doors so they only open from the inside, with the exception of the few used as main entrances.
Maybe instead of blowing 4 mill on "new fangled tech" you could used a tried and true tech. HID cards work fine, even finger print scanners would work here (and you still get to collect people's data unnecessarily).
I don't think many of the school shootings in the last 10 years would have been caught by blacklists anyhow.
Having student IDs with trackers and sensors around the school that could "sense" a person without a tracker would locate anyone on campus who is a potential threat. Then you could quickly identify any potential unknown. Having cameras that could snap a shot of the guy and attempt facial recognition at that point would be fine. The cameras could then be few and far between.
That still wouldn't catch a student shooter.
Personally throwing 4 million from the education budget into cameras seems like something not very educational, but that's just me.
I refuse to sign
On the plus-side, the earlier children learn they live in a surveillance-society and not a free one, the better.
I feel like this is a reflex response, there is an issue with widely deploying facial recognition as it would allow authorities to widely track individuals. However, consider schools - students already have attendance taken and visitors are already required to report into the office. There doesn't appear to be any additional privacy problems here I can see.
With 4M you could create your own company to implement a brand new image recognition software from scratch. With open libraries and a programmer I could do it for $10k and $1000 per camera for hardware, installation and wiring.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Face recognition is a pure show-effect at this time. The visibility (and it would need to be visible to provide any perceived "security gains") will make surveillance more obvious. Also, attendance is taken by humans and it is pretty clear what it is for and the children know the teachers. This is anonymous surveillance bu machines and the children do not really understand how it works, what it can do or what it is for. This sends a "be afraid" message.
Of course, the religious are immune, they already have permanent and malicious surveillance by their "God", so I can see why they would not mind.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Absolutely! We should install dozens of these fine devices in every school.
Right after we finish installing a moat, ramparts, pillboxes, a tiger trap, barbed wire, electric fences, an artillery battery, a minefield, anti-aircraft missiles, and a billboard-sized sign reading "authorized personnel only - all others will be shot on sight".
NYC schools - hell yes. Every one of them. They need to be secure and NYC is full of crazy people statistically. In a rural school, not so much. If they have a problem, sure. Bring them in. In Parkland Florida where they had that whacko student that they refused to discipline due to the stupid Chicago no-discipline model - sure. Could have saved lives.
We have technology, let's use it.
Fun fact: there is a strong positive correlation between cities with draconian gun ownership restrictions, and cities with heavily fortified public buildings. Almost like they are both caused by cultural antipathy to freedom...
But you knew that.