Slashdot Mirror
Facial Recognition Has To Be Regulated To Protect the Public, Says AI Report (technologyreview.com)
A new report (PDF) from the AINow Institute calls for the U.S. government to take general steps to improve the regulation of facial recognition technology amid much debate over the privacy implications. "The implementation of AI systems is expanding rapidly, without adequate governance, oversight, or accountability regimes," it says. The report suggests, for instance, extending the power of existing government bodies in order to regulate AI issues, including use of facial recognition: "Domains like health, education, criminal justice, and welfare all have their own histories, regulatory frameworks, and hazards." MIT Technology Review reports: It also calls for stronger consumer protections against misleading claims regarding AI; urges companies to waive trade-secret claims when the accountability of AI systems is at stake (when algorithms are being used to make critical decisions, for example); and asks that they govern themselves more responsibly when it comes to the use of AI. And the document suggests that the public should be warned when facial-recognition systems are being used to track them, and that they should have the right to reject the use of such technology.
The report also warns about the use of emotion tracking in face-scanning and voice detection systems. Tracking emotion this way is relatively unproven, yet it is being used in potentially discriminatory ways -- for example, to track the attention of students. "It's time to regulate facial recognition and affect recognition," says Kate Crawford, cofounder of AINow and one of the lead authors of the report. "Claiming to 'see' into people's interior states is neither scientific nor ethical."
The report also warns about the use of emotion tracking in face-scanning and voice detection systems. Tracking emotion this way is relatively unproven, yet it is being used in potentially discriminatory ways -- for example, to track the attention of students. "It's time to regulate facial recognition and affect recognition," says Kate Crawford, cofounder of AINow and one of the lead authors of the report. "Claiming to 'see' into people's interior states is neither scientific nor ethical."
It amazes me that people believe that AI(Machine Learning) can be regulated. There is no hard to purchase component like plutonium for an atomic bomb. The code to do machine vision is available everywhere. It doesn't take special hardware, yes, a good GPU can speed up the training phase but strictly speaking, it's not necessary. Please let me know how someone intends to regulate such a thing.
Deity forbid, a private citizen will collect a database of strangers passing by his house, is that it? Horrors, if allowed at all, it must require a government-issued license and assault-type face-recognition must be banned by Federal Law!
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
"AINow Institute" is a "thinktank" which will write expensive treatises and provide consulting to these new governmental entities.
The pot cannot regulate the kettle.
https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
Frog 2 (later): Ok it's pretty hot now, what do we do?
Frog: What we need to do is regulate the water temperature!
Frog: *passes regulation*
Water: *ignores regulation, being water*
Frog 1& 2: *die horribly*
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
we run a simulation of ourselves one day... This planet is long dead, were just inside a long ago secured bunker filled with computers simulating what once was.... 'tis the most plausible.
[($)]
Do a crime and expect to walk around a nice city all day?
An illegal citizen who expects their fake ID to just keep working for decades?
Open a new bank account and expect your fake ID to be accepted?
Want to move around the nation as a criminal and expect the freedom to do new crime in another city/state?
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
... address climate change, immigration, fossil fuels, government corruption and validated pussy-grabbers.
See you in the funny papers.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Gait Recognition
I question if this is as reliable as it seems. Giat would be affected by encumbrance, physical issues (pulled something at the gym), heck even just very different clothing could affect this, or make it hard to measure...
If gait detection becomes pervasive maybe a bunch of people will all get duster coats. :-)
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
You go out in public, you have virtually no expectation of privacy. End of story.
In fact, if I were a privacy activist, I would offer a sweet deal to law enforcement. You can track public movements all you want without a warrant, but the third party doctrine gets legislatively abolished. GPS trackers, facial recognition? Have it. You'll give us full warrant requirements for stored communications in the deal.
"Claiming to 'see' into people's interior states is neither scientific nor ethical."
We know that polygraphs don't work, yet they're still being used to gauge honesty. It'd be surprising if AI were held to a higher standard for gauging attention level.