.png "back to home page")
Facial recognition technology is just one tool. We need to stay focus on the many other ways as well that mass surveillance can be conducted--and the ways that data is combined to create searchable profiles of us without any consent on our part. https://t.co/uAY1jNWMAo
— Kenneth Roth (@KenRoth) January 21, 2020
"The large internet surveillance companies like Facebook and Google collect dossiers on us more detailed than those of any police state of the previous century", https://t.co/PeR9OGYZYD
— DHH (@dhh) January 20, 2020
"focusing on [fac.rec] misses the point. We need to have a serious conversation about all the technologies of identification, correlation and discrimination" Bruce Schneider who started the 90s crypto battles by 1st publishing "forbidden" strong encryption https://t.co/cSME58rg9T
— dietmar offenhuber (@dietoff) January 24, 2020
The guy behind the frighteningly accurate facial recognition company that can identify almost anyone thinks it's "absurd and unfair" to draw any conclusions about his ties to the far right https://t.co/MDUG2byTFV
— Kim O'Connor (@shallowbrigade) January 23, 2020
Buried in this feature on #FacialRecognition is another way technology can be deployed to hurt workers, make businesses more money, and bring on the heart attacks: https://t.co/45Irujxffl pic.twitter.com/U7vsSjv9OH
— Joseph Jerome (@joejerome) January 24, 2020
Bruce hitting the nail on the head. A ban on #FacialRecognition won't stop mass surveillance. "The problem is that we are being identified without our knowledge or consent, and society needs rules about when that is permissible." https://t.co/h0QwQF5WbE
— Lindsey Andersen (@Linds_Anders) January 25, 2020
Investigators, high school administrators, radiologists, and even camp counselors share how and why they're using facial recognition software. https://t.co/ZdZVehz3zm
— California Sunday (@CalSunday) January 24, 2020
“We are being identified without our knowledge or consent, and society needs rules about when that is permissible”, writes Bruce Schneier in the NYT https://t.co/HpjeS8vha0
— Privacy International (@privacyint) January 22, 2020
There are many ways you can be identified, some you might not know about. Here are some examples ?
1/5
Facial recognition is everywhere, it's kind of scary, but also I compulsively do face filter apps and so do you. Anyway, here's everything you might want to know about it feat. @adrianchen and @chrisoutcalt https://t.co/jIrwpcXlyj
— Meher (@_meher) January 23, 2020
Clearview’s facial recognition technology poses chilling privacy risks. I’m concerned it could destroy individuals’ ability to go about their daily lives anonymously, and I’m demanding answers about Clearview’s partnerships with law enforcement.https://t.co/JoSAkabxJE
— Ed Markey (@SenMarkey) January 23, 2020
“A ban on facial recognition won’t make any difference if, in response, surveillance systems switch to identifying people by MAC addresses...we are being identified without our knowledge or consent, and society needs rules about when that is permissible.” https://t.co/JRY8xoSDbe
— Dahlia Peterson (@dahlialpeterson) January 20, 2020
An in-depth look at facial recognition software, the controversial and nearly ever-present technology that could replace the fingerprint https://t.co/ZdZVehz3zm
— California Sunday (@CalSunday) January 24, 2020
"The whole point of modern surveillance is to treat people differently, and facial recognition technologies are only a small part of that." https://t.co/Sb2bnkOafc
— Kontra (@counternotions) January 20, 2020
Clearview AI Says Its Facial Recognition Software Identified A Terrorism Suspect. Police Say That's Not True.
— Jason Leopold (@JasonLeopold) January 23, 2020
Docs obtained by @BuzzFeedNews reveal that its claims to law enforcement agencies are impossible to verify — or flat-out wrong
https://t.co/xcDYyj405G @RMac18
"Perhaps facial recognition has become a symbolic last straw in our techno-skeptic moment," @AdrianChen writes in @CalSundayhttps://t.co/z283x3vrjE
— Privacy Project (@PrivacyProject) January 24, 2020
"A technology that collects and analyzes the facial expressions and movements of students inside a classroom and categorizes the behavior it detects as “good” or “bad.”https://t.co/aVSZYPy34j
— David Gambacorta (@dgambacorta) January 23, 2020
Bottom line: @schneierblog is brilliant. But his argument is flawed.@hartzog & I will continue to claim-
— Evan Selinger (@EvanSelinger) January 20, 2020
Facial recognition technology has *unique* affordances.
These affordances pose such severe dangers tech-specific regulation is required *now*.https://t.co/AeOgCx2GjL
Facial recognition tech is under scrutiny but we need to have a serious conversation about all identification, correlation and discrimination technologies and decide how much we want to be spied on by governments and corporations @schneierblog ↘️https://t.co/OmYcAk2FZQ
— Marietje Schaake (@MarietjeSchaake) January 21, 2020
The dangers of ubiquitous surveillance are underappreciated but facial recognition poses unique threats not the least of which is significantly higher misidentification rates in non-white populations.https://t.co/bA67ICudlK
— Farhat Habib (@far_hat) January 21, 2020
One in two American adults is in a law-enforcement facial-recognition database, often without his or her knowledge.https://t.co/ZdZVehz3zm
— California Sunday (@CalSunday) January 23, 2020
so yeah, the company scraping social media for constant facial recognition surveillance has ties to white nationalists
— Jessica Price (@Delafina777) January 23, 2020
cool, cool, very normal https://t.co/2Y8bpdgLTk
This is right. The Washington Privacy Act is a better bill than last year’s WA bill, and better than CCPA. Washington DC, pay atttention. https://t.co/GTVXKCQrSd
— Cam Kerry (@cam_kerry) January 25, 2020
Boarding at JFK now requires using a facial recognition machine. I tried opting out (on principle because they already have all my facial data) but airline employees didn't allow it. https://t.co/qgz8FZUH4k
— Oscar Pocasangre (@oscarpocasangre) January 18, 2020
"People can be identified by their heart-beat, gait, fingerprint, iris patterns—all of which can be obtained remotely via tech. (...) we need rules protecting people’s privacy and requiring their consent before any of these means are used" https://t.co/7qHvbujXfY
— Adrienne Fichter (@adfichter) January 21, 2020
I agree with almost everything Bruce has written here. Everyone should read this. I also think fighting to #BanFacialRecognition is strategic, and a crucial tactic for building power toward what we eventually need: the abolition of surveillance capitalism. https://t.co/dLNVCmk9lb
— Evan Greer (@evan_greer) January 20, 2020
“A ban on facial recognition won’t make any difference if, in response, surveillance systems switch to identifying people by smartphone MAC addresses. The problem is that we are being identified without our knowledge or consent...” https://t.co/KTjnV2tnBV
— Spencer Ackerman (@attackerman) January 20, 2020
"Focusing on one particular identification method misconstrues the nature of the surveillance society we’re in the process of building," writes @schneierbloghttps://t.co/NM8Uh8UuGN
— Privacy Project (@PrivacyProject) January 21, 2020
“We’ve seen these kinds of tools being used in high-security places like hospitals and nursing homes, as well as in agriculture. We’ve also seen it being used by companies like Uber to verify remote workers” https://t.co/aTCTfCd6jm go @aihanguyen
— ken montenegro (@kmontenegro) January 24, 2020
"I don't see a future where we harness the benefits of face recognition technology without the crippling abuse of the surveillance that comes with it," #Northeastern's @hartzog tells @nytimes: "The only way to stop it is to ban it."@NUSL @KhouryCollege https://t.co/7sZm8wSH56
— Northeastern U. (@Northeastern) January 24, 2020
San Francisco & other US cities have already banned facial recognition. Activists are understandably calling for a nationwide ban.
— russjackson (@docrussjackson) January 24, 2020
The @nytimes argues focusing on just one method of identification fails to address the wider problem of mass surveillance.https://t.co/JUqAy1uUti
“... if in the pursuit of innovation we lose the ability to shield citizens from private surveillance, we’ll lose a lot more than ground in the so-called AI arms race.” https://t.co/YDCvdWMnNx
— One Ring (doorbell) to surveil them all... (@hypervisible) January 25, 2020
Inbox: @Microsoft's @JulieSBrill lays out why the Washington Privacy Act is the next best thing in privacy legislation:
— Dan Stoller (@realdanstoller) January 24, 2020
The new Washington Privacy Act raises the bar for privacy in the United States https://t.co/yGnqijxv7b
Washington state has an opportunity to build on California’s law and take strong action to protect consumer privacy. My blog explains why @Microsoft supports Sen. @Reuvencarlyle’s proposed Washington Privacy Act. https://t.co/s03mFVhkLB pic.twitter.com/CXr1vmE3CX
— Julie Brill (@JulieSBrill) January 24, 2020
Calls for #FacialRecognition moratorium
— Spiros Margaris (@SpirosMargaris) January 25, 2020
highlight need for #protection from #surveillance tech https://t.co/AtVlzbRHPW #fintech #AI #ArtificialIntelligence #MachineLearning #DeepLearning #BigData @KHARIJOHNSON @VentureBeat #privacy pic.twitter.com/Ygb2IBK0qi
#AI Weekly: Calls for #facialrecognition moratorium highlight need for protection from #surveillance #ArtificialIntelligence #tech @PawlowskiMario https://t.co/cVkN2yDuEv via @VentureBeat
— Margaret Siegien ? (@MargaretSiegien) January 25, 2020
The latest from our sibling publication, @CalSunday: An in-depth look at how facial recognition works, who’s relying on it, and for those truly concerned, how to avoid it https://t.co/hPwQYvB3GD
— Pop-Up Magazine (@PopUpMag) January 25, 2020
"Perhaps facial recognition has become a symbolic last straw in our techno-skeptic moment," @AdrianChen writes in @CalSundayhttps://t.co/z283x3vrjE
— Privacy Project (@PrivacyProject) January 24, 2020
An in-depth look at facial recognition software, the controversial and nearly ever-present technology that could replace the fingerprint https://t.co/BegIfYxDQw
— Africa Updates (@africaupdates) January 24, 2020
A good overview of Facial Recognition https://t.co/kRUt7JK0u0
— Mathias Klang (@Klangable) January 24, 2020
You are where we say you are. Facial recognition systems can help government track and identify suspects like #DeltaGreen targets—and #DeltaGreen Agents. https://t.co/v0zmqF6opM
— Shane Ivey, maker of horror & adventure games (@shaneivey) January 24, 2020
The history of #FacialRecognition, how it works and where it’s headed... from @CalSunday https://t.co/7UPAsz1rlL
— Heather Federman (@FedaHeda) January 24, 2020
An in-depth look at #facialrecognition software, the controversial and nearly ever-present technology that could replace the fingerprint https://t.co/MbMkmZrTKM #AI
— Evan Kirstel (@evankirstel) January 24, 2020
Laws that ban facial recognition miss larger point: We need laws on all tech used for identification & to decide how much of our data should be surveilled. #facialrecognition #artificialintelligence @SpirosMargaris @ipfconline1 @DeepLearn007 @psb_dc https://t.co/esEhkZ7RjA pic.twitter.com/sjD2OApGFw
— Efi Pylarinou (@efipm) January 25, 2020
Bruce hitting the nail on the head. A ban on #FacialRecognition won't stop mass surveillance. "The problem is that we are being identified without our knowledge or consent, and society needs rules about when that is permissible." https://t.co/h0QwQF5WbE
— Lindsey Andersen (@Linds_Anders) January 25, 2020
USA: We’re Banning Facial Recognition. We’re Missing the Point by @schneierblog
— Statewatch (@StatewatchEU) January 24, 2020
"Focusing on one particular identification method misconstrues the nature of the #surveillance society we’re in the process of building."https://t.co/JkvEGlgryX
"Focusing on one particular identification method misconstrues the nature of the surveillance society we’re in the process of building," writes @schneierbloghttps://t.co/NM8Uh8UuGN
— Privacy Project (@PrivacyProject) January 21, 2020
Facial recognition technology is just one tool. We need to stay focus on the many other ways as well that mass surveillance can be conducted--and the ways that data is combined to create searchable profiles of us without any consent on our part. https://t.co/uAY1jNWMAo
— Kenneth Roth (@KenRoth) January 21, 2020
Facial recognition tech is under scrutiny but we need to have a serious conversation about all identification, correlation and discrimination technologies and decide how much we want to be spied on by governments and corporations @schneierblog ↘️https://t.co/OmYcAk2FZQ
— Marietje Schaake (@MarietjeSchaake) January 21, 2020
Bottom line: @schneierblog is brilliant. But his argument is flawed.@hartzog & I will continue to claim-
— Evan Selinger (@EvanSelinger) January 20, 2020
Facial recognition technology has *unique* affordances.
These affordances pose such severe dangers tech-specific regulation is required *now*.https://t.co/AeOgCx2GjL
San Francisco & other US cities have already banned facial recognition & activists are understandably calling for a nationwide ban.
— russjackson (@docrussjackson) January 24, 2020
The @nytimes argues focusing on just one method of identification fails to address the wider problem of mass surveillance.https://t.co/JUqAy1uUti https://t.co/thnT2aTkpv
미 서부에서 시작된 얼굴인식기술 금지만으론 대규모 감시사회 못 막는다. 중국은 국가, 미국은 기업이 얼굴뿐 아니라 갖가지 개인정보 수집. 폰 위치나 카드 사용과 연결. 신원 일상 파악 이어 개인 차별로 갈 것. 데이터 브로커들 정보 수집과 거래, 사용 매 단계 규정 필요 https://t.co/y1rcRtzcgO
— Journey (@atmostbeautiful) January 22, 2020
I *highly* recommend pairing @kashhill's fascinating story-about-the-story with @schneierblog's thoughtful, super-smart explainer op-ed @nytopinion on why facial recognition bans can't be the only solution to facial recognition tech.https://t.co/AGH9pP16v5 https://t.co/HRPBJKSCio
— Kate Klonick (@Klonick) January 20, 2020
Moving beyond using facial recognition technology to determine where people have been, Britain plans to use it to track people in real time where they are at the moment—another example of why we urgently need stronger privacy protection. https://t.co/jIoplrFVcu
— Kenneth Roth (@KenRoth) January 25, 2020
London transitions into a full surveillance state: https://t.co/MB30twaxER
— hussein kesvani (@HKesvani) January 24, 2020
Normally, with face recognition you choose between safety and privacy. London, by implanting a system that doesn’t work, appears to want neither. https://t.co/OMFnrmOKzF pic.twitter.com/lkLpHNrspk
— Nicholas Thompson (@nxthompson) January 24, 2020
We’re Banning Facial Recognition. We’re Missing the Point.
— Charles Mok 莫乃光 (@charlesmok) January 25, 2020
The whole point of modern surveillance is to treat people differently, and facial recognition technologies are only a small part of that.https://t.co/RrZYXNqK5B
London’s police department said on Friday that it would begin using facial recognition technology in the city to identify people off the street in real time with video cameras, adopting a level of surveillance that is rare outside of China. https://t.co/7XWEL37Tp1
— PEN America (@PENamerica) January 24, 2020
Just a reminder that the @metpoliceuk have actually fined people for attempting to avoid facial recognition scanners. This is dangerous, dystopian tech, and no-one, let alone an organisation as fascist and irresponsible as the Met should be allowed to use it. https://t.co/umtfBniem1
— Elle Osili-Wood (@ElleOsiliWood) January 24, 2020
LIVE FACIAL RECOGNITION | We are using the latest technology to tackle crime and keep Londoners safe.
— Metropolitan Police (@metpoliceuk) January 24, 2020
Live Facial Recognition will assist us locate and identify those wanted by police for violent offences and serious crimes.
? https://t.co/ZhhNeJPHT5 pic.twitter.com/0IWaCZOzln
Scotland Yard believes it has legal cover & public backing for ‘live’ facial recognition cameras to become a standard feature of policing in London - despite the concerns of civil liberty groups: https://t.co/Tmgr9h6nDj
— Danny Shaw (@DannyShawBBC) January 24, 2020
Technologist Bruce Schneier: "Facial recognition bans are the wrong way to fight against modern surveillance." #privacy https://t.co/8V74mSkUaM
— Sarah Genner, PhD (@sgenner) January 26, 2020
'Today, facial recognition technologies are receiving the brunt of the tech backlash, but focusing on them misses the point.' Useful if worrying piece on facial recognition by Bruce Schneier. https://t.co/TyerrPaAQ2
— tiffany jenkins (@tiffanyjenkins) January 26, 2020
We’re Banning Facial Recognition. But We’re Missing the Point. https://t.co/Xqxtizk6XS #surveillance #privacy #FacialRecognition #ai #ArtificialIntelligence #MachineLearning pic.twitter.com/AJcU2dT6eU
— Nige Willson (@nigewillson) January 26, 2020
"In all cases, modern mass surveillance has three broad components: identification, correlation and discrimination"
— Dalan Mendonca (@dalanMendonca) January 26, 2020
Addressing only one of these doesn't help privacy. https://t.co/eeNsjDu4MD
Hypermodernity IS the future: facial recognition ubiquitous in London and coming to US cities soon enough #hypermodernity https://t.co/O6uDvRHBSi
— John David Ebert (@johndavidebert) January 24, 2020
#AsWasToBeExpected: "London’s police said on Friday that it would begin using facial recognition to spot criminal suspects with video cameras as they walk the streets, adopting a level of surveillance that is rare outside China." https://t.co/lUmcmyNG16 https://t.co/lUmcmyNG16
— Félix Tréguer (@FelixTreguer) January 26, 2020
London Police Are Taking Surveillance to a Whole New Level - The New York Times https://t.co/DYiAIIIUVi
— Paul Triolo (@pstAsiatech) January 26, 2020
London Police Are Taking Surveillance to a Whole New Level https://t.co/JUmpfkvTk1
— Tactical Tech (@Info_Activism) January 26, 2020
From the @nytimes newsroom: "The new tools use software that can immediately identify people on a police watch list as soon as they are filmed on a video camera," writes @satariano.https://t.co/uma81SStUB
— Privacy Project (@PrivacyProject) January 25, 2020
London Police Are Taking Surveillance to a Whole New Level #UK https://t.co/iBLbNI7CB2
— Raymond E. Foster (@policeofficer) January 25, 2020
london cops, might I introduce you to san diego cops, florida cops, and the companies selling this garbage to schools?https://t.co/tCbAl2mxQ7 pic.twitter.com/wyCrjUWCUs
— Lindsey Barrett (@LAM_Barrett) January 25, 2020
Smart Cities present a personal security and rights issue when vast surveillance techniques are adopted by law enforcement. London has joined China in deploying extensive face recognition software to identify “criminals”. https://t.co/nMDBUNot0O @FutureCities4 #SmartCities
— Xander Dyer (@XDSPIA) January 25, 2020
London's police department said that it would begin using real-time facial recognition technology in the cityhttps://t.co/05PZJovN2R
— Alfons López Tena (@alfonslopeztena) January 24, 2020
Moving beyond using facial recognition technology to determine where people have been, Britain plans to use it to track people in real time where they are at the moment—another example of why we urgently need stronger privacy protection. https://t.co/jIoplrFVcu
— Kenneth Roth (@KenRoth) January 25, 2020
How Facial Recognition Works https://t.co/bjHQ6EaIon pic.twitter.com/ThIpVVRhXc
— Rich Tehrani (@rtehrani) January 26, 2020