Facial Recognition Fears: Invasion of Privacy or Necessary Security on College Campuses?!

Facial Recognition Fears: Invasion of Privacy or Necessary Security on College Campuses?!


90 Replies to “Facial Recognition Fears: Invasion of Privacy or Necessary Security on College Campuses?!

  1. OH HI. Maria is feeling better since taping for those asking, go hang with her on Instagram if you don't follow her already!
    That said, thoughts on the subject? Would you support this kind of technology being used on college campuses and beyond to track people in the name of security? Let us know in the comments!

  2. As a victim of abuse I would support it but I also can see where it could go wrong. So a middle ground needs to be found! As soon as possible.

  3. She always sounds sick. Is it that she is sick or she is just really nasal? – Not to take away from her presententation, she presents well.

  4. So much for “Land of the Free”. We are all being monitored constantly. It’s great that they can catch criminals, but I wouldn’t be happy with it until there is a 0% error rate. Scary how the USA never needs our consent to do anything. Aren’t we all being treated like criminals who need to be monitored 24/7? What a sad world we live in.

  5. A wise man once said You have No Rights if you're dead. Aint nothing wrong with this. It would be used outside in public where anyone can take photos of you. Lets say some creep hits your phone up and hacks the camera. Half the time its either in a pocket face up or face down on a desk. But these are cameras outside not inside they arent spying on you naked you are fully clothed. In the end you aren't doing anything wrong you aint got shit to worry about.

  6. Facial recognition: "Jefe, would you say I have a plethora of issues?"
    Jefe:" yes a plethora"
    Facial recognition: "do you even know what a plethora is?"

  7. I played enough watchdogs yo know where…
    Honestly no I don't cuz those games really say absolutely nothing about privacy and the information age.

  8. Privacy! A balance is preferable, with some degree of security, for sure. But if your torn between security and privacy, I choose liberty most time. We have lost this idea of balance, and too many think privacy others claim they need or want and liberty is personal. Privacy (within an acceptable range) IS liberty. Journalism without privacy is destined to fail, as an example, the privacy insures the liberty for the press.

  9. Interesting.. And also scary at the same time. Me personally, I value my privacy above anything. So, I guess my hope is if it is used. I hope not everyone can use it other than law enforcement. The idea of people using my Facebook photos and social media is very scary to me. Ultimate fear for me would be some random using it to track down where I live to follow me home or one of my crazy ex's 😧. I do see the silver lining though, it would be good to catch people who are up to no good. But with change I guess it will take some of us to feel like this is the new normal. And to address those fears to making sure the software won't be missed used.

  10. I left the Netherlands because without facial recognition its already very much like Big Brother. So as someone who's experienced the constant eye of the government, the idea that facial recognition and potentially continual tracking is horrifying. Not to mention what we see developing in China as we speak. No, I care far more about my right to privacy, inside and outside of my home, than "security".

  11. FRT surveillance should be illegal full stop. FRT searches via data bases should only be accessible after a crime is committed and upon obtaining a warrant from a judge on sworn probably cause testimony. The idea behind FRT surveillance is that they can stop crimes before they happen, and well that's just some Minority Report level problem. Every time someone tries to stop crimes before they happen innocent people get hurt. We're supposed to be a country of laws, of proof, or Innocent until proven Guilty in a court of law by a jury of your peers. In the words of Benjamin Franklin Those who can give up essential Liberty, to obtain a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

  12. People are so quick to call out racism. The reason, and I can guarantee you this, that AI more correctly identifies people that are not of color, is because there is more of them. The AI is not biased, it just has more training with white people for example, because it has more pictures of them to study since there are more of them. And it's also another cry out for racism to say that it would more often incriminate people of color. Incorrect identification and malidentificaiton are different. What I'm saying is that it could take a criminal of color and call them innocent just as easily as it could do the opposite. Racism is real. My argument was never against it, but we are way too sensitive and easy to jump the gun on buzz words before actually considering the situation.

  13. I live in the EU, but had to return to the US in November; I was really disturbed to see the airports in the states have mandatory facial recognition scanners. I had to get where I was going, so I had no choice but to submit. Another privacy violation line crossed by Americans more concerned with security than freedom.

  14. The potential for facial recognition is terrifying honestly. I think the only people who should be in a facial recognition database are people with criminal records (mugshots) and people with driver's licenses and state IDs once they turn 18 and are legally adults. Also police officers, government officials, military service members, etc.
    I also think there needs to be regulation around when and how the government can use FRT. Some people go on a crazy kind of power trip when given that kind of ability. I remember in my freshman year of high school, only two years ago, I went on a trip to my county's 911 dispatch office and traffic control center. Here was where they could access any and all of the traffic cameras, and they use such high res cameras that "we could zoom in on the driver's shirt and read the two-inch logo on their breast pocket." When we were allowed to ask questions, I asked the man in charge if he ever felt like he was invading people's privacy, even if he's legally allowed to watch the cameras. Instead of saying yes or no, the man said, "as soon as you step outside your house, you forfeit any right to privacy. That's the price you pay for life." He had no emotional or moral issues with this; he very obviously believed that because the law didn't say it was wrong, it was right. It unsettled me. People like that need to be kept in check by laws and regulations.

  15. Can we give facial recognition technology to people with prosopagnosia before we start using it to do god knows what socially? >o<
    <—-face blind

  16. The efficiency is one of my main questions. I am split here since I believe this could involve plain view doctrine, if something or someone is in public there is no expectation of privacy since we are plainly visible. But at the sametime technically police are not suppose to use any tech that would give them "superhuman" level powers. Also for the accuracy, this is something where we need to keep the human discretion imvolved.

  17. I could've sworn we were living in 2020 but apparently I'm confused and it's 1984.

    Does no one see that connection?! I can see where this tech can be helpful but if the government can track our every move we're not really a free society.

  18. I remember the outrage after 9/11 and the laws that came after.
    For me this just sounds like the next step in an ever growing Big bother society a la 1984.
    One small step at a time, and just in a few years you can have complete control.

  19. Why do you keep making the poor girl do this when she is ill and has a stuffed nose? It' s very hard to listen to. Just let her rest and have someone else do it, or do this in a week or something.

  20. See the problem with facial recognition software atm is that it is horrible at understanding that gender markers aren't binary and that genderfluid and enby trans persons who are seen by the technology have a hard time being recognized if their presentation changes so that they look like a different gender. This can also happen when people change haircuts significantly or other large appearance changes that lead to the system assuming it's a stranger that it sees;

  21. Let's play devil's advocate for a moment. This is not an invasion of "privacy". If you own an iphone, and/or are on any social media platform, you gave up your privacy a long time ago… Tech like this once coupled to AI, and perfected is an excellent form of public security.
    After all, once you step outside your front door, you have no expectation to privacy, nor should you.
    Don't want to get in trouble? Don't do anything wrong.
    The people who are the most vocal often have the most to hide.

    The warning has been around for almost a decade: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wx62wex8BYE
    If you'd avoided the trap of oversharing in your youth, you wouldn't be so concerned about what "they" may find out about you.

  22. Does Maria have a cold? She doesn't sound like herself. Please give her a break when she might not feel well. Great job Maria. You are a good presenter.

  23. This is such a huge invasion of privacy. Can it be a positive? Yes, but it has much more potential for evil than good

  24. Fuuuuuuck the whole thing. Giving ANYONE that kind of power has throughout all of history bitten every involved party on the ass.

    Scratch that, half the whole fuckin gluteus was taken off.

  25. Can you please cover the protests tha have been going on since september in IRAQ with a Q over 400 peacful protesters died and thounds injured and yesterday terirost militia that basicly contorl the entire goverment and itself is controled by iraN most notebly qasim solaimani came out shotting protesters and they even used buck shot shotguns and fired AT protesters as well as snipers
    bo6.3y thats my insta if you wanna see the shotgun shells

  26. I think it should be used wisely, such as in criminal cases as mentioned. For really, you wanna make sure you’re getting the right person, and not use it all the time, especially when a lot of those people are innocent. Also, there are several points on a face you can by, so surprised Rekognition got that many Congress members wrong oh well..

  27. "especially us iphone users" You know that android phones have facial recognition too, right? Even my 300$ phone does it, even has a pop up camera.

    Man, iphone users are annoying, they have overpriced dated hardware but still think they're the shit…

  28. Privacy First Always! In the US, we have the right to bear arms. Even if it is not you who is carrying, the reality that someone nearby most likely is, is your deterrent and security in public places.
    We have cameras on all our phones. If you are unable to stop a crime, just having video recording (even if it only gets sounds) can be a massive help to law enforcement.
    Warrants are there for a reason. If they want to search a face after the fact, they need a warrant.
    If we don't stand up for our freedoms and right to privacy, how long till they have all been eroded away? They don't take them in one fell swoop. That would outrage the public. Slowly taking them over decades and it feels like a lesser blow. Same end goal: Absolute control of the population. If you doubt this, look at China today.

  29. This is the same thing that they're doing in China, isn't it? Different premise, same conclusion. It always starts as a form of protection.

  30. there needs to be some tec that prevents FRTs from reading your face this is something right out of black merrier I don't like this

  31. This is my issue with this topic along with all the other privacy topics. It is, for the most part, put in an ultimatum. You can't enjoy our software unless you give up every piece of private information about you. It will boil down to you can't use this public facility or you can't go to this school unless you agree to the terms and conditions that we know everything about you.

  32. There's no amount of security that could ever make these systems fail proof to being stolen and leaked.
    How many times in history have we gone "this code is uncrackable, it changes too fast and we can never get it" aka, the enigma. The enigma was truly unbreakable by any human means, until Alan Turning changed history and cracked it.
    And this has now happened a dozen times over. We think up these amazing uncrackable security systems, and then it's only a matter of time until it too becomes obsolete.
    The march of technology and progress hasn't slowed down even a little bit, and the "advanced security" of today could easily be broken tomorrow. And what is at risk is simply too high to dare that with.

  33. There's also the issue of our current legal system and how 98% of all charges end in plea agreements only 2% ever even go to trial. This is some is set up for the rich for people who can't afford lawyers for people who can afford court fees for people who can afford to fight for their innocence if you think you're innocent until proven guilty you're wrong. The court as soon as you are charged with something puts it on your record as if you have been convicted you can get fired and be denied jobs based off of it. I can only imagine you trying to pick up your kid and having the cops called on you again or something you're still trying to fight in court

  34. You should point out that facial recognition is used in China to attack the uighur Muslims and anyone who might be practicing a religion that the Communist party doesn't like. The government is not there yet the way our current legal system is and 98% of all charges in plea agreements and do not go to trial where you are judged by your peers this should not be used we need to fix our system before we start adding things to it before we start adding powers to police to lawyer to judge has two things we as common citizens cannot afford to spend $15,000 on to defend ourselves.

  35. This isn't even a question. Humanity has lasted thousands of years without this, the only reason for it is to help tighten the police states grip on your throat.

  36. How many stories have we heard, with Police SWAT teams bursting into a house, and killing someone. Only for it to turn out, they were in the wrong house to begin with? Now, take that times 1000, when FRT becomes wide spread. Also, how many people have been erroneously placed on the No Fly watch list? Those people are never removed from the list. Once on a list, forever shall you remain.

  37. I know this won't make sense to a lot of people but the middle ground is always what comes first for me. It's never one thing or the other thing, in this case it's not privacy or security. You can use facial recognition to track violent fugitives without allowing it to be abused you just have to design the systems so they are hard to abuse and having stiff penalties for anyone who does abuse it. Our current law enforcement often has a difficult time policing itself but that doesn't mean that law enforcement is all bad, if we set up a decent system then the abuse will be small.

  38. There is absolutely nothing the government can or will do that can make this okay. It’s just another crutch for the government to not take responsibility on the real issue of mental health that causes the mass shootings in the first place that they’re attempting to stop. Benjamin Franklin once said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Is the quote I think of every time I hear something in the news about increased unconstitutional measures like the PATRIOT Act or things like this where everyday people have to give up a pound of privacy for a milligram of security.

  39. It's inevitable. Once they get them in every public school, students going into collage will already be so used to them, they won't say a word.

  40. Privacy. Absolutely, I am not willing to trade my human rights for a little bit of security, anyone who thinks differently is insane.

    Once they’re gone, you’ll never get them back.

  41. I can’t believe things about me can be taken and put out there without my knowledge. Now excuse me while I go comment about this new revelation on my Snapchat, Instagram, FaceBook, and Twitter accounts.

  42. Generally I am more for privacy over security, but that's not a hard line in the sand for me. There is a middle ground, where something could be very useful, as long as it isn't abused. The big question is more about trust and legislation. I think most people are rather cynical when they consider both, and I am no exception. There would have to be 100% transparency on something and even then, I'm doubtful.

    I think it leans too far into distopian, big brother territory; but that alone isn't enough for me to write it off completely. A parallel, I might make, is my thoughts on AI. Sure, it could be the doom of us all, but more likely it's a fascinating technology that can do some great things and is often approached cautiously by the scientists involved. This, however, is something that could be immediately and easily abused. Before any attempts at utilizing this kind of technology, reliability and TRUE insurance of moral use would have to be established.

  43. If this concerns you, then you really have no idea how much of your personal information is out there. Because with just a swipe of your card at a business, that business can now have all your personal information. Since our data is traded and sold so much now, that everything about us is pretty much on sale. All thanks to those user agreements which we never read nor can work around. And those are binding regardless of how we agreed to them, unlike every single other contract or agreement. This tech will be pushed allong and companies that use the tech will just do what they already do, which is sell the data off. Personially I rather have use cut back on all the security shit, since it's really not needed. Hell if i remember the trends right, each year has been less crime filled and less violent than the last. To me tacking on more stuff just feels like we'll not looking for problems, but excepting those around us to becomes ones. Which is being paranoid and will only cause problems.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *