Welcome back and thanks for joining us. We’ve been discussing the highly controversial use of facial recognition technology in Michigan, and looking at what people on both sides of the argument have to say about it’s safety. As we mentioned in the previous article, this software is already widely used here in Michigan, although the most controversial instances are probably cases of law enforcement agencies like the Detroit Police Department, using it to isolate and identify suspects. Because that’s where it gets complicated…
Why is there so much concern over facial recognition technology?
There are loads of concerns when it comes to facial recognition tech and its many uses. Certainly, public safety and crime prevention are major motivators for its acceptance, but the concerns over privacy violations and mistaken identities are growing exponentially. The tech, which is widely used by both law enforcement and marketing companies all over the country, is driven primarily by financial profit and promises of future deliverance. However, the cost of that lucrative social safety might be a little more “minority report” than we’d like to admit. Or maybe not.
Facial recognition tech is used in so many different ways these days.
From airport security to smartphone security features, digital facial mapping is in use around us constantly. In many cases, we have no idea when and how our faces are being watched, tracked, recorded and identified. The new iPhone X uses a “True Depth Camera,” which maps a user’s face, taking 3D pictures using an infrared camera, flood illuminator, and dot projector. But not all smartphones offer that same level of specialization. A Dutch organization named Consumentenbond recently tested a wide variety of smartphones offering facial recognition safety and found that 42 out of 110 devices tested were able to be unlocked using a picture of the device’s owner.
Does constant, unsanctioned surveillance violate our rights?
Evan Greer, deputy director of Fight for the Future – an organization that battles against the growing use of facial recognition technology, believes that the tech really doesn’t have a place in society. “It’s deeply invasive, and from our perspective, the potential harm to society and human liberties far outweigh the potential benefits.” Knowing what we know about the growing number of people mistakenly identified by law enforcement databases, and even in less concerning circumstances, it’s definitely cause for concern. Crime victims and their families believe otherwise.
Several states are already considering banning the technology…
Digital rights group Fight for the Future is leading a national campaign entitled BanFacialRecognition.com, which has been endorsed by more than 30 organizations, including a high profile effort to stop the use of facial recognition surveillance at music festivals and concerts. So far, California and one Massachusetts are the only states where certain cities already have laws in place banning the use of facial recognition technology in certain circumstances. But Massachusetts and Michigan are both on the bandwagon to consider state-wide bans on the tech.
There is a lot to consider when making decisions about future safety!
Considering your own future privacy can seem like a rather esoteric subject to consider, but being falsely accused of a crime is a much more immediate and personal problem. If you are being accused of a crime you didn’t commit, especially because of police use of flawed technology, you’re going to need help from a tech-savvy defense attorney with access to great resources and respected expert witnesses. So call 866 766 5245 today and talk to one of The Kronzek Firm’s highly tough and highly respected criminal defense attorneys. We’re available 24/7 for emergency consultations and intervention.