munkle
Diamond Member
- Dec 18, 2012
- 5,284
- 9,101
- 2,130
Nope. No racism in A'murca.
coronanews123.wordpress.com
"As the debate over government use of FRT (Facial Recognition Technology) heats up and CA Gov. Gavin Newsom unveils plans to rebuild L.A. as a “smart city” in which the technology would be ubiquitous, more horror stories emerge, usually involving people of color. This month a man filed a lawsuit in a case in which he was wrongly arrested for the robbery of a Sunglass Hut in Houston in 2022, based on an FRT match. He was thrown in jail, gang raped, then released with all charges dismissed.
Facial Recognition street cameras are inherently unconstitutional, because this constitutes a 24/7 search. The US Constitution guarantees that searches many be performed only on probable cause and/or with a warrant. Evidence obtained by illegal search must be thrown out, even if it uncovers a crime. In the Houston case, facial recognition software was used to link the innocent man, who was in another state, to the crime.
Some cities are fighting back. So far the city with the strictest regulations against Facial Recognition Technology is Portland, OR. Whereas some cities are attempting to draw guidelines to guard against abuse, Portland bans FRT.
On the federal level, the TSA and services such as Social Security and the IRS have rolled out the “option” for users to submit to “video selfies” which gather intimate, high resolution face data. This is what usually precedes governments making measures mandatory, as the federal government did with COVID shots.
As the conservative site Lew Rockwell opines:
“once a voluntary option is adopted by enough people our leaders have a way of making it mandatory.”
The senators wrote:
“TSA has not provided Congress with evidence that facial recognition technology is necessary to catch fraudulent documents, decrease wait times at security checkpoints, or stop terrorists from boarding airplanes,”
In November 2023 US Senator Jeff Merkey (D-OR) introduced a bill, the Traveler Privacy Protection Act, which would ” [ban] the use of facial recognition technology and the collection of facial biometric data by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) in U.S. airports.“ Cosponsors of the bill as of January 2024 are John Kennedy (R-LA), Ed Markey (D-MA), Roger Marshall (R-Kansas), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Mike Braun (R-IN) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT.)
In the future, if CA Gov. Newsom is to get his way, all people will be walking identity cards which will be scanned constantly, and easily monitored and tracked. The key is the massive deployment of cameras capable of seeing a freckle from 200 yards away, as Amnesty International describes its June 2021 report “Surveillance city: NYPD can use more than 15,000 cameras to track people using facial recognition in Manhattan, Bronx and Brooklyn”.
Gavin Newsom announces Smart City L.A. 2028 (view at Rumble)
In an explosive January 15, 2025 Washington Post article on the inherent dangers of using facial recognition in law enforcement, the Post writes:
“We’ve seen this before. Many times. Galtin and Vernau join a growing list of those known to have been wrongfully arrested around the United States based on police use of face recognition. They include Michael Oliver, Nijeer Parks, Randal Reid, Alonzo Sawyer, Robert Williams, and Porcha Woodruff. It is no coincidence that all six of these people, and now adding Christopher Galtin to that list, are Black.”
A main advocacy group is BanFacialRecognition.com
In 2020 Portland, Oregon passed the most comprehensive ban on FRT in the nation, although many other cities are attempting to regulate the growth and scope of FRT, Portland’s approach outright bans its municipal departments, including police, from using it in any way. Portland goes even further by prohibiting public-facing private businesses, legally known as public accommodations, from employing the technology. The City of Portland designed its legislation as a model for the nation. [Portland ordinance for city agencies] {Portland ordinance for public accommodations]
Portland’s main ordinance defines:
“Surveillance Technologies are defined as any software, electronic device, system utilizing an electronic device, or similar used, designed, or primarily intended to collect, retain, analyze, process, or share audio, electronic, visual, location, thermal, olfactory, biometric, or similar information specifically associated with, or capable of being associated with, any individual or group.
Face Recognition means the automated searching for a reference image in an image repository by comparing the facial features of a probe image with the features of images contained in an image repository (one-to-many search). A Face Recognition search will typically result in one or more most likely candidates—or candidate images—ranked by computer-evaluated similarity or will return a negative result.”
The Portland ordinance governing public accommodations, Chapter 34.10, asserts:
“Face Recognition Technologies have been shown to falsely identify women and People of Color on a routine basis. While progress continues to be made in improving Face Recognition Technologies, wide ranges in accuracy and error rates that differ by race and gender have been found in vendor testing.”
Other cities which have enacted laws governing FRT are San Francisco, Boston and Oakland.
In 2020 IBM terminated its facial recognition program business, writing in a letter to the US Congress:
“IBM firmly opposes and will not condone uses of any technology, including facial recognition technology offered by other vendors, for mass surveillance, racial profiling, violations of basic human rights and freedoms, or any purpose which is not consistent with our values and Principles of Trust and Transparency.”
A landmark study by the Media Lab at MIT in 2018 found that darker-skinned women are nearly 35% more likely to be misidentified by facial recognition technology than lighter-skinned white men.
In the UK this month, AI cameras just installed were cut down within hours of going up, image below.
"
Ban Facial Recognition
Man Who Was Wrongly Picked Out by AI Facial Recognition Gang-Raped in Jail, Cities Ban Racist Facial Recognition
As the debate over government use of FRT (Facial Recognition Technology) heats up and CA Gov. Gavin Newsom unveils plans to rebuild L.A. as a “smart city” in which the technology would be ubiquitou…
coronanews123.wordpress.com
"As the debate over government use of FRT (Facial Recognition Technology) heats up and CA Gov. Gavin Newsom unveils plans to rebuild L.A. as a “smart city” in which the technology would be ubiquitous, more horror stories emerge, usually involving people of color. This month a man filed a lawsuit in a case in which he was wrongly arrested for the robbery of a Sunglass Hut in Houston in 2022, based on an FRT match. He was thrown in jail, gang raped, then released with all charges dismissed.
Facial Recognition street cameras are inherently unconstitutional, because this constitutes a 24/7 search. The US Constitution guarantees that searches many be performed only on probable cause and/or with a warrant. Evidence obtained by illegal search must be thrown out, even if it uncovers a crime. In the Houston case, facial recognition software was used to link the innocent man, who was in another state, to the crime.
Some cities are fighting back. So far the city with the strictest regulations against Facial Recognition Technology is Portland, OR. Whereas some cities are attempting to draw guidelines to guard against abuse, Portland bans FRT.
On the federal level, the TSA and services such as Social Security and the IRS have rolled out the “option” for users to submit to “video selfies” which gather intimate, high resolution face data. This is what usually precedes governments making measures mandatory, as the federal government did with COVID shots.
As the conservative site Lew Rockwell opines:
“once a voluntary option is adopted by enough people our leaders have a way of making it mandatory.”
TSA Trying to Expand Facial Recognition Technology
In November 2024 a group of bipartisan US senators wrote to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Inspector General Joseph Cuffari, who oversees the TSA, and challenged the TSA’s reasoning for vastly expanding Facial Recognition Technology at security checkpoints at airports.The senators wrote:
“TSA has not provided Congress with evidence that facial recognition technology is necessary to catch fraudulent documents, decrease wait times at security checkpoints, or stop terrorists from boarding airplanes,”
In November 2023 US Senator Jeff Merkey (D-OR) introduced a bill, the Traveler Privacy Protection Act, which would ” [ban] the use of facial recognition technology and the collection of facial biometric data by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) in U.S. airports.“ Cosponsors of the bill as of January 2024 are John Kennedy (R-LA), Ed Markey (D-MA), Roger Marshall (R-Kansas), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Mike Braun (R-IN) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT.)
AI Facial Recognition Technology Found to be Racist
The man in the Houston case is Harvey Eugene Murphy Jr., who was arrested after FRT had made a match. Anytime someone posts his or her picture online, or submits to a “video selfie” of the kind states and the US government is asking for in order to “verify identity,” the images are likely to wind up in a massive database of the kind Mr. Murphy was in. Many states are “partnering” with third party vendors such as ID.me.In the future, if CA Gov. Newsom is to get his way, all people will be walking identity cards which will be scanned constantly, and easily monitored and tracked. The key is the massive deployment of cameras capable of seeing a freckle from 200 yards away, as Amnesty International describes its June 2021 report “Surveillance city: NYPD can use more than 15,000 cameras to track people using facial recognition in Manhattan, Bronx and Brooklyn”.
Gavin Newsom announces Smart City L.A. 2028 (view at Rumble)
In an explosive January 15, 2025 Washington Post article on the inherent dangers of using facial recognition in law enforcement, the Post writes:
“We’ve seen this before. Many times. Galtin and Vernau join a growing list of those known to have been wrongfully arrested around the United States based on police use of face recognition. They include Michael Oliver, Nijeer Parks, Randal Reid, Alonzo Sawyer, Robert Williams, and Porcha Woodruff. It is no coincidence that all six of these people, and now adding Christopher Galtin to that list, are Black.”
Some Cities Fighting Back
The people of some towns and municipalities are not accepting FRT as an inevitable marker in the progress of humanity, as advocates of the technology like Bill Gates and the World Economic Forum are portraying. In other cities, city police departments are racing ahead with the technology, as the best thing since sliced bread.A main advocacy group is BanFacialRecognition.com
In 2020 Portland, Oregon passed the most comprehensive ban on FRT in the nation, although many other cities are attempting to regulate the growth and scope of FRT, Portland’s approach outright bans its municipal departments, including police, from using it in any way. Portland goes even further by prohibiting public-facing private businesses, legally known as public accommodations, from employing the technology. The City of Portland designed its legislation as a model for the nation. [Portland ordinance for city agencies] {Portland ordinance for public accommodations]
Portland’s main ordinance defines:
“Surveillance Technologies are defined as any software, electronic device, system utilizing an electronic device, or similar used, designed, or primarily intended to collect, retain, analyze, process, or share audio, electronic, visual, location, thermal, olfactory, biometric, or similar information specifically associated with, or capable of being associated with, any individual or group.
Face Recognition means the automated searching for a reference image in an image repository by comparing the facial features of a probe image with the features of images contained in an image repository (one-to-many search). A Face Recognition search will typically result in one or more most likely candidates—or candidate images—ranked by computer-evaluated similarity or will return a negative result.”
The Portland ordinance governing public accommodations, Chapter 34.10, asserts:
“Face Recognition Technologies have been shown to falsely identify women and People of Color on a routine basis. While progress continues to be made in improving Face Recognition Technologies, wide ranges in accuracy and error rates that differ by race and gender have been found in vendor testing.”
Other cities which have enacted laws governing FRT are San Francisco, Boston and Oakland.
In 2020 IBM terminated its facial recognition program business, writing in a letter to the US Congress:
“IBM firmly opposes and will not condone uses of any technology, including facial recognition technology offered by other vendors, for mass surveillance, racial profiling, violations of basic human rights and freedoms, or any purpose which is not consistent with our values and Principles of Trust and Transparency.”
A landmark study by the Media Lab at MIT in 2018 found that darker-skinned women are nearly 35% more likely to be misidentified by facial recognition technology than lighter-skinned white men.
In the UK this month, AI cameras just installed were cut down within hours of going up, image below.
"
Ban Facial Recognition
