The death of anonymity. Or something.
LostOnThemInterwebs sends us a link to PrivacySOS which draws from an article in the Cincinnati Enquirer in regards to the fact the Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine started using facial recognition software linked to state drivers’ license photos in public without telling Ohioans. In fact the program was used before DeWine even knew that it was being used;
Since June, police officers have performed 2,600 searches using the new database feature, which is designed to analyze a snapshot or, in some cases, security camera image, and identify the person by matching the photo with his or her driver’s license photo or police mug shot.
DeWine last week told The Enquirer he didn’t think the public needed to be notified about the launch because 26 other states have facial recognition databases. Now, more than two months into the launch, he’s creating an advisory group of judges, prosecutors and law enforcement officials to make recommendations for updated rules for the system’s use.
The facial recognition technology is aimed in part at leveraging the growing prevalence of security cameras in daily life. Ohioans are on camera in parks, schools, elevators, stores, highways and parking garages. Cameras track boats on the Ohio River, gamblers at casinos, revelers at concerts and sometimes people walking in their own neighborhood.
I guess police can tell who are criminals just by looking at them, and then they can get all of the background on some anonymous person without even knowing their name. Actually, they’re scaring me into finding out which of those 26 states have this stuff and it will keep me (and my money) out of them. Not that I’ve done anything wrong, but because I kind of like my privacy.
Category: Who knows
And what are useful countermeasures? Guys-grow a beard after having your driver’s license picture made and always wear sunglasses in public. Women-wear a burqa or a veil. In other words, become a Moslem or at least dress like one.
Updated for today:
“If my dog lived in Ohio, I’d shave his ass and teach him to walk backwards.”
I’ll be honest, I expected this to be another rant by Psul saying we can’t hide behind our screen names anymore. I expected him to tell us he found a attorney willing to pursue this court.
Facebook uses “facial recognition software”. As I upload photos, I noticed, at first, that it could pick out the face and frame it, asking if I wanted to tag someone. Lately, it can recognize me and even a couple of my friends, suggesting that I tag them with their facebook name.
It only stands to reason that Law Enforcement would use the same stuff. Whether we like it or not, is immaterial since there aren’t many of us who will make a stink about their stinky methods of tracking citizens.
Someone before me, somewhere, said, and I agree: “While I have nothing to hide, I also don’t have anything to share.”.
As I upload photos, I noticed, at first, that it could pick out the face and frame it, asking if I wanted to tag someone. Lately, it can recognize me and even a couple of my friends, suggesting that I tag them with their facebook name.
This is very true. My GF’s brother-in-law is very paranoid about Facebook and refuses to use it. Like me, he’s fairly deep in the IT field. Unlike me, however, he’s worried about it. I’m not simply because I “get” how proliferated facial recognition software is and recognize (Heh!) how futile it is to try to avoid it.
Something about people in public have NO expectation to privacy…
@6
Yup. Exactly my point. You cannot avoid it. We have spy satellites that can recognize a gnat’s ass from space. Red light cameras, security cameras, dash cams, those are all readily available.
My wife’s phone won’t let anyone else’s face answer her calls.
Now, take a crack at how many state, county & cities law enforcement agencies are using license plate scanners and infra-red camera’s after 9/11. In every state whether you are on an interstate and or major two lane highway and approaching a weight station, check out the metal poles about a mile before you arrive. One each plate scanner, acquiring front or rear license plate number & one each infra-red cam taking snapshots of the vehicles for number of warm bodies on board.
Those same state, county & city agencies also have mobile versions mounted on the rear deck (trunk) of patrol vehicles, too. Same thing, plate recognition and IR, all in one camera.
Facebook does that crap all the time. I posted up picture of Gerald Butler from “300” and it asked me if I wanted to tag myself.
Just kidding. It was Jabba the hut, Fuckers.
Well it’s true that an individual has no expectation of privacy in public, but that does not mean that we should not be concerned about how the state uses the information that it extracts from our public interactions.
Mark Steyn (and others) have made the point several times about the capricious nature of tyranny and how the powerful will use that power to suppress opposition. Further, an attorney has written a book titled “Three felonies a day” about how the proliferation of laws has made us all potentially guilty of committing a crime without realizing it. Being concerned about how the powerful might potentially use law and advances in technology to suppress dissent seems like a prudent enough course.
The foundation of our system of law and government is that the powers of the state should be limited, and opposition to an expansion of their powers, such as explained above, is consistent with that foundation.
Police cameras do help solve crimes. They don’t deter anything. The red light cameras designed to track people ignoring traffic lights are nothing but revenue collectors and have caused more ‘sudden stop’ rear-enders than anything else. Yes, there are statistics for that.
But then, we also have phones with cameras, which are as densely populated per square mile as fleas on a dog, and people get a massive kick out of videoing something and posting it online.
Security cameras have caught criminals in the act. They have done some good. Facial recognition software can easily be defeated by someone with ill intent putting on a silicone mask that makes him look like someone else.
What if you really hated someone (think of our favorite troll and what he would do) and you committed a nasty act in public, in front of security cameras, wearing a mask that looked like the person you hate? The catch is that our obnoxious troll probably outweighs all of us if we all stood on the same truck weighing scale at the same time.
IR LEDs at both front & rear plates.
IR LEDs (battery operated portable) as a headband.
‘Nuff said. I’ll be expecting a knock (!!) at my door any time (3AM) now from the HIT (I mean SWAT).
Since we can’t seem to avoid cameras I think it appropriate that we all start wearing those little jacket or shirt cameras so we can start photographing the police and start our own databases….clearly no rules are being violated by constant filming of citizens, ergo those whose work is funded from the public tit should be subject to a similar examination and categorization….that way when you get stopped your software can tell if the cop who stops you is one of the guys with a clean record or one of the f#cktards with dozens of complaints….information can be a 2 way street regardless of how the government originally intends its use.
Sh1t like this starts my mind thinking maybe Snowden is different than Manning, we are being spied on every f#cking day from every f$cking corner….if that’s the new normal I want to know that and I want to be able to record every encounter I have with the government as well…that way bullsh1t ends in both directions…
Ah Ha! The one good thing about being a hermit, and never leaving my house!
@2, it’s become this today. That was a big grin.
Back in the day, after getting out of the Army (didn’t do anything worthy of mention, just did my hitch and left as an E4), I went into my career in Aerospace. Well, it wasn’t “space” back then, but it evolved to that and included working on sensitive projects and programs that required me to sign agreements about the government monitoring my every communication. I’ve always figured that every thing I said over the phone or later, sent via e-mail, was subject to scrutiny by the government. Now that I’m retired I wonder if those rules still apply, but don’t really care since I lived with them for so long that I’m comfortable with them. Those rules I agreed to for a decent job and a fair wage. For people who never signed up for that, if I was never in the defense establishment and I learned that my communications were monitored – I’d be highly pissed. I value my privacy highly, much as any one else, but I also expect a great deal of professionalism on the part of those who might be checking out my correspondence from time to time. Those who have never worked in this environment wouldn’t have this perspective, so, yeah. They should spin out of control with their indignation over learning that their correspondence is monitored by our government.
Telling who’s guilty just by looking at them? Nyet, comrade, we have an approved enemies list of who’s guilty from the Party! (Those bluse state Democrats keep us in lavish healthacre benefits and job security for asking no questions!)
killorbekilled.com, dot org, dot gov, etc etc etc motherfucker lol just joking or maybe not no jj lol 😀 :-xxx
Lesson # 1: Read True Grit.
Lesson # 2: See the movies, the JW and the JB versions
Lesson # 3: Have fun while becoming educated for the 21st Graphene Century
Facebook is for the refreshingly innocent and risibly naive. Twitter too. And most of the shuhniz on the netsky. Sorry, bee chozz, juss saying.
3 x 7 = 21 how dat fer mad math skillz? lol dam i is good or mebbe not ok, later gaterz
Who’s the new troll? Running his keyboard and not saying anything. Nothing new, just a new face. Lacking in spelling skills, talking in nonsensical bits n pieces. Only thing lacking is the drunken rambling of the sort used by Paul K. Wickre.
Methinks its just another dropout idiot getting any attention it can. Maybe it’s “Vietnam Protestor”?