52 Million Photos In FBI's Face Recognition Database By Next Year 108
Advocatus Diaboli writes "The EFF has been investigating the FBI's Next-Generation Identification (NGI) scheme, an enormous database of biometric information. It's based on the agency's fingerprint database, which already has 100 million records. But according to the documents EFF dug up, the NGI database will include 52 million images of people's faces by 2015. At least 4.3 million images will have been taken outside any sort of criminal context. 'Currently, if you apply for any type of job that requires fingerprinting or a background check, your prints are sent to and stored by the FBI in its civil print database. However, the FBI has never before collected a photograph along with those prints. This is changing with NGI. Now an employer could require you to provide a 'mug shot' photo along with your fingerprints. If that's the case, then the FBI will store both your face print and your fingerprints along with your biographic data.'"
I grew a beard (Score:2)
Let's see how they handle that, as I keep messing around with facial hair 8^{)>
Re:I grew a beard (Score:5, Informative)
Let's see how they handle that, as I keep messing around with facial hair 8^{)>
Modern facial recognition seems to be immune to facial hair changes, as well as other simple attempts to fool it. It is based more on measurements of bone structure, and distances between certain facial features such as eyes, nose and mouth. Also, sophisticated AI software is used to make the system robust against changes to some of these features as well. Unless you wear a bag over your head, it's pretty hard to fool modern systems.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The field of AI is not just about movie-style artificial humans.
Re: (Score:2)
I did my masters in AI so I do in fact know exactly what it is about. YOU don't get to define the term or the field.
Fortunately it is common knowledge: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence
I know, I know - it sucks having someone so easily point out how so wrong you were when all you you wanted to do was post an angry, snarky post about something you actually know very little about but were hoping no one would notice.
So sorry about that little fella.
But hey, I may never aim to
Re: (Score:2)
Strawman. Didn't say it was. What AI is about, though, is Artificial Intelligence, and unless you know something no one else around here knows, there still isn't any. At all. Expert systems? Sure. Clever algorithms to solve specific problems? Yep. Dedicated hardware to mimic neurons? That too. Are these things artificial? They are. But are they, or do they incorporate, or do they evidence, intelligence? No. Not even. No way. There is no "field of AI."
You know, you've just demonstrated why many clueless people denigrate AI: whenever the field of AI solves some problem, that problem stops being considered an AI problem and spins out as a separate area with its own research and applications. Then, hordes of people like you shout "but they haven't found out anything useful yet!"
Re: (Score:2)
And considering we are talking about facial recognition here even more so. Humans are naturally very good at it. Computers are not.
This goes for most pattern recognition which is a fundamental of human intelligence.
That is part of the field of AI. Both in concept and in the official definition.
Just face it dude. You are WRONG with a capital "nah nah na nah nah" and waggly moose horns.
Deal with it.
And who the hell cares whether YOU think this is worthy of being called AI? The height of arrogance r
Re: (Score:2)
No. It's not. The most effective and efficient forms map the face to a uniform shape, almost spherical shape, especially for 3D facial recognition. The resulting consistent transform is *edge* based, not 3d structure shaped. Anything that adds extra edges, or re-arranges them, like makeup that adds eyebrow like dark markings or makes the face strongly asymmetrical consuses the hell out of it.
Re: (Score:2)
Last time I renewed my drivers' licence they asked me to remove my glasses before taking the photo. I assume the reason for it is to help facilitate algorithmic facial recognition.
I wonder how many databases this photo is in, who gets access to it, and for what reason.
Re: (Score:1)
tie that to K'nect camera (Score:2)
and active investigations only my ass -they will stockpile this for the rest of our lives and when they find some association 20 years from now they will backtrack all the way to all other associations NSA 'metadata' style with the same deniability.
-I'm just sayin' -we're screwed
Re: (Score:3)
and we are one step closer to a 1984 'Big Brother is watching' world....
and active investigations only my ass -they will stockpile this for the rest of our lives and when they find some association 20 years from now they will backtrack all the way to all other associations NSA 'metadata' style with the same deniability.
-I'm just sayin' -we're screwed
o Sunglasses
o Facial Hair
o Make-up
o Big Floppy Hat
These are your weapons, use them wisely.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When I went to renew my passport a few years ago [Australian], they had additional requirements "neutral expression, no smiling" and they were explicit about the fact that this was to improve facial recognition DB matching.
Soon this will be the rule for walking around the street, great news for botox fans. No smiling, look straight ahead, head down, eyes down and enjoy your freedom.
Have a nice day!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'd love to argue with you... but I can't. Have a very pleasant and conformist day, citizen.
Such a gathering would be illegal anyway and I would have to report you lest I would be liable for similar penalties. You also have a pleasant day citizen!
Re: (Score:2)
At first I read that as "BoSox" fans. That would probably work, too.
Re:tie that to K'nect camera (Score:5, Funny)
o Sunglasses
o Facial Hair
o Make-up
o Big Floppy Hat
These are your weapons, use them wisely.
You just described my mother in law out for an afternoon stroll.
Re: (Score:1)
Well, she makes a formidable weapon...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
and we are one step closer to a 1984 'Big Brother is watching' world....
Or a jump...
I bought a SAMSUNG UN32F6300AFXZA smart HDTV as a computer monitor.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/... [newegg.com]
While I haven't read the Xbox ToS and Privacy statements; I have read the ones for this HDTV, it's one hell of a data miner that claims it's jurisdiction in some city in South Korea.
It can match the Xbox and Kinetic for intrusiveness and I'm sure surpass it.
The difference is you must supply a webcam for the HDTV, this is used for gestures (no joke).
With a built in WiFi, it will most likely be conn
Re: (Score:2)
and we are one step closer to a 1984 'Big Brother is watching' world....
Or a jump...
I bought a SAMSUNG UN32F6300AFXZA smart HDTV as a computer monitor.
If you don't like what the product does, just don't buy them.
Re: (Score:2)
and we are one step closer to a 1984 'Big Brother is watching' world....
Or a jump...
I bought a SAMSUNG UN32F6300AFXZA smart HDTV as a computer monitor.
If you don't like what the product does, just don't buy them.
That wasn't a complaint. I bought exactly what I wanted (well it was to be 120 Hz) and it suits my needs perfectly, it's the features that you start getting into tracking. I don't use the any of the features, nor have I acquiring an account, and as long as I don't hook the lan into it (allow it's WiFi) I'll have no problems.
I've read the ToS (there are two), and Privacy Policy I know what I can and can't do, and how to prevent the shout-outs.
I posted about the HDTV to show that other people have the same sy
Re: (Score:2)
Well I have been Samsung.
Nice Smart TV with decent processor+application set.
HOWEVER....
They no longer update it. I got my two updates and that is
all I get. Netflix has new but NO the update is unavailable
on this model.
I have a nice Android phone but wait I have been Samstung again.
They no longer update it. The version of the Android kernel does
not use the graphics accelerator and the battery life STINKS.
In all fairness there are two troublesome actors here: AT&T and Samsung.
My tablet is not exactly as bad but it also has hit its update
limit for the core Android bits.
I have a Motorola Xoom tablet very nice, much nicer due to CyanogenMod, Team Win (TWRP) and now Omni (thank you).
I rooted it long ago, it stopped getting updates at 4.1, Omni took it to 4.2.2 and right into the openSSL problem (Netflix); but Motorola said it couldn't take it past 4.1; Omni reformatted the drive structure, ah hacker's gotta appreciate em.
T-Mobile MyTouch is my cell phone and a bear to root, it updated just after I got it and that was it, stuck at 2.3.4. The update was just to block rooting a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just steal one (Score:1)
They should just steal Facebooks database.
In like Rubin (Score:4, Funny)
You're in DB, like Rick [wikipedia.org]
But we've got the trick
To make your chin slick
Burma Shave
Falsely accused (Score:3, Insightful)
Just remember that the best defense against being falsely accused of a crime is to SHUT UP. Exercise your right to remain silent or in England and Canada reply no comment to every question. You do NOT want to waste your time doing battle with cops who couldn't care less if you are guilty or innocent. You are just a means to an end to them. They will elect whoever they think they can take down for the rap.
Re:Falsely accused (Score:4, Insightful)
The thief with a squeaky clean record is a bigger danger than the guy with one trial for larceny; "squeaky" looks like he's a model employee, while "tainted" faces much harsher punishment if convicted of another crime plus the destruction of the rebuilt life he's working on, which is hard enough because even renting a house in the middle of nowhere tends to require "background checks" that ultimately deny him basic needs such as housing. Inability to rebuild a stable life opens the door to commission of crime, in many cases just to survive. Sadly, America has a punishment and revenge fetish, and until that changes there will be nothing done to solve these problems.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that if they do prosecute you in the UK the failure to mention when questioned anything you later rely on in court can harm you defence. It is assumed you making it up later if you didn't mention it when questioned. Maybe you could convince a jury you just didn't want to talk to the police, because they are well known for being corrupt scumbags, but it's one hell of a risk.
Don't be an Employee (Score:3)
One more reason not to be an employee. Work for yourself.
Of course, they're going to get your photo in other ways. Facebook, blogs, etc.
Law enforcement already has your photo, and it has (Score:1)
The DMV.
It is fun to pick on facebook though.
Re: (Score:2)
Risky though. Some people prefer a guaranteed small-but-steady wage to gambling their income.
Re: (Score:2)
Ha! Working for someone else is far more of a risky gamble than working for myself. As an employee you have to satisfy your boss and the clients. As my own boss I only have to satisfy my clients.
Odds of success:
Boss% x Client% Client%
You have a much higher risk as an employee.
I'm taking less of a gamble as an independent.
Pretty simple math.
Even worse... (Score:3, Insightful)
A lot of people aren't aware that thanks to a law passed by California voters, if you are arrested for a felony (or a possible felony) in California, your DNA will be collected and held in a government database indefinitely
Note that you only have to be arrested for what might be later possibly considered a felony for this to occur. You don't have to be convicted. Not even charged. Everyone who is arrested in California is arrested fairly and ultimately charged and convicted... right, Occupy Oakland people?
This has even been challenged and upheld [latimes.com] by the 9th district.
This law was passed by a 9/11-frightened public in 2004. Would such a law [wikipedia.org] pass now? I strongly doubt it.
These records are never expunged.
Re: (Score:2)
This law was passed by a 9/11-frightened public in 2004. Would such a law [wikipedia.org] pass now? I strongly doubt it.
Maybe not, but it shows how easily manipulated people are. If people are so stupid (they are) that they're give away their privacy and freedoms for 'safety' after every bad event, then we're screwed.
Re: (Score:2)
Why is this a surprise? (Score:2)
Not sure what the big news is.... like we didn't already know this? They probably already have access to every state's DMV records, which include photographs for every person who has a driver's license or ID card. I would estimate that is maybe 90% of every adult citizen, alone.
And yes, it upsets me.... far less than fingerprinting or DNA, however. The only privacy-friendly biometrics are those that we don't "leave" all over the place, and can't be collected or taken without our knowledge. That leaves
Re: (Score:2)
Not to mention access to the biometrics and photo in every US passport, images of every individual crossing the immigration line at an airport, and a fingerprint or prints for every non-US citizen crossing the line. That's all without trying too hard.
Numbers don't fit (Score:3)
Hah! (Score:2)
That's a factor of 100 less than what's available in Facebook's and Google's databases separately.
Don't take the job (Score:1, Troll)
If you don't have enough self-respect to not sell your identity for a job then you're not worth my time.
Re:Don't take the job (Score:5, Insightful)
You may have the luxury of choosing between multiple job offers, but many people don't.
Re: (Score:2)
I have *0* respect for a person who submits to photographs, fingerprints, credit checks or drug tests to get a job.
I have an FBI file, being cleared by them for a job I enjoyed and got lots of money doing it. Two Out Of Three Ain't Bad -Meat Loaf.
The loss of your respect was comforted by the money being made.
Was required to obtain a Q clearance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q... [wikipedia.org] before 1993, after that date there is no FBI involvement There was also only one type of Q clearance (the link mentions two); I was a Q clearance with assess to vital areas.
On the bright side I now have a list of all the places I've lived, even
Re: (Score:2)
Please do not fly commercially, you clearly will not respect the authority of the pilots or the safety that zero blood alcohol/drug levels add to (http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/120.109). Don't consume anything that is mined in my part of the world, most (all) mining companies have zero tolerance for drink/drugs and random testing for same... even for office staff.
Re: (Score:2)
Some of us like to have money. These are not good economic times - most people can't be picky, they are lucky to get just one job offer.
Re: (Score:2)
I have *0* respect for a person who submits to photographs, fingerprints, credit checks or drug tests to get a job.
I work for a modeling agency, you insensitive clod!
Border pics? (Score:1)
Does this database include the pics and fingerprints taken each time I enter the USA (as a EU-citizen)?
Re: (Score:2)
of course . think they will pass on an occasion to treat you like a criminal ?
Welcome to the USA , where every visitor is a criminal and is being treated like one .
The USA is not a great nation. It's a sick police state the likes we haven't seen since the Nazis .
.
Need laws on effects, not technologies (Score:2)
We need clear laws on what law enforcement and government agencies are allow to know about us, not how they gain that data. Do we want the government to be able to track everyone's motions. If not, then it shouldn't matter if they use cell phone data, face recognition, satellite photos, tracking implants, or invisible flying monkeys that follow people around, it shouldn't be legal.
If we do want to allow the government to track out motions, then we should let them us the least expensive, most efficient techn
Re: (Score:2)
The reality is that it doesn't matter WHAT the law says. If they obtain the data, they can and will do anything they want with it. I knew this long before the whole NSA "expose`".
I am not saying we shouldn't make laws about it, or even try to enforce them, but I am saying that laws and enforcement are not enough. To some degree, the government (and businesses) simply should not have access to certain data in the first place because it is the ONLY way to prevent it from being used in an abusive way.
Re: (Score:2)
The law should limit what they can collect as well as what they can do with data they have. I don't see any alternative to laws to prevent the government from having access to data. They have the resources to get pretty much any data they want, certainly a non-expert will not be able to secure their data against the NSA.
Re: (Score:2)
But it won't happen to me... (Score:2)
You might think it won't happen to you but it only takes a few decades for things to go horribly horribly wrong (see German history...Nazi...) You might think your modern citizens are somehow wiser or smarter or more evolved-- well, maybe so (debatable) but the techniques used HAVE evolved.
People escaped, people resisted, and underground networks were extremely important in winning WW2. Will such things even be possible in the future? If your nation has the system already active and in place, it is just
so many sources (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
If writng style is really an identifiable characteristic, I would actually be doing you a favor by going Grammar Nazi on your last sentence. Those people who really learn enough of the manifold rules of proper English will form a group which will appear indivisible in attempts to isolate an actual individual, To stand out at all, such people will have to use words such as "eldritch", that are very, very rare, create complex compound sentences such as this one, or otherwise write unusually. People who write
Police state. (Score:1)
Says it all . Keep being sheep , do not go out to Washington and protest , do not write your Congressman or Senator.
Keep being sheep and build the walls of your own prison. You deserve it .
I predict... (Score:2)
More people wearing head coverings like in Star Wars.
Personally I'm thinking of exercising my rights, as a western white male, to dress as a muslim woman and don a Burqa. [wikipedia.org]
Some warnings (Score:2)
1. driver's license photos. There are several states that are already incorporating them into their facial recognition systems. This will accelerate. It needs to stop. (See #2)
2. the accuracy of these systems coupled with the increasing poor job police and investigatory (national security, etc) agencies are doing actually using these kinds of tools means that your chances of getting hit for a false positive is rapidly accelerating. It will wreck lives. It will get people (on both sides) killed.
3. I have bee
52 million pictures, >= 2,421 false positives (Score:3)
According the wikipedia, the number of pictures being seen as the same with probability p is =sqrt(2d * ln(1/1-p)) If d is 52,000,000 and we use a 99% probability, then for each 21,884.6 pictures we get a false positive with a perfectly accurate matcher. And there are no perfect matchers.
This is a variant of the birthday paradox, where it only takes 100 people to get a 99.9% chance of them having the same birthday, and a mere 23 people to get a 50% chance [wikipedia].
The German Federal Security Service rejected facial matching years ago, for exactly this reason, when I was working for Siemens. The Americans did not, and supposedly stopped someone's grandma for being a (younger, male) terrorist.
If they use this, expect a week or so of everyone's grandma being arrested (;-))
--dave
Mathematicians, please feel free to check me on the numbers: I suspect I'm rather low...
Re:52 million pictures, = 2,421 false positives (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
DMV (Score:1)
Anybody else experienced this?
Fuck the government (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)