Oakland Becomes Third US City To Ban Facial Recognition (vice.com) 63
Oakland, California has followed San Francisco and Somerville, Massachusetts in banning the use of facial recognition in public spaces. Motherboard reports: A city ordinance passed Tuesday night which prohibits the city of Oakland from "acquiring, obtaining, retaining, requesting, or accessing" facial recognition technology, which it defines as "an automated or semi-automated process that assists in identifying or verifying an individual based on an individual's face." The ordinance amends a 2018 law which requires any city staff member to get approval from the chair of Oakland's Privacy Advisory Commission before "seeking or soliciting funds" for surveillance technology. State and federal funding for surveillance technology must also be approved by the chair, per the ordinance. According to a public memo by Rebecca Kaplan, Oakland City Council President, the ban was instituted on the basis that facial recognition is often inaccurate, lacks established ethical standards, is invasive in nature, and has a high potential for government abuse.
Outsourcing (Score:1)
There are plenty of private companies that provide these services and are not subject to these bans. The police departments simply subscribe to these services. There are already pervasive in California.
Re: (Score:3)
There are plenty of private companies that provide these services and are not subject to these bans. The police departments simply subscribe to these services. There are already pervasive in California.
What part of...
... was unclear to you?
prohibits the city of Oakland from "acquiring, obtaining, retaining, requesting, or accessing" facial recognition technology
Re: (Score:2)
That is the point: Oakland does none of those things. They just get the service from the Northern California Regional Intelligence Center which uses Palantir Technologies. They are outsourcing, just like all 200+ california cities/towns that do the same thing. The monitoring still goes on. Why do people bother arguing with me?
Re: (Score:2)
Not sure what you are talking about. All that is here, in use, today.
Re: (Score:2)
Answer: yes. Palantir Technologies is monitoring over 8 million people in California alone. It is a $20B 4,000 employee company you probably haven't heard about, but they know all about you.
Hmmm (Score:2)
Local, County, and State legislators could theoretically stem the flow of ubiquitous oversight that the federal governors seem destined to permeate our lives with.
All I would say, to the naysayers, is, consider the outbreak of legislation legalizing (or semi-legalizing) marijuana and CBD use. It's still quite illegal at the federal level, yet a multitude of States are in open rebellion... and there's been no federal challenge to the States' usurpation of right to simple possession.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd like to thank you in advance for your kind words. Positive feedback like yours is what keeps me going.
Re: (Score:1)
So, you anticipate that states will discard HIPAA regulations about privacy the same way they've discarded immigration laws and marijuana laws? I'm inclined to agree. since permitting such private use of facial recognition would be useful to some individuals with parrticular businesses.
Or is that not wht you meant?
Re: (Score:2)
I don't get it. Do you think private use of facial recognition ISN'T already happening? It is. Look up "Palantir Technologies" for an example. Building facial recognition systems is very easy. It only takes a camera and a $99 processing board.
Re: (Score:2)
The "flow of ubiquiout oversight" has included lifesaving and privacy saving regulations such as HIPAA, the Clean Air Act, and the 19th Amendment that guaranteed wmen the right to vote. Discarding federal laws or regulatory mandates is potentially quite risky: I'd suggest that disregarding the regulations requires thought and caution. There are many other laws than marijuana possession that have been challenged by the federal government, including the right to segregate schools, the right to deny gay marria
Nobility or Survival Instinct? (Score:2)
Hypothetically that's good.... (Score:1)
But what is the punishment for getting caught violating these bans or circumventing them by having a private 3rd party with a taste for selling that info to anyone and everyone who wants it (like Palantir)?
Because this is not just profitable but intensely destructive to privacy and citizens rights/freedoms in general, so unless it gets your family shot to be caught doing it, they're going to keep on doing it.
Bluntly: It wasn't much value. (Score:2)
Facial recognition has significant trouble with dark-colored skin, so was it really going to help them much anyway?
https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea... [sfgate.com]