30,000 Unsuspecting Rose Bowl Attendees Were Scooped Up in a Facial Recognition Test (medium.com) 35
On New Year's Day 2020, more than 90,000 college football fans piled into the Rose Bowl Stadium in Pasadena, California, to watch the Oregon Ducks play the Wisconsin Badgers. It turns out some of those fans were being watched, too. From a report: Before they even entered the stadium, thousands of attendees were being captured by a facial recognition system in the Rose Bowl's FanFest activity area by an ad tech company called VSBLTY. Four cameras hidden underneath digital signs captured data on attendees, generating 30,000 points of data on how long they looked at advertisements, their gender and age, and an analysis to try and identify weapons or whether they were on a watch list of suspicious persons. Three fans who attended the Rose Bowl game and spoke to OneZero said they didn't remember seeing any notice that they were being surveilled.
[...] The data gathering and surveillance operation has not been reported in the mainstream press before and was revealed after VSBLTY issued a press release of its findings. Neither VSBLTY nor the Rose Bowl Stadium responded to multiple requests for comment or questions about how data was gathered, whether fans were informed, and where the watch list of suspicious persons came from. "Facts about fans, their habits and actions -- in addition to demographic and psychographic information -- will help plan audience activities as well as serve as a tool to validate the value of on-site advertising impressions to sponsors," wrote Jay Hutton, VSBLTY's CEO. VSBLTY is a small, Philadelphia-based company that anticipates generating $15 million to $20 million in revenue in 2020, according to a company slide deck targeted at investors reviewed by OneZero. The company has fewer than 50 employees according to LinkedIn data. Despite its relatively small size, the company has contracts around the world, including conducting real-time facial recognition in Mexico City through a partnership with intelligent lighting company Energetika.
[...] The data gathering and surveillance operation has not been reported in the mainstream press before and was revealed after VSBLTY issued a press release of its findings. Neither VSBLTY nor the Rose Bowl Stadium responded to multiple requests for comment or questions about how data was gathered, whether fans were informed, and where the watch list of suspicious persons came from. "Facts about fans, their habits and actions -- in addition to demographic and psychographic information -- will help plan audience activities as well as serve as a tool to validate the value of on-site advertising impressions to sponsors," wrote Jay Hutton, VSBLTY's CEO. VSBLTY is a small, Philadelphia-based company that anticipates generating $15 million to $20 million in revenue in 2020, according to a company slide deck targeted at investors reviewed by OneZero. The company has fewer than 50 employees according to LinkedIn data. Despite its relatively small size, the company has contracts around the world, including conducting real-time facial recognition in Mexico City through a partnership with intelligent lighting company Energetika.
The company probably wanted controls (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The Wright brothers were amateurs.
Public (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a public venue where one has no expectation of privacy. Besides, what's the difference whether a machine or human is looking at you with surveillance cameras? Finally, anyone who uses a browser/google/internet is subject to the same sort of surveillance.
Re:Public (Score:4, Interesting)
It's a public venue where one has no expectation of privacy. Besides, what's the difference whether a machine or human is looking at you with surveillance cameras? Finally, anyone who uses a browser/google/internet is subject to the same sort of surveillance.
In terms of expectation to privacy... Sure, but perhaps there is an expectation to not be stalked?
For me that ties into the comparison of a human looking at you. A human wouldn't be scanning that many people and store all sorts of data about them in a database.
I agree with you that we are subject to surveillance all the time. But I don't think that justifies more surveillance. The problem is blanket surveillance. This application may seem pretty harmless, but honestly most data collected about people is pretty harmless on it's own, it's when you start combining data sets that really creepily accurate things start to happen. What if this test worked really well, and then this tech started popping up everywhere. It will eventually get to the point where if you find the one place you aren't seen on camera, they will know exactly where you are anyways.
Also, it's sort of telling that neither of the entities would respond to provide any sort of comment after multiple attempts, according to TFS. That doesn't sit well with me either.
Re: (Score:2)
For me that ties into the comparison of a human looking at you. A human wouldn't be scanning that many people and store all sorts of data about them in a database.
So... if the company had instead hired 5,000 sketch artists to draw everyone, you'd be okay with that? I'm not in favor of this sort of thing, but your argument is weak.
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, comparing a hand sketch to face recognition, because of everything it implies such as real time person identification and tracking, is a pretty weak argument as well. =)
Re: (Score:3)
I'm just saying that your argument (initial and follow up) focuses on the technology / implementation not the concept itself. That's the weak part. The whole thing is either good or bad, not just bad because it's faster and automated. The principle behind using computers, sketch artists or photographers to record peoples' faces and track them is the same, one is just (way) more efficient than the other. (Also, the sketches/photos could be scanned into a computer, and computers can print images so these t
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
> It's a public venue where one has no expectation of privacy.
Firstly, privacy is not binary. We have different expectations depending on the context (see privacy as "context integrity" theory). Now I'm not saying a sporting event is the same as a nudist beach, but at the very least there is an expectation to be able to see the camera's and be aware that you're being recorded. In Europe this is the law.
> Besides, what's the difference whether a machine or human is looking at you with surveillance came
Re: (Score:1)
It's a public venue where one has no expectation of privacy. Besides, what's the difference whether a machine or human is looking at you with surveillance cameras? Finally, anyone who uses a browser/google/internet is subject to the same sort of surveillance.
A human in such a venue may see you but are unlikely to take notice of your or make notes in detail about your. They likely will NEVER know who you were. These automated systems go far beyond. They are taking notes that YOU were there and everything you did. They build it into databases which are merged with others databases and this data - YOUR DATA - is bought, sold and used to profit others often at your expense.
A human may see you and forget you as an unidentified part of a mob. The computers
Good Grief (Score:3)
It turns out some of those fans were being watched, too.
Who would go to a public stadium and think they were NOT on camera the entire time???
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Do I expect to be on a CCTV, viewed by security personnel, and possibly having the recording saved for a few weeks in case it's needed to solve a crime? Sure.
Do I expect an advertising company to install hidden cameras and use my face to track my movements, without my consent? No.
Why these silly names!? (Score:3)
by an ad tech company called VSBLTY
Really? "VSBLTY" for "Visibility"?
Was "Visibility Inc." already taken, trademarked? Was "Eyes on You Inc." also not available? Were they going for a "ticker symbol" name (which is too long anyways)?
Come to think of it, I guess I'm somewhat thankful Twitter isn't named "Twittr"
Re: (Score:3)
I'd of gone with "AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA1 Advertising", you know to get it up there in the phone book. =)
Re:Why these silly names!? (Score:5, Funny)
Really? "VSBLTY" for "Visibility"?
Was "Visibility Inc." already taken, trademarked? Was "Eyes on You Inc." also not available?
VSBLTY...all the I's are on YOU
Re: (Score:2)
VSBLTY...all the I's are on YOU
Dammit, I have no mod points left. That answer is sheer genius - thanks for making my day!
Re: (Score:2)
VSBLTY...all the I's are on YOU
I hadn't even thought of that (despite my "Eyes on You Inc." bit) - that's probably exactly what they were going for.
Didn't they buy tickets? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So, they already knew you were there.
I honestly ask this out of ignorance, but do the tickets actually have names and/or pictures on them?
I've never gone to a sportyball event to know, and it seems almost plausible, yet still surprising sport events are at airport level of wtf-ery.
Concerts, movies, the fair grounds, basically the places you can get tickets ahead of time that I'm familiar with, at best know who's credit card was used to purchase the ticket, not who has or uses it.
Re: (Score:1)
So, they already knew you were there.
I don't buy tickets to such events. I have multiple times been given them and depending on who wanted them either gave them away or sold them as I have no interest in going to them. Often people go to events with tickets that the venue wouldn't associate with them by purchase.
You do know it is possible to buy tickets to many events in person, with cash and no ID being presented don't you? The total surveillance 1984 society is not yet here though the tech industry seems to be trying to change that.
Masks and facial recognition? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, that was another story from a couple of weeks ago. A Chinese company figured out how to do that already.
protects us from terrorists (Score:1)
You know, scary domestic terrorists like the 75 year old antifa members that tip over when police officers rush them.
I think I was merely annoyed when this big data privacy invasion crap was some tech company looking to mine valuable marketing data at my expense. Now that multiple parts of the government are exposed as paranoid liars and morons, it's quite a bit more of an Orwellian problem.
cams at their offices (Score:1)
Pay Me (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
So the more you are out and about in society the more data is collected and the richer you become. Brilliant. You can clear the homeless off the streets and reclusive millionaires/billionaires don't make money on THEIR data.
Buy the data on all the congress critters and senators process it for all the "bad" stuff (based on what they are publicly against) and reveal to all the number of times a month they do all the "bad stuff" and who with. Unfortunately all they would do is collectively pass laws again
Their gender?? (Score:1)
How the hell do they identify a person's gender just from a snapshot of their face? Insensitive bigoted people!
Re: Their gender?? (Score:2)