Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
AI Privacy Crime Government Software United States

Clearview AI CEO Says 'Over 2,400 Police Agencies' Are Using Its Facial Recognition Software (theverge.com) 14

More than 2,400 police agencies have entered contracts with Clearview AI, a controversial facial recognition firm, according to comments made by Clearview AI CEO Hoan Ton-That in an interview with Jason Calacanis on YouTube. The Verge reports: The hour-long interview references an investigation by The New York Times published in January, which detailed how Clearview AI scraped data from sites including Facebook, YouTube, and Venmo to build its database. The scale of that database and the methods used to construct it were already controversial before the summer of protests against police violence. "It's an honor to be at the center of the debate now and talk about privacy," Ton-That says in the interview, going on to call the Times investigation "actually extremely fair." "Since then, there's been a lot of controversy, but fundamentally, this is such a great tool for society," Ton-That says.

Ton-That also gave a few more details on how the business runs. Clearview is paid depending on how many licenses a client adds, among other factors, but Ton-That describes the licenses as "pretty inexpensive, compared to what's come previously" in his interview. Ton-That ballparks Clearview's fees as $2,000 a year for each officer with access. According to Ton-That, Clearview AI is primarily used by detectives.
You can watch the full interview here.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Clearview AI CEO Says 'Over 2,400 Police Agencies' Are Using Its Facial Recognition Software

Comments Filter:
  • All the more reason to wear a mask.

  • Even on Slashdot, nobody cares about mass private-sector surveillance any more. That's pretty messed up. I wouldn't have guessed that Slashdot, of all places, would have gone pro-surveillance a couple of decades ago.
    • Even on Slashdot, nobody cares about mass private-sector surveillance any more. That's pretty messed up. I wouldn't have guessed that Slashdot, of all places, would have gone pro-surveillance a couple of decades ago.

      That's because the cognitive dissonance affecting those who want to silence speech they do not agree with is indicative of their general low cognitive ability.

      When it's time to attack anyone believing that all lives matter, then we need to remove anonymity so we can identify who to attack. When it's time to loot, then we need anonymity to protect the looters.

      Can't have it both ways people - when you start giving up freedoms because you support #cancelculture, you are also giving up freedoms you enjoy. When

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      I care but I'm more interested in solutions than stories that tell me what I already know.

      I thought we would never see masks become mainstream in the West but fortunately I was wrong.

    • It's not that nobody cares. It's that this story doesn't really bring anything new to the table. Do we really need to have the billionth conversation about how mass surveillance is affecting our society? When even the trolls and bots can't be bothered to comment on a story because it's so redundant, you know you're flogging a dead horse.

    • Even on Slashdot, nobody cares about mass private-sector surveillance any more. That's pretty messed up. I wouldn't have guessed that Slashdot, of all places, would have gone pro-surveillance a couple of decades ago.

      Say what? Can you provide examples? I see very little support for that shit here, and lots of opposition to it. What am I missing? Because if you are right, then that is indeed disappointing.

    • I shall repeat myself, then:

      A single person seeing a license plate is a witness.
      Following a person around and recording their movements is stalking.
      Tracking everyone's movements all the time is a surveillance state.

      Scale matters. Ban organized surveillance, now.

    • Especially given the latest civil unrest, I fully support cameras on *public* streets. They help solve crimes daily.
  • Nuff said! Sad but true...
    • That's spelled "Sieg".

      Also, not exactly sure what you mean, as nazism is mainly a racism issue and has nothing in particular to do with privacy invasion. But what do I know...

The unfacts, did we have them, are too imprecisely few to warrant our certitude.

Working...