Comments
kano OP wrote
I don't think that I or the members of any society would be safer with facial recognition. I'm not sure if you read the article/we interpreted what was written the same way, because I think the author addressed the point he feels is being missed. I don't think that the author was arguing that anyone is safer with facial recognition. I think that they did correctly point out that banning facial recognition is really only addressing a symptom rather than a cause of the problem, which is the increasing ubiquity of mass surveillance, and the 'data broker industry' that comes with that. I think the last paragraph illustrates the point.
Today, facial recognition technologies are receiving the brunt of the tech backlash, but focusing on them misses the point. We need to have a serious conversation about all the technologies of identification, correlation and discrimination, and decide how much we as a society want to be spied on by governments and corporations — and what sorts of influence we want them to have over our lives.
Of course I don't want to be spied on by corporations or by the government period. But I do think the author is right that we as a society, or in this case specifically the USA does need to change its laissez faire attitude towards these issues.
seeker021 wrote
What are we missing? Do you feel you'll be safer with facial recognition? I think we'll have a bigger problem.