,
26 tweets,
31 min read
Read on Twitter
ICO opens investigation into use of facial recognition in King's Cross theguardian.com/technology/201…
“Scanning people’s faces as they lawfully go about their daily lives in order to identify them is a potential threat to privacy that should concern us all,” Denham (@iconews) said. “That is especially the case if it is done without people’s knowledge or understanding.”
@ICOnews "Last month the House of Commons science and technology committee suggested authorities cease trials of such technology until a legal framework was established."
"In a report on the government’s approach to biometrics and forensics, the MPs referred to automatic facial recognition testing carried out by the Metropolitan police and South Wales police."
"MPs noted that an evaluation of both trials by the Biometrics and Forensics Ethics Group raised questions about accuracy and bias. Concerns were also raised that police custody images of individuals not convicted of any crime were not being deleted."
The problem with this? It's not new: we have known that the police have been retaining the images of innocent people since 2012! So: great that MPs are still expressing 'concerns', but what are they doing to FIX IT? washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/…
"The police can use facial-recognition on us even without our knowledge. There are no laws governing what they can do with this data, or how long they can keep it. If we are released without charge, or if we are acquitted, they can keep our facial data indefinitely."
"Police databases in Britain contain the facial data of innocent people alongside mugshots of suspected and convicted criminals. A High Court ruled in 2012 that they must not do this, but the Home Office (which controls the police) ignored this until 2017..."
"...when it devised a workaround: If we think our face is wrongfully in a police database, we can request to have it deleted. But most of us don’t know we have this right, there is little evidence that citizens are taking advantage of it, and the police can refuse our request."
"This means that when the police scan our faces, they may find us in their database even if we’ve done nothing wrong. This requires us to prove our innocence, which violates one of the core tenets of a liberal democracy: that we are innocent until proven guilty."
"Nor does facial-recognition technology identify us all with equal accuracy: it performs worse on darker-skinned people, women and children — well more than half the population."
"That’s why Axon, the largest provider of police body cameras in the United States, decided not to use facial recognition, citing ethical concerns."
"Yet even if facial-recognition technology someday becomes accurate to a high degree of confidence (it will never be 100 percent), this only solves the technical problem. The social problem remains."
"Facial-recognition technology threatens the right to protest and the right to free speech, core freedoms in a liberal democracy. If people fear their faces will end up in a police database, they may be reluctant to exercise their rights to protest and speak their views."
"The 3 UK data regulators (@surcamcom, the Biometrics Commissioner and @ICOnews ) have warned that the government’s biometrics strategy is “not fit for purpose and needs to be done again."
@surcamcom @ICOnews "The House of Commons Science and Technology Committee (@CommonsSTC) recently called for a moratorium on the use of facial-recognition technology."
@surcamcom @ICOnews @CommonsSTC "All are recognizing not just of the inaccuracy of facial-recognition technology, but also the risks it poses to our privacy and civil liberties."
@surcamcom @ICOnews @CommonsSTC "A technology that makes it possible to identify people anywhere, in real time, without their knowledge, is a tyrant’s dream come true, opening up new nightmares of persecution based on our ethnicity, religion, gender, sexuality, immigration status or political beliefs."
@surcamcom @ICOnews @CommonsSTC "Liberal democracies have always had to balance freedom and security. Anything that threatens that balance, such as facial recognition technology, is not a matter for the police to decide. It should be decided by Parliament, which represents the people."
@surcamcom @ICOnews @CommonsSTC I published on the risks of facial recognition technology to liberal democracies, and specifically the UK, yesterday in @washingtonpost @DemocracyPost washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/…
@surcamcom @ICOnews @CommonsSTC @washingtonpost @DemocracyPost And I published on exactly the same risk A YEAR AGO in the @FT -- in which time parliament and the @ukhomeoffice have done precisely NOTHING to protect our biometrics: ft.com/content/b4d47e…
@surcamcom @ICOnews @CommonsSTC @washingtonpost @DemocracyPost @FT @ukhomeoffice Also a year ago @Jatusmaximus and I interviewed the UK Biometrics Commissioner Paul Wiles, @normanlamb, @silkiecarlo of @bbw1984, and the @metpoliceuk about the lack of legal protections our for biometrics in the UK for @BBCTechTent (listen here: bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p0…)
@surcamcom @ICOnews @CommonsSTC @washingtonpost @DemocracyPost @FT @ukhomeoffice @Jatusmaximus @normanlamb @silkiecarlo @bbw1984 @metpoliceuk @BBCTechTent Here's an entire YEAR'S worth of research outputs to try to warn the public about the lack of legal protections we have for our biometrics here in the UK: harebrain.co/biometrics
@surcamcom @ICOnews @CommonsSTC @washingtonpost @DemocracyPost @FT @ukhomeoffice @Jatusmaximus @normanlamb @silkiecarlo @bbw1984 @metpoliceuk @BBCTechTent @bbw1984 @libertyhq @madhumita29 @rowlsmanthorpe @halhod @renatesamson @dansabbagh @zsk @LeoKelion and many, many have all done so much to highlight the risks concerning our #biometrics -- meanwhile the government does nothing, parliament does nothing. Please write to your MP
@surcamcom @ICOnews @CommonsSTC @washingtonpost @DemocracyPost @FT @ukhomeoffice @Jatusmaximus @normanlamb @silkiecarlo @bbw1984 @metpoliceuk @BBCTechTent @libertyhq @madhumita29 @rowlsmanthorpe @halhod @renatesamson @dansabbagh @zsk @LeoKelion What has happened in King's Cross, London endangers us and was preventable -- parliament must introduce legislation to protect our biometric data @ukhomeoffice @BorisJohnson @CommonsSTC @joswinson @normanlamb @darrenpjones theguardian.com/technology/201…
@surcamcom @ICOnews @CommonsSTC @washingtonpost @DemocracyPost @FT @ukhomeoffice @Jatusmaximus @normanlamb @silkiecarlo @bbw1984 @metpoliceuk @BBCTechTent @libertyhq @madhumita29 @rowlsmanthorpe @halhod @renatesamson @dansabbagh @zsk @LeoKelion @BorisJohnson @joswinson @darrenpjones I gave a talk in King's Cross London in June at #CogX19 warning of these dangers and calling for a moratorium on facial recognition technology in the UK, only to learn we were ALREADY BEING SCANNED AND OUR DATA STORED:
