Thread by @schock

I'm reading the Facial Recognition and Biometric Technology Moratorium Act that was just introduced into the Senate. This is a quick read, and does not represent the views of any organization.

Please @ me if you have a different take. Grab ur copy here: markey.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/…

On quick read: good. I'm looking for 5 things. 1. Are definitions of facial recognition and biometrics well crafted? 2. does it stop gov from using private vendors? 3. are the exceptions appropriate? 4. does it help people redress harms? & 5. what about state and local govs?

1. Definitions seem broad enough to include face identification, & other forms of analysis that are bad but not technically 'recognition,' like emotion classification; also broad enough to include other biometrics including gait recognition, or cardiac signature via laser;

2. It stops any federal official from using these tools, as well as from contracting private vendors, and crucially, it stops them from using data obtained via these tools;

3. exceptions seem very clearly defined (NIST is allowed to use facial recognition and biometrics in order to test or research them, for example);

4. The bill enables litigation by people who have been targeted by federal officials using biometric systems;

5. It has a mechanism to pressure state and local govs (they will receive no federal Byrne funds unless they comply; Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program funds are the top mechanism for federal funding to state and local police).

Please do @ me if you are following this closely and have another take, my DMs are also open.

Also ICYMI: onezero.medium.com/we-must-fight-…

Also ICYMI, this is why we urgently need to reign in this terrible technology:

nytimes.com/2020/06/24/tec…

To clarify re the JAG funds: those are not good and the more we reduce them, the more we are able to #DefundThePolice. But they currently exist and until we end them, this Bill's mechanism can only REDUCE access to them, so I think it is still consistent with abolition.

In other words, this bill doesn't create any new funds for police, and it will reduce many states and municipalities ability to access already existing funds unless they stop using FRTs and biometrics.

Another clarification: this is not a Ban. It's a moratorium, a placeholder designed to stop federal use with the idea that later there will be another bill that would regulate use. See @stoplapdspying take, here

https://twitter.com/stoplapdspying/status/1276262958348156928?s=19

Fight for the future @fightfortheftr take is here, they are calling on everyone to mobilize to try and get this passed!

https://twitter.com/fightfortheftr/status/1276206585136721920?s=19

In conclusion, I support this bill and think we need to fight to get it passed without watering down. Thank you for coming to my TED talk.