https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/briannasacks/lapd-banned-commercial-facial-recognition-clearview
Facial Recognition software such as Clearview AI have created a lot of controversy over the proper regulations and usage for the program. Clearview AI uses facial recognition technology to gather images off of social media platforms, and saves them in their database, even after the picture is deleted online. Some say this is a breach of privacy, but Clearview AI claims that this technology is only meant to be used to help law enforcement solve crime such as shoplifting or identity theft.
However, the LAPD (Los Angeles Police Department) has decided to temporarily prohibit the use of Clearview AI, after the program was used by officials who were not authorized access to it. It was reported in March that over 2,200 "law enforcement departments, government agencies, and private companies across 27 countries" had used Clearview AI, many of which did not have professional agreements with Clearview AI, and were able to experiment with the technology as a "free trial." Clearview AI was also found to tell officers to "run wild" with the technology and test it out on friends and family. They granted access to "political allies, Republican lawmakers, and entities in countries with questionable human rights records." The officers who use Clearview AI refuse to say what they use the software for, and whether or not they have actually made any arrests through using it, which is what Clearview claims it was intended for. The LAPD does use another facial recognition program called LACRIS, but LACRIS only takes photos such as mugshots and booking photos, not pictures off social media.
Personally, I find it somewhat scary that Clearview can access so many pictures online. It's not limited to what I post, but what others post too. I agree with most people who call it "creepy," although I don't think it's a breach of security since these pictures are on the internet already. Though I can't use it, it's kind of interesting to think that on their database there are pictures of me that I don't even know are on the internet, such as a stranger catching my face in their YouTube video. I think this technology is very advanced and has a lot of potential, but it can also be easily abused and maybe hijacked by people who are not allowed access to it.
Do you think Clearview AI is doing more harm than good? What else could Clearview be used for?
Who do you think should be able to use Clearview AI? What rules would there be to ensure security?
I think it's a little hard to definitively say whether or not Clearview AI is doing more harm than good, because while this article highlights the many negatives that come with the technology, I don't know how many arrests and high-profile cases have been solved with it. I think that yes, Clearview AI has extreme potential for being a beneficial asset to solving crimes, but right now, it seems like it's a little too easy for unauthorized individuals to get their hands on it, which calls into question Clearview AI's integrity or security, both of which are EXTREMELY important when dealing with such a powerful system.
ReplyDeleteI think that petty crimes and even some larger crimes shouldn't have access to Clearview AI because when dealing with so much information, access should try and be as limited as possible, to ensure as much security as possible. I think a really big aspect of this argument of who gets to use it and who doesn't is largely based on the balance of security vs freedom - we want to keep our country safe from criminals, which is possible with access to the system, but we also want to maintain our privacy, which means limiting the individuals allowed to access the tech. Overall, I think that Clearview should either get their act together and not allow the wrong individuals to gain access (of course easier said than done) or the government should step in to enforce stricter policies.
I agree that security should be better enforced and especially for such a powerful software. While it was partially designed to help small crimes, I think that it isn't worth running the risk of being hacked or used by the wrong people to solve such minor crimes that police can probably solve without it. I think it would be a very useful tool in the future when the developers are able to make it more secure and limited to the people who must use it.
DeleteI agree with Lauren's point that the article seems somewhat biased against this technology, so it's hard to say whether there's more good than bad. Since the internet is already so permanent, I'm not sure how much more clearview AI can breach people's privacy, but it still seems a bit concerning. Because it can be considered an invasion of privacy however, I think that there need to be strict rules on who can use this technology. If it's being used to solve crimes, there isn't any reason for anyone who isn't an officer or detective of some sort to have access to it. Although I don't know how helpful it is in solving crimes, I think that it should only be used to solve difficult cases or to provide evidence for a crime.
ReplyDeleteI'm of the libertarian opinion that solving crime should never intrude on the liberty and privacy of the innocent. It's what our whole justice system is built on - presumption of innocence, our Constitutional negative rights, and so on. Legislation like the PATRIOT act has become more commonplace and acceptable in the courts of public opinion, which worries me. It's not about whether Clearview AI would be effective, it's about how much surveillance and power the police would have.
ReplyDeleteThe question concerning security is one that I cannot do justice in an annoyingly narrow comment blurb, as the balance between freedom and security is a theme that goes on through all of American history. I will simply say it depends on your values, and I lean towards freedom and individuality as opposed to security and stability. In my perfect world, Clearview AI would be impermissible for usage.
Your viewpoint is really interesting and I do agree that it is based on our values. I understand where you're coming from as crimes are already able to be solved without this technology. You bring up a good point about how our system is built on the "presumption of innocence" and I agree that it would give the police a lot more power. Especially with the protests and controversy over the police system at the moment, it may not be a good idea to hand over that power quite yet, if ever.
DeleteThe potential of Clearview AI is very scary in my opinion. After reading the article, I was confused as to who owns Clearview AI and if it's a privately owned company or if it's government owned. I think that softwares like these who have access to many databases must be secure to ensure that there aren't possible hackers that are able to access the system. Like Anthony stated above, I definitely agree in thinking that the privacy of innocent people shouldn't be violated to solve a crime. There should be rules and regulations for Clearview AI, only allowing certain people to access it as well as keeping it very secure. From a social media and images on the internet stand point, I think that the public should be more educated on the subject. It is really important to teach digital safety in the sense that when you post something online and "delete" it, it's still there.
ReplyDeleteI do find Clearview AI pretty alarming, as there are so many ways the government and even the public in general can find us just my face recognition. I think Clearview AI does have some positive uses such as if a top crime needs to be solved, or an important official needs to be found, then in this case, it would be useful. My biggest concern, similar to others above, is people who will abuse the system. These people include hackers, and owners of the company. I believe that Clearview AI must have strict restrictions and a tight security base, in order to protect the public's safety. Clearview AI should also be careful when providing information for detectives and police officers, as they are not all trustworthy.
ReplyDeleteI think that the Clearview AI is doing more harm than good, as the numerous risks outweigh the benefits. The biggest concern that needs to be addressed is the invasion of privacy, as people are unknowingly being put into databases, where their information can later be accessed in the future. In addition, another growing alarm for any Artificial Intelligence system is its gender and racial bias. The racial bias in facial analysis and recognition technology is high, as the error rate of identifying darker-skinned individuals is much greater than the risk of incorrectly identifying lighter-skinned people. I believe that until Clearview AI has been properly cleared of not adding to racial bias, and protected against potential abusers, it should not be used in any police department. In the future, as technology continues to grow and is devoid of the above-mentioned risks then Artificial Intelligence can be a vital tool in security, but until then it is better to not use it and face the potential risks.
ReplyDeleteAs facial recognition software advances, more rules and regulations are going to have to be put on them. The fact that clearview has lent it's tech to countries with not so great human rights records, and "political allies" is a bright enough red flag for me to think this company should be put on trial. Ultimitely this technology is vulnerable to corruption at the highest level. I really only trust the Government with tech, specifically only agencies such as the FBI and CIA, however I think that for tech like this the people are the ones who need to regulate the governments use of it. If this tech is left in the hands of an entity whose authority cannot be questioned, it's power will be abused. For example, China is using facial recognition software to ensure "the safety and wellbeing of all it's Citizens." I personally don't want to live in 1984
ReplyDeleteFacial recognition with Clearview AI does sound like a scary concept when people first hear about it, but facial recognition does already exist. People use it when they unlock their phones by holding it up to their face, and some might prefer to use fingerprint information instead. It isn't necessarily a foreign concept, and isn't a harmful thing to begin with, but I think people start to get uncomfortable with the idea once they realize that the information could be leaked to anyone in the world. Currently, I don't think there is a big use for Clearview AI, especially if the LAPD is willing to let go of the software, and consequently is doing more harm then good. The security surrounding the software should definitely be increased, if security breaches are becoming a bigger issue since the software could easily be used to stalk and target people who have done nothing wrong. People in fields of work such as the police or higher levels of law enforcement should be the only ones with access, but even then, they should go through tests and screening before being present with access. Unfortunately, while I believe the software by itself isn't harmful to begin with, people will always use it for bad decisions and corruption will affect who will gain access, so I believe its best for the software to be discarded until it can be improved.
ReplyDelete