Surveillance: San Francisco prohibits facial recognition by authorities | & nbsp; ZEIT ONLINE
For reasons of racial profiling and constant control, the San Francisco City Council has banned facial recognition technology. However, there are some exceptions.
San Francisco is the first city in the United States to ban the use of facial recognition technologies by government agencies. The risk that the use of such technologies could violate civil rights far outweigh the claimed advantages, the city council of the California metropolis decided. The use of facial recognition threatens to exacerbate racial injustice and "threatens our ability to live free from constant government surveillance," the decision said.
The ban is part of broader legislation designed to restrict the use of surveillance technologies. According to the decision, the city police and other city authorities may not acquire, own or use any facial recognition technology in the future. However, airports, ports or other facilities operated by the federal authorities as well as shops and private users are explicitly excluded from the ban.
City Councilor Aaron Peskin, the initiator of the bill, spoke of a particularly strong message to the nation from a technology-driven city. As one of the main tech locations, San Francisco has a responsibility to local lawmakers. "We have a great responsibility to precisely regulate an excess of technology."
Face recognition technologies are rapidly evolving technologically, but are repeatedly criticized for data protection reasons. Opponents of the technology complain about the strong intrusion of face recognition systems into privacy. There is also the risk that innocent people could be wrongly identified as criminals. The US civil rights organization ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) also warns that the technology can be used to monitor the general public indiscriminately and without specific suspicion or evidence.
According to a New York Times report, Chinese authorities are using facial recognition to monitor members of the Uyghur Muslim minority nationwide. According to this, China's immense network of surveillance cameras is programmed in such a way that facial recognition can filter out Uyghurs based on their appearance. According to experts, this is the first known example of a government using artificial intelligence for racial profiling, i.e. personal control based on its supposed origin ; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp;
The move is welcome, but the reason for aggravating racial injustices is absurd. If I am against the use of such cameras for data protection reasons, I do not want to have to hope that racial injustices will continue.
Should one then also ban electricity since it can be used for the electric chair? How the authorities (only this is about) using technology is subject to democratic control! AND: quote:
Face recognition is neither a police officer, nor a court nor a prison system - it only helps to identify real political suspects who are then checked manually to determine whether they are the person they are looking for. You can be suspected of innocence even without technology, for example if you look like a phantom image
How do you want to ban lightning? Or the current that flows through her nerves? Quite apart from the fact that the comparison lags a lot in Germany there used to be strong discussions about civil rights, for example at the census in the 80s. On the basis of this census, the Constitutional Court recognized in a judgment that there is a fundamental right to "informational self-determination". However, there is not even the core of this fundamental right if surveillance continues.