South Wales cops crow about facial recognition arrests on social media South Wales Police deployed facial recognition technology in Cardiff this weekend, making multiple arrests using the controversial kit. The force has been using an automated facial recognition (AFR) system since June last year, when it launched a pilot during the Champions League finals week. In December, the police boasted …
"Nobody much complains about human Police spotters identifying trouble makers at football matches. So is this just luddite objections?"
I have no experience of Police spotters at football matches as I've assiduously avoided football for my entire adult life. So I'm open to contradiction in this. But as I understand the comment spotters would be looking for known individuals who shouldn't be there. If that's the case then their visual identifications would be subject to more robust checks on identification. If automatic facial recognition is being applied to the lousy images from typical CCTV as the only evidence then it's far from being a Luddite objection. The initial ID, human or AI, needs to be tested and distrusted until it's tested. A violent arrest as in the Denver case linked above really shouldn't be conducted on the basis of such ID.
It's really like the blood test kits we used to give to SOCO - and used in the lab as well. The technical term was a presumptive test (it worked by detecting peroxidase activity which haemoglobin shares with several other substances such as fruit juice). The presumptive test highlights something to be followed up to decide not only is it's blood but also what species.
Facial ID seems to be at the presumptive level - useful to tell you what's worth looking at but too liable to give false positives to be used solo.
I see from the linked article that the FBI have ditched hair evidence. I never could understand why they were keen on it. It always seems hopeless. In 14 years I only ever used it once and that was to give an ID of a body where there were 3 alternatives; fortunately I could exclude 2 as couldn't be and that left one that could have been.
"As such, I don't see that it's worth spending that amount of money on"
Pennies, you mean? It's about £7k to scan 200 cameras for the 74500 people at the millennium stadium. How much for 200 officers eyes for the event?
https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/pricing/details/cognitive-services/face-api/
I'm not saying I'm in favour or against the scanning, but however you look at it this stuff is cheap!
Easier still, just criminalise having a ratboy face. You know, the sort of ugly weasel faced gits that seem to feature disproportionately on the wanted lists.
Then the police just arrest and charge the ugly, who carry the evidence with them. And when they come out of prison, they can arrest them immediately for a repeat offence. Obviously you'd need a few more prison places, particularly in places like the East Midlands where the population appear to be particular given to having offensive faces that would put them in breach of the Facial Offences Act 2018.
More worrying for the Welsh is, judging from the photo in the article, the incredibly poor quality weed they are subjected to.
That'll be Cymric Wyrdd, a Welsh assembly economic development project to create a Welsh recreational hash for export throughout the world. The business plan calls for 85,000 tonnes a year to be exported by 2023, creating 11,000 Welsh jobs, and bringing £7bn a year into the Welsh economy, two thirds of it going to the Welsh Assembly. The genetics are a closely guarded secret, but it is believed that IGER won a contract to cross breed nettles with orgeano, and experienced hash smokers have described as having overtones of dried burnt sheep shit, or composted squaddy socks.
Just before the match started my friends phone was stolen out of her hand. She didn't give it easily and ended up on the floor. This was less than 100m from Cardiff Police station ! Some of our group heard her shout but the attacker was on a bike.
Fingers crossed they catch the git, they took swabs for DNA matching and checked cctv but not heard anything back. I'm more worried that they will keep her DNA on a list forever and accidentally match her for something in the future :/
The same country that has just called for 16 year olds to be given the vote because "they can handle it" while at the same time banning 16 year olds from getting "interesting piercings" because they're not mature enough to understand the ramifications.
I can't see this AFR stuff backfiring at all....
"I can't see this AFR stuff backfiring at all...."
They can recognise pictures of your bum as well?! That is a bit intrusive!
Mine's the arseless overcoat. Also, can I have the boots designed to hinder gait analysis and the Theresa May face-mask. Thanks.
Should that not be the other way round...
Banning 16 year olds from getting "interesting piercings" because "they can handle it" .
The same country that has just called for 16 year olds to be given the vote because not mature enough to understand the ramifications.
Certainly better matches the usual mental politician meddling and seeking advantage.
A whole new concept.
Imagine, being formally Released and then immediately being re-arrested for 'Attempted Escape' because you'd lost track of how many times that you'd been "further arrested".
Constable Bobby S. Wales yells, "Hey! Where are you going? You've been Arrested and then 'Further Arrested' 17 more times, making 18 concurrent arrests in total. But you've only been formally Released from 17 of those. So you're still under 'further arrest' once. Now plus one more for Attempted Escape. That makes two as of right now. Would you like a pen and paper to help keep track?"
Keeping DNA samples and fingerprints even after a suspect is found innocent.
Perfectly sensible, given once you've had the Policing and Justice system 'steamroll' over you once, you're unlikely to be as helpful with the police anymore, twice or more, well, by that time you'd be thinking of hitting the proverbial woods with a small arsenal.
"Keeping...fingerprints..."
Recently had to provide fresh fingerprints as part of a security clearance renewal, to be used to confirm identity by comparison with my prints on file. Forms reassured me that my fresh fingerprints would be destroyed after they'd fulfilled their brief role.
Seems pointless since they have, and are keeping, my original prints on permanent file. Silly reassurance.
Not at all. It is a surveillance state. Google searches get stored and introduced into databases, DNS requests, websites visited, as many emails as possible, social media, cameras everywhere.. and now facial recognition.
If we are going to be living in such a society, well, at least use the databases to stop criminals. I do disagree with drugs being illegal, but illegal they are, so dont buy them.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
