Rekognition was being sold to government agencies and could be inaccurate - especially when trying to identify people with darker skin tones.
My conclusion form this article, from its own links, and from *cough* some of the "new content" is that although the likes of IBM, Google, Uber etc are truly useless at making AI do ANYTHING well, a few enthusiastic miscreants have actually done something rather well from a technical viewpoint (whether anybody else approves or not).
So let's ask the difficult question: In particular directed to Commentards who are not white - are non-white individuals disadvantaged or advantaged by the fact that the crappy big company AI can't tell them from rather too many other non-white individuals? Speaking as a white male, I see ZERO advantage to me that face recognition works well on my ethnicity, I'd value your views how all this works from your perspective.
Assuming that other people don't think the same way as I do, and still WANT people with darker skin tones to be as readily identifiable (and presumably "manipulable") as lighter skin tones, because somehow that's "fairer". then combining the two points above, the way forward is clear: Ignore big companies, and just engage the same people who made deepfakery work for pr0n, rather than leaving the matter to the tech-sector's pompous, self righteous and probably overwhelmingly white milennials. I suspect there's enough thought there to be thoroughly contentious and start at least one civil war, but having read it several times, I think it's all balanced and reasonable - speak out if you disagree.