Most active commenters
  • bko(5)

←back to thread

You can't refuse to be scanned by ICE's facial recognition app, DHS document say

(www.404media.co)
574 points nh43215rgb | 23 comments | 01 Nov 25 08:58 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source | bottom
Show context
hexbin010 ◴[01 Nov 25 13:30 UTC] No.45781498[source]▶
> “ICE officials have told us that an apparent biometric match by Mobile Fortify is a ‘definitive’ determination of a person’s status and that an ICE officer may ignore evidence of American citizenship—including a birth certificate—if the app says the person is an alien,”

This is "computer says no (not a citizen)". Which is horrifying

They've just created an app to justify what they were already doing right? And the argument will be "well it's a super complex app run by a very clever company so it can't be wrong"?

replies(13): >>45781606 #>>45781662 #>>45781821 #>>45782252 #>>45782541 #>>45782817 #>>45782848 #>>45782971 #>>45783123 #>>45783772 #>>45784468 #>>45784720 #>>45786967 #
rgsahTR ◴[01 Nov 25 13:53 UTC] No.45781662[source]▶
> They've just created an app to justify what they were already doing right?

This was also one of the more advanced theories about the people selection and targeting AI apps used in Gaza. I've only heard one journalist spell it out, because many journalists believe that AI works.

But the dissenter said that they know it does not work and just use it to blame the AI for mistakes.

replies(5): >>45782107 #>>45782130 #>>45782878 #>>45783028 #>>45783384 #
bko ◴[01 Nov 25 16:18 UTC] No.45782878[source]▶
It's better that the alternative which is humans. Unless you think enforcing laws or ever having the need to establish identity should never take place
replies(11): >>45782905 #>>45782914 #>>45782959 #>>45782980 #>>45783029 #>>45783156 #>>45783385 #>>45784431 #>>45787217 #>>45788483 #>>45792841 #
1. sennalen ◴[01 Nov 25 16:29 UTC] No.45782980[source]▶
It's humans. This is like TSA's fake bomb detectors with nothing inside the plastic shell
replies(1): >>45783387 #
2. bko ◴[01 Nov 25 17:15 UTC] No.45783387[source]▶
You think the person at the TSA that gets paid 40k a year is better at facial recognition than a computer?
replies(7): >>45783450 #>>45783557 #>>45783603 #>>45783644 #>>45783650 #>>45783831 #>>45791172 #
3. ◴[01 Nov 25 17:22 UTC] No.45783450[source]▶
4. snovv_crash ◴[01 Nov 25 17:34 UTC] No.45783557[source]▶
Having worked in this space (ID verification of live-humans to ID documents), yes, I absolutely think people are better at the 1:1 person:document yes/no question than I think an AI model is at saying which of 200M people this face is. Just having a prior of a physical document with their name and likeness on it already makes up 1 factor of the N-factor authentication.
replies(1): >>45786553 #
5. Larrikin ◴[01 Nov 25 17:42 UTC] No.45783603[source]▶
Stop presenting your opinion with no evidence as obvious facts on the ground that people need to argue against with sources.
6. tchalla ◴[01 Nov 25 17:45 UTC] No.45783644[source]▶
Are you saying that a computer should be trusted without human intervention? If so, I have a computer right now that says you should be banned on the Internet.
7. novemp ◴[01 Nov 25 17:46 UTC] No.45783650[source]▶
Yes.
8. atmavatar ◴[01 Nov 25 18:03 UTC] No.45783831[source]▶
It's likely the TSA employee's five year old child is better at facial recognition than a computer, too.
replies(1): >>45783926 #
9. bko ◴[01 Nov 25 18:15 UTC] No.45783926{3}[source]▶
Please don't spread unscientific misinformation. You can say ICE bad, or you don't believe in borders, but saying computer facial recognition is inaccurate compared to humans is just factually incorrect.

https://pages.nist.gov/frvt/html/frvt11.html?utm_source=chat...

replies(2): >>45783978 #>>45783993 #
10. Kinrany ◴[01 Nov 25 18:21 UTC] No.45783978{4}[source]▶
Better-than-human facial recognition existing doesn't mean that all facial recognition technology is that good.
11. esseph ◴[01 Nov 25 18:23 UTC] No.45783993{4}[source]▶
https://abc7ny.com/post/man-falsely-jailed-nypds-facial-reco...

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/12/...

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/jan/24/met-polic...

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00146-023-01634-z

https://www.mozillafoundation.org/en/blog/facial-recognition...

https://surface.syr.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2479&con...

Yeah it's pretty fucking shit, actually.

Here's the science.

replies(1): >>45784134 #
12. verdverm ◴[01 Nov 25 18:38 UTC] No.45784134{5}[source]▶
Looks like GP is using ChatGPT (see the utm_source in their link) to find the first result that supports their viewpoint rather than doing a broad discovery and analysis
replies(2): >>45785206 #>>45786543 #
13. ◴[01 Nov 25 20:49 UTC] No.45785206{6}[source]▶
14. bko ◴[01 Nov 25 23:42 UTC] No.45786543{6}[source]▶
The horror! Someone using an LLM for basic information gathering like "is AI facial recognition accurate compared to humans?" rather than going off vibes or one off sensationalized articles.
replies(3): >>45787198 #>>45788024 #>>45788516 #
15. bko ◴[01 Nov 25 23:44 UTC] No.45786553{3}[source]▶
If you really worked in this space you would know that AI models don't scan 200M people because... why would they? Seems kind of weird.
replies(2): >>45786676 #>>45788494 #
16. snovv_crash ◴[02 Nov 25 00:02 UTC] No.45786676{4}[source]▶
The database of potential US citizens that could be matched to a face scan is where the 200M comes from.
17. verdverm ◴[02 Nov 25 01:50 UTC] No.45787198{7}[source]▶
Apparently it has not given you broad coverage of the subject, others have provide more references showing the opposite result of your claim

LLMs are sycophants, how you ask matters

18. justinclift ◴[02 Nov 25 05:26 UTC] No.45788024{7}[source]▶
> Someone using an LLM for basic information gathering ...

While doing so can be ok, you should probably do some checking via non-LLM means as well.

Otherwise you'll end up misunderstanding things that you _think_ you've learned about. :(

19. queenkjuul ◴[02 Nov 25 07:28 UTC] No.45788494{4}[source]▶
So the model is verifying faces against ... A database of zero faces? Surely there's 200M faces in there, or else how does it work?
replies(1): >>45788661 #
20. queenkjuul ◴[02 Nov 25 07:31 UTC] No.45788516{7}[source]▶
LLM is equivalent to vibes, sorry
21. ThrowMeAway1618 ◴[02 Nov 25 08:09 UTC] No.45788661{5}[source]▶
>So the model is verifying faces against ... A database of zero faces? Surely there's 200M faces in there, or else how does it work?

No. The model is, "Hey! this guy is being a pain in the ass. He even claimed that The President wasn't blessed with superintelligence and doesn't actually smell really good!

We need to get this terrorist off the streets! He sure looks a whole lot like that illegal on the FBI most wanted list, doesn't he? Off to CECOT with him!

What's that? He's a twelfth generation citizen? No way! Look, the app I used to claim this guy matches an illegal who's also a child rapist!

Your papers are all fake (if, as a citizen he's even carrying them). Onto the plane with you Senor.

That's the model. Feel free to disagree, but come back and reread this comment in 18 months. I hope you read it then and think "what a paranoid guy! Nothing like that could ever happen here!" But I'm not holding my breath. :(

replies(1): >>45789127 #
22. actionfromafar ◴[02 Nov 25 09:57 UTC] No.45789127{6}[source]▶
In 18 months the discussion will have moved on to make excuses for the conentration camps. Alligator Auschwitz and such camps must be much larger to hold everyone.
23. rpdillon ◴[02 Nov 25 15:48 UTC] No.45791172[source]▶
People are exceptionally good at facial recognition because of the Fusiform face area, which is a specialized portion of the temporal lobe optimized for it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusiform_face_area