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

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]▶

>>45781498 #

> 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]▶

>>45781662 #

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 #

sennalen ◴[01 Nov 25 16:29 UTC] No.45782980[source]▶

>>45782878 #

It's humans. This is like TSA's fake bomb detectors with nothing inside the plastic shell

replies(1): >>45783387 #

bko ◴[01 Nov 25 17:15 UTC] No.45783387[source]▶

>>45782980 #

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 #

atmavatar ◴[01 Nov 25 18:03 UTC] No.45783831[source]▶

>>45783387 #

It's likely the TSA employee's five year old child is better at facial recognition than a computer, too.

replies(1): >>45783926 #

bko ◴[01 Nov 25 18:15 UTC] No.45783926[source]▶

>>45783831 #

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 #

esseph ◴[01 Nov 25 18:23 UTC] No.45783993[source]▶

>>45783926 #

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 #

verdverm ◴[01 Nov 25 18:38 UTC] No.45784134[source]▶

>>45783993 #

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 #