San Francisco May Be the First City in the Nation to Ban Facial Recognition

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,003
There already exists some degree of pushback regarding the use of facial recognition technologies by law enforcement and other agencies in San Francisco, as demonstrated by legislation mandating board approval before such surveillance may be used. City supervisor Aaron Peskin doesn’t think current ordinance is enough, however, having proposed a new law that would place “an outright ban on facial recognition technology.” If passed, the “Stop Secret Surveillance Ordinance” would make San Francisco the first in the country to make facial recognition illegal.

Civil rights groups have raised concerns about the threat to privacy and safety posed by facial recognition, as well problems with accuracy. “We know that facial recognition technology, which has the biases of the people who developed it, disproportionately misidentifies people of color and women,” Peskin said Tuesday. “This is a fact.” BART officials came under fire over the summer when they began exploring the implementation of a surveillance system and former BART board member Nick Josefowitz expressed interest in facial recognition software that could help identify specific individuals, such as those with arrest warrants.
 
Of course they will, they're a sanctuary city & they need votes. At this point I wouldn't even consider California to be part of the United States.

With all the government corruption there, facial recognition should be the least of their worries.
 
Krenum said:
Of course they will, they're a sanctuary city & they need votes. At this point I wouldn't even consider California to be part of the United States.

With all the government corruption there, facial recognition should be the least of their worries.
Click to expand...

It's a huge state. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. I know the big stupid things get a lot of national attention, but overall it's fine - the bullshit really rarely hits you.*

* - Until you try to get a permit to build something. Then you'll be teetering on the brink of a meltdown due to the absolute and utter stupidity you have to deal with. My partner and I went through this a while ago to modify our house, and near the end I just wanted to drive a car off a cliff. No, not with me in it - the city engineers who didn't agree, one telling us one thing, the next moving the goalposts constantly.
 
I wouldn't care about facial recognition, *IF it's not used to track individuals movements once scanned, meaning scan locations are only presented when a hit is confirmed of a wanted individual, this would allow for preservation of the amendments while still gaining the advantages of the security. Once they can prove reliability.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PaulP
like this
1Nocturnal101 said:
I wouldn't care about facial recognition, *IF it's not used to track individuals movements once scanned, meaning scan locations are only presented when a hit is confirmed of a wanted individual, this would allow for preservation of the amendments while still gaining the advantages of the security. Once they can prove reliability.
Click to expand...
But you know it will not work that way. Next thing you know you are getting a j-walking ticket sent to your house.
 
dgz said:
They don't wan to use broken technology for serious matters. Whoever is running this city, good job to them.

I find it hilarious so many people on this site are constantly bashing the jewel state of their country lol

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fox_and_the_Grapes
Click to expand...
Jewel state? Are you joking? California is a cesspool. Your average Californian likes to pretend they are among those who make the state so special with their bragging about it being the 7th largest economy, but the truth is, it is that hated 1% in Silicon Valley who inflates those numbers; it's really a case of stolen valor when most Californians bleat about the state's economy. The rest of you are just middle class Joes like the rest of us, or even more likely to be dirt poor, since California has the largest population of impoverished folk.
 
Facial recognition, once it gets really accurate, would essentially kill the ability of illegals to name change and come back again and again with even a small bit of enforcement. That said, considering just how naturally our government takes things far beyond how something was meant to be used, it would end up being used, or rather abused, like stoplight and speed trap cams, or something worse like civil forfeiture.

We fought a war with England so we would not have to be England. I don't want cameras on every corner.
 
Smashing Young Man said:
Jewel state? Are you joking?
Click to expand...

Well like it or no, it makes the US a ton of money. It's GDP is over $1 trillion higher than the next biggest state. It also pays the most federal taxes by a large margin and is one of the states least dependent on federal funding (39th of 50). So economically at least, it rather is a jewel.
 
"Pervasive surveillance, widespread corruption, and government oppression are A-OK as long as the team I love is doing to the people that the politicians I worship in place of gods told me to hate."

The rubes who scream "1984!!" on these forums should read the fucking book.

Sycraft said:
Well like it or no, it makes the US a ton of money. It's GDP is over $1 trillion higher than the next biggest state. It also pays the most federal taxes by a large margin and is one of the states least dependent on federal funding (39th of 50). So economically at least, it rather is a jewel.
Click to expand...

Numbers are fake news. The politicians I worship in place of gods tell me that California is a communist dystopia where everyone eats rat poop and drinks urine!
 
Krenum said:
Of course they will, they're a sanctuary city & they need votes. At this point I wouldn't even consider California to be part of the United States.

With all the government corruption there, facial recognition should be the least of their worries.
Click to expand...

Get that fauxnews shit out of here... some people just don't like every part of their lives profiled.
 
I get it, they don't want to be labelled as racist when it picks certain people as gorillas.
 
Gorankar said:
We fought a war with England so we would not have to be England.
Click to expand...

Protecting you from becoming part of the French colonies wasn’t cheap you know. All we wanted was for you to contribute via a very small tax. :(
 
  • Like
Reactions: PD187
like this
Gorankar said:
Facial recognition, once it gets really accurate, would essentially kill the ability of illegals to name change and come back again and again with even a small bit of enforcement. That said, considering just how naturally our government takes things far beyond how something was meant to be used, it would end up being used, or rather abused, like stoplight and speed trap cams, or something worse like civil forfeiture.

We fought a war with England so we would not have to be England. I don't want cameras on every corner.
Click to expand...

Huh? We fought a war with England based on taxation without representation last time I checked. We wrote the Constitution as a means to have a common set of rules for us as a guideline to follow to avoid instances of abuses that were occuring in European monarchies and Aristocracies......... Also 100% sure England had no cameras, you either had money and provenance or you didn't you were an aristocrat or garbage. If you had money you got away with alot versus the street rat.

It's not the ForeFather's fault people are idiots and we allowed the economic system to have impacts on the Democratic construct leading to an Oligarchy, freedom is bought and paid for these days. The only difference is blood isn't a payment method anymore.
 
1Nocturnal101 said:
Huh? We fought a war with England based on taxation without representation last time I checked. We wrote the Constitution as a means to have a common set of rules for us as a guideline to follow to avoid instances of abuses that were occuring in European monarchies and Aristocracies......... Also 100% sure England had no cameras, you either had money and provenance or you didn't you were an aristocrat or garbage. If you had money you got away with alot versus the street rat.

It's not the ForeFather's fault people are idiots and we allowed the economic system to have impacts on the Democratic construct leading to an Oligarchy, freedom is bought and paid for these days. The only difference is blood isn't a payment method anymore.
Click to expand...
Did that really go that far over your head, or did you just really overthink what I said? We fought a war to not be like them, but are steadily pushing the same way they have.

zehoo said:
Protecting you from becoming part of the French colonies wasn’t cheap you know. All we wanted was for you to contribute via a very small tax. :(
Click to expand...
Independence from one, or the other, would have still likely been the outcome. The taxation to pay for European wars had become too tiresome, or did it? We may have wasted our time on that one. LOL It might have been nice to speak french. Then the people in Quebec would speak English and still pretend like they did not understand us just to be contrary, so I suppose there would be no difference there.
 
Last edited:
Krenum said:
Of course they will, they're a sanctuary city & they need votes. At this point I wouldn't even consider California to be part of the United States.

With all the government corruption there, facial recognition should be the least of their worries.
Click to expand...

the entire US Government is corrupt, From Trump himself to the local state governments.

If Politicians weren't corrupt, the uniparty wouldn't elect them.
 
PhaseNoise said:
* - Until you try to get a permit to build something. Then you'll be teetering on the brink of a meltdown due to the absolute and utter stupidity you have to deal with. My partner and I went through this a while ago to modify our house, and near the end I just wanted to drive a car off a cliff. No, not with me in it - the city engineers who didn't agree, one telling us one thing, the next moving the goalposts constantly.
Click to expand...

Just as bad in many Southern California cities.
Have family members who have been in construction for years. Some cities are easy, just basic plans & as long as you follow the codes, no problem.
Other cities are so bad they stopped accepting jobs in those cities due to all the red tape.

We decided to add a sunroom on the back of our house.
Brought my plans to the building department, and they do a quick look over before allowing them to be submitted. Of course you have to pay a few hundred dollars to submit the plans.
Plans where rejected a couple weeks later. I address all the reasons they where rejected, but they rejected them again. Said I need a structural engineer and an architect to sigh off on the plans.
When I asked why, they said because the sunroom is attached to the house.
So, I pulled out their guide for a patio cover (solid cover), and asked why I don't need a structural engineer to sigh off on a patio cover that would use the exact same lumber as the sunroom.
They wouldn't give me an answer.

My plan was to built it ourselves for just the cost of materials.
I finally gave up as hiring someone to draw up detailed plans (for what was basically a patio with 3 walls) would increase the costs to much.
Instead we just built a large patio with a solid roof. (basically the sunroom without the 3 walls, and following their chart.
Before we could finish the cover, they sent an inspector out unannounced to see if the "improvement" would raise the tax basis for the house. :mad:
Luckily, since we where replacing and existing cover that was rotted and similar in size, they didn't try to increase the taxes.
 
At times it's fun to read the comments just to see how clueless so many people are (or bigoted, but that's the same group constantly posting opinion as fact). Facial recognition or any biometrics are intrusive in nature. These are things that should be highly regulated. Although this seems silly to me there needs to be more recognition (pardon the pun) as to what data is being stored. For CLEAR they are doing iris scans now. I would like to know that type of data is secure or the practice needs to be halted... but CA so the white you what are out in force!
 
Not quite clear from the article if they are differentiating facial recognition applied to surveillance from facial recognition technology itself.
For example a facial recognition database for existing convicted criminal mugshots vs an always on camera system that's monitoring and recording all public spaces.


Also food for thought, China has gone ALL in for mass surveillance tied to a facial recognition systems in recent years, and they're hitting all the creepy privacy concerns and questionable data practices with no signs of slowing.
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/new...acial-recognition-technology-privacy-11196684
 
Krenum said:
Of course they will, they're a sanctuary city & they need votes. At this point I wouldn't even consider California to be part of the United States.

With all the government corruption there, facial recognition should be the least of their worries.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with your general premise, but I do have to ask... are we really all that advanced to be using facial recognition?

Things like fingerprints are much more well established - but I'm not aware of a finalized facial recognition being completely 100% accurate.
 
But...how are Californians going to unlock their new iPhone X and iPhone XS if there is an outright ban on all facial recognition technology?
 
After a quick partial read of the proposed statute, looks like it applies to most mass surveillance methods, not just facial. Page 5 line 20 of the statute starts the definition.

A few lines before, it defines a "personal communications device" as a cell phone not modified beyond manufacturer's capabilities. So loading an app renders a phone not qualifying?

Kinda hate to admit it, but this sounds like a good idea even if it is from San Francisco but it probably needs a bit of clean up by someone tech aware.
 
Gorankar said:
Did that really go that far over your head, or did you just really overthink what I said? We fought a war to not be like them, but are steadily pushing the same way they have.

Independence from one, or the other, would have still likely been the outcome. The taxation to pay for European wars had become too tiresome, or did it? We may have wasted our time on that one. LOL It might have been nice to speak french. Then the people in Quebec would speak English and still pretend like they did not understand us just to be contrary, so I suppose there would be no difference there.
Click to expand...

No it did not go over my head,

…... but by the same token while Imperial England was bad, they were never as bad with how you inferred them to be, In case you needed a history lesson they actually wanted George Washington to be a king not an elected president(he turned it down stating that is not what we need), so it really wasn't about not being like them, in fact the change in the form of Government was just a "fuck you" of sorts to the British government that was maintained by aristocracy with very little chance to ascend or descend social status based upon ones birth and family name rather than what you did and how well you did it in life. It wasn't that America didn't want to be like them in fact Americans wanted to match and exceed Britain in any way they could. America was founded based on a Federation in charge with a Republic of States they simply came to this conclusion while not perfect that it would avoid many of the problems that other countries governments had.

Also America wanted and Needed to get away from 1 very specific family, the Rothchild's, they were a very big reason for the overwhelming taxes the colonies endured, the better part of American history has been Americans battling the privatized banking system as we had experienced corruption, Woodrow Wilson signed the Federal Reserve(privately owned) banking stating " I believe I have damned our children, God help me" he had really no choice to pay for the debt incurred by the depression but he full well knew the implications as we tried a Privatized banking system before the was corruption and they were fired of sorts.

Also food for thought but *IF we were so keen on not being Europe than how can you explain the US falling right back into the same garbage most of our ancestors came here to get away from. A lot of the systems we use are close to traditional ones.
 
Dead Parrot said:
After a quick partial read of the proposed statute, looks like it applies to most mass surveillance methods, not just facial. Page 5 line 20 of the statute starts the definition.

A few lines before, it defines a "personal communications device" as a cell phone not modified beyond manufacturer's capabilities. So loading an app renders a phone not qualifying?

Kinda hate to admit it, but this sounds like a good idea even if it is from San Francisco but it probably needs a bit of clean up by someone tech aware.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't this cause problems with telemtrics data companies collect as much of that can be considered "Blind/Anonymous surveillance", because if it only applies to government Fed/State that wouldn't stop privatized companies from doing exactly what they are trying to prevent.
 
PhaseNoise said:
It's a huge state. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. I know the big stupid things get a lot of national attention, but overall it's fine - the bullshit really rarely hits you.*

* - Until you try to get a permit to build something. Then you'll be teetering on the brink of a meltdown due to the absolute and utter stupidity you have to deal with. My partner and I went through this a while ago to modify our house, and near the end I just wanted to drive a car off a cliff. No, not with me in it - the city engineers who didn't agree, one telling us one thing, the next moving the goalposts constantly.
Click to expand...

That was your first problem: You involved the government.

90% of the things I do to my house require permits. I have only filed one (for a fence). I didnt file a permit to rewire parts of the house, or to modify the bathroom to have dual shower heads etc. And the work I did will be better than what code says anyway...so they will never know or find out.
 
kju1 said:
That was your first problem: You involved the government.

90% of the things I do to my house require permits. I have only filed one (for a fence). I didnt file a permit to rewire parts of the house, or to modify the bathroom to have dual shower heads etc. And the work I did will be better than what code says anyway...so they will never know or find out.
Click to expand...

The example I cited as actually adding two bedrooms - so there's little chance of sweeping that one under the rug! :)

Missing paper trails can come up when you sell, just watch out there.
 
PhaseNoise said:
The example I cited as actually adding two bedrooms - so there's little chance of sweeping that one under the rug! :)

Missing paper trails can come up when you sell, just watch out there.
Click to expand...

Bedrooms are harder to hide vs what I do which there is generally no easy way for them to tell.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top