On May 14, 2019, the San Francisco empire became the major city in the United States to banned the use of face recognition technology (paywall) by government and law enforcement agencies. This prohibition is part of an anti-surveillance oversight team. Until May 14, it is set up for about a month.
Local officials and civil supporters seem to be afraid of recognizing face-to-face technology technology to develop throughout San Francisco, while supporter software claims that the ban could limit technology advances. In this article, I will examine the prevailing sanctions in San Francisco, looking for concern about the technology of introductory technology, and explaining what a defamation is perhaps not a good move.
How Technology Works
Law enforcement agencies have been using facial recognition technology for some time now. People use it when collecting evidence and finding lost people. Facial recognition technology can enable people to record video recording more effectively. The software can use a study inn to kill the faces of video recordings with images from database images, such as images of license drivers or shot shots, with high accuracy rates.
Problems With Facial Recognition Problem
The researchers and intellectual property (AI) have a major understanding of the passive introduction to the software and are very concerned about the motives and tendencies in the face of system identification. According to The New York Times (paywall), research indicates that identification technology is not appropriate when identifying the color of women and men.
This is possible because the data used to make technology up to this level is male and white. Companies like IBM seek to increase the richness of the face used in face recognition technology, although this initiative can be long before people consider it fair.
As CEO, an identity verification company using face recognition technology in its product offering, I still support technology despite problems mentioned above.
I believe technology has improved dramatically in the last few years and can be used when adding more metric identity identities. Additionally, if the company clearly explains its face recognition technology and its purpose, I believe this is an ethical and responsible way of using technology.
What San Francisco Banned Recognition Technology is Banned
The San Francisco Supervisory Board is seeking face recognition as a software because they believe it is harmful to San Francisco citizens and citizens. Harun Peskin, a city councilor supporting the bill, said that since San Francisco is the world’s chief technology in the world, they have a responsibility to control many technologies.
Finally, Peskin stated that the ban was intended to “safeguard the security and responsibility” of monitoring technology. Some people told the use of face-recognition technology that the government could misuse it and eventually use it as a form of surveillance by governments like in China (paywall).
What the Press Thinker Thinks
Supporting software supporters believe that technology can not be banned bluntly because it provides some benefits. According to The New York Times (paywall), Ed Davis, a former police officer in Boston, said, “it is a banned article.” So, technology is fast and growing, there is a new usage for them all the time. Davis notes that software “can be the answer to many of the issues we have to ensure our community.”
I agree with Davis and think facial recognition technology can be very useful. Joel Engardio, vice president of Stop Crime SF, also agrees with Davis. He suggested that a technology moratorium on releasing the explosion. The reason is that the latest technology can help in the future.
I believe local governments have the obligation to set standards for new technology monitoring and will come and should be