Facial recognition technology uses software to identify individuals based on their facial features, and can be used to monitor public spaces and enhance security measures. Proponents argue that it enhances public safety by identifying and preventing potential threats, and helps in locating missing persons and criminals. Opponents argue that it infringes on privacy rights, can lead to misuse and discrimination, and raises significant ethical and civil liberties concerns.
Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Voting for candidate:
@ISIDEWITH1yr1Y
No
@9ZPKT3R10mos10MO
China is a country who use facial recognition and class their citizen with it and i can promise you you dont want the united states to look like china
While facial recognition can offer many security and authentication benefits, flawed or misused facial recognition systems can put consumers at risk. When a facial recognition system works as intended, security and user experience are improved. But when it doesn't, user experience suffers and people are put at risk.
@9ZPMLGN10mos10MO
The way to think about this question is if we give our government this ability thThey might use this against their citizens, and I believe that the government shouldn’t control people.
@9ZPNZ6910mos10MO
We have security cameras for a reason, we do not require face recognition system to identify people, instead, improve the quality of the security cameras.
@ISIDEWITH1yr1Y
Yes
@B3HT36T 6mos6MO
Innocent until proven guilty means you're allowed to refuse a warrantless search. Facial recognition means I'm being searched without a warrant.
I think it could decrease times for lawmen to catch people and this would make things go smoother with evidence that could hold up in a court case
I think it could decrease times for lawmen to catch people and this would make things go smoother with evidence that could hold up in a court case
@ISIDEWITH10mos10MO
No, it sets a dangerous precedent for government control over citizens
@B3VCF6N6mos6MO
I believe it is more dangerous to not use facial recognition when it has the ability to reduce crime rates.
@ISIDEWITH10mos10MO
Yes, but only if it’s tightly regulated and used with transparency
@9ZPLCHMWomen’s Equality10mos10MO
Even with regulation, facial recognition poses privacy risks and can be misused. It may lead to mass surveillance, discrimination, and false identifications, and could be exploited beyond its intended use.
@9ZPNZ6910mos10MO
Even with tight regulations, it is similar to a future oppressive government, and it's still an invasion of privacy of the people.
@ISIDEWITH12mos12MO
Do you think facial recognition could make your community safer, or would it just make you feel more controlled?
@9V72N9412mos12MO
It would make our lives safer but there is a lot of room for misuse and the mishandling of such personal information
@9V6FRH9Republican12mos12MO
If a criminal are walking out there, the government has the right to find the criminal.
@9V9BBS912mos12MO
It would just make me feel more controlled and trapped
@9V77CZS12mos12MO
Though it could lead to the enhancement of security in areas, it could also lead to infringement and discrimination against ethnic groups.
@ISIDEWITH10mos10MO
Yes, but only targeting criminal hotspots to protect vulnerable communities
@B2XXCS57mos7MO
If hackers jack into the government database stored all citizens facial recognition, all people are in risk.
@ISIDEWITH10mos10MO
No, this would be too expensive to implement
@9L4Z23BIndependent 1yr1Y
Yes, as long as data is stored securely and not sold to third parties, and technology is used only in public spaces where expectation of privacy is not expected
@9RVFYF31yr1Y
Never for mass surveillance, but targeted surveillance should be permitted if a warrant showing probable cause of criminal or terrorist activity is acquired
@9SXRZYYRepublican1yr1Y
Yes, but only to look for individuals whose image has been uploaded into a system to track those individuals specifically.
@9VLZGRV11mos11MO
No, absolutely not this is a clear violation of mass privacy. As there is a boundary between being recorded accidentally and without mean to harm, categorize, or surveil. And purposefully scanning hundreds of thousands of faces with the means of scanning a database to find a specific person then categorizing and memorizing those faces. In short it is a violation of public privacy that everyone should be afforded.
@ISIDEWITH12mos12MO
Who should be held responsible if facial recognition technology is used to discriminate or unfairly target individuals?
@9TNKLXX12mos12MO
It should not be used, this is some Soviet era KGB type **** .
The source /companies that are engaging in facial recognition.
@9TNMQP812mos12MO
The company or agency responsible for the discrimination
@9TNM4VB12mos12MO
The company that runs the facial recognition software and the people who allowed it to be put in place.
@ISIDEWITH12mos12MO
What might be the impact of facial recognition technology on people who are unfairly treated or targeted in society?
@9WY5C4T11mos11MO
we've already seen racial differences in AI facial recognition software that indicates that it cannot accurately determine identity when people are certain races so right now it's not advisable
@9WY5KFR11mos11MO
I’m not sure. Maybe I’ve just watched too many sci-fi movies.
@9TSZ3HDProgressive12mos12MO
It could make it easier for authorities to target or surveil certain groups of people, causing an increase to discrimination and privacy issues for those already facing social problems.
@9TT442G12mos12MO
People with similar features like identical twins. A long with people who racially profile instead of looking at the person properly.
@9RWQ4CJ1yr1Y
No, facial recognition technology has shown itself to be wildly undependable and struggles to correctly identify POC, which could lead to the arrest of innocents.
@9TBZWTK1yr1Y
There are both positives and negatives from this, but it can definitely be misused and people can use it for the wrong reasons.
@ISIDEWITH12mos12MO
How do you balance the need for safety with the risk of compromising personal freedom if such technology becomes widespread?
@9THRNVN12mos12MO
People being armed with guns to protect themselves and family from harm.
@9THQW7912mos12MO
Personal freedom should take priority over public safety
Almost all technology such as phones use facial ID as a password, if we are willingly giving that permission to our phones why can't it be used to enhance public safety?
Whatever needs to be done for more protection for peoples' lives, should be done.
@9SLDRDJ1yr1Y
Never mass surveillance, but targeted surveillance against criminals and terrorists should be permitted with a warrant showing probable cause
@9T6JGRN1yr1Y
I think the government should use facial recognition technology for its own employees, not the public.
Yes, but only if it is tightly regulated and used with transparency. (especially because they are already watching us, so why not use it for good and safety)
@DSNEPatriot 1yr1Y
Yes, but limit its use to extenuating circumstances such as stopping a terror plot or an abduction in process.
@9YLTPPK10mos10MO
No, there are too many people that look similar for such a method to be effective. Fingerprints would be more acceptable.
@9W6782411mos11MO
Not for mass surveillance, but targeted surveillance should be permitted if a warrant showing probable cause of criminal or terrorist activity is acquired or if searching for missing persons.
@ISIDEWITH12mos12MO
Can you imagine a situation where facial recognition might help you in a positive way, and if so, what would that scenario look like?
@9TSCCHNIndependent12mos12MO
the realm of public safety and security. Imagine a crowded event, such as a music festival or a sports game, where the presence of law enforcement is crucial for ensuring the safety of everyone. By utilizing facial recognition systems, authorities could quickly identify individuals who may pose a threat or who are missing.
@9TSC85GRepublican12mos12MO
Yes, it could help me in court because I could say it wasn't me.
if you used for the right reasons. knowing our government it won’t be. it should be used if needed and not at all times
@268W4CPRepublican 1yr1Y
No, this would only open the door for the government to eventually take complete control over every aspect of people's lives.
@B6X9D4K3 days3D
The thing is I agree with it. but also there also things that make me disagree with it. Like identical twins, they have very similar facial features. Also the cost, making taxes go up, and the income going up, but the more stuff will cost.
@B6X6F3G3 days3D
Yes but at the same time it will be very expensive and it would be weird knowing you are being watch 24/7.
@B6WYFGS3 days3D
I think we could use it to help ensure the safety of high-crime-rate communities, or if they are looking for somebody, but they should make sure that it can't be manipulated by the government or the people using it so they can use it for bad things.
@B6WXKRV3 days3D
While it could be useful to keep people safe it can also be used to harm U.S. citizens. I do not agree nor disagree.
@B6WVQNW3 days3D
No, technology fails sometimes and the government may misuse the technology to take control over citizens.
@B6WV3V73 days3D
Yes, but only targeting criminal hotspots to protect the citizens. It could be misused, therefore they would need to have strict regulations and it would need to be used with transperency by the government
@B6WSVVD3 days3D
No, I trust the technology, but not the people, because our government is corrupt. This provides a dangerous motive for government control, and more control would mean the possibility of a totalitarian government.
@B6WM4FF4 days4D
Yes, but only after we have the resources to inexpensively implement it, and if it is tightly regulated
@B6WK78H4 days4D
No because the impact that ai has on this world, globally and economically is unhealthy and inhumane.
@B6WBCN45 days5D
I think there is a TON of grey area here. It could be beneficial in a situation where people that have committed crimes have gone on the run and have been hard to locate or finding missing persons. It could become a danger for people if it was able to be used by some of the same criminals that it might help to locate in my first thought. Free will can be a dangerous thing.
@B6VZWD86 days6D
No, the Technology may identify someone incorrectly as someone else, possibly getting them arrested if it was assumed to be someone else with a criminal record.
@B6VXDSD6 days6D
no, because people can hack which can cause trouble but also yes it can help capture criminals and etc
@B6VTTJM6 days6D
Only if it is truly needed. Certain people should not be allowed to use it, because they will misuse it.
@B6VM3F66 days6D
I feel that no matter how it gets regulated, there will always be some level of abuse and misuse over it. It would be very valuable for preventing dangers, but could be used in unsafe ways, or lead to others feeling unsafe.
@B6VJH297 days7D
Yes and implement a social credit system like China has so that we can have a society of true equality.
@B6V2YWR1wk1W
it sets a dangerous precedent for government control so it should be a city cited law that will be tightly regulated and used with transparency.
Only if it's tightly regulated and used to target criminal hotspots and protect vulnerable communities
@B6TPX2Z1wk1W
Yes, but the use of it should be highly regulated and just in high-profile cases, where the public could be in danger.
@B6TNHZG 1wk1W
I think it can be very dangerous if miss used, bug very well is already happening with our smart phones and technology all around.
Yes, but only if tightly regulated and used with transparency, ESPECIALLY in criminal hotspots to protect vulnerable communities
@B6T28CNRepublican1wk1W
It is not possible to give a simple "yes" or "no" answer to whether the government should use facial recognition for mass surveillance. This issue involves a complex trade-off between enhancing public safety and protecting individual rights like privacy and civil liberties, with significant ethical concerns on both sides.
@B6SXB4W1wk1W
Big Brother’s Always Watching War is Peace Freedom is Slavery Ignorance is strength
@B6SSWMR1wk1W
This could be very helpful, but at the same time depending on who is looking it could have problems. like if someone was in the witness protection program. it makes me have more questions. and there are very few answers you can give for safety and other things. but could be a good thing if you are trying to find people who are evading the law and or people who are in danger.
@B6RWGJH2wks2W
Yes, but only for criminals and to monitor their whereabouts and activity. Law abiding citizens should not be monitored for other's crimes.
@B6RQG73Independent2wks2W
No, that sets a dangerous precedent. I do, however, think that targeted use of it could be effective if a warrant is required.
@B6RPQP52wks2W
Yes, law enforcement or intelligence should be permitted to apply for facial recognition surveillance warrant in a similar manner to a search warrant.
@B6RP6FZ2wks2W
Yes if it is in public spaces and is monitored on many levels so that those in charge do not misuse this surveillance, as well as having full transparency with those in surveillance footage.
@B6RN6VLIndependent2wks2W
Only in majorly crowded areas that experience crime and in private, extremely vital security areas. If implemented, this should come with Facial insurance option open to all people.
@B6RMGWM 2wks2W
Yes, but only if its tightly regulated, used with transparency but anything found cannot be used against someone in the court of law unless it is some form of outrage crime like a murder.
@B6QVTXN2wks2W
I feel like businesses in criminal hotspots should already have their own security cameras that the businesses pay for and control.
@B6QV2PV2wks2W
Yes, but not as permanent systems like a train stop or business area, more like facial recognition from afar used with a warrant from law enforcement.
@B6QRHJN2wks2W
As much as I trust the purpose and use of facial recognition technology, our privacy still needs to be respected.
@B6QPCLLRepublican2wks2W
Yes, but only in important places like Washington DC, Military bases, anything that can compromise American security
@B6QNXXZ2wks2W
Must be tightly regulated with government transparency and should primarily be used for criminal hotspots.
@B6QF4RH2wks2W
Yes but to only to identify specific suspicious peoples. They don't need to be able to identify people who don't need to be identified or aren't guilty of anything.
@B6QDRHL2wks2W
I believe it could be good but I really don't trust the humans that could misuse it, and AI shouldn't be anywhere near it.
It would allow the government to control people and it would allow false-identification, regardless of how 'good' it would be for crime rates.
So overall, no.
it depend on the case because some tech can't fail to recognize the person and can be hacked by other members.
@B6Q3Y672wks2W
People could misuse the technology, and the government could be seen as trying to control the citizens.
@B6PZ2QH2wks2W
It should be used when needed for example, when someone is missing in that area people can check to see if that missing person has recently been there. Or is there is a criminal on the loose the same procedures can occur.
@B6NV9RJ3wks3W
i feel that it would be safe to add that but i dont trust the technology or the people that could be put incharge of it as the could use it to their advantage.
@B3VGV2T 3wks3W
The question of whether governments should use facial recognition for mass surveillance to enhance public safety is complex and controversial, sparking debate on privacy, civil liberties, and the potential for misuse. While proponents highlight its potential for crime prevention and security, opponents raise concerns about its impact on individual freedoms and the risk of bias and error.
Arguments for Use:
Crime Prevention:
.
Facial recognition technology can be used to identify suspects in real-time, potentially preventing crimes and apprehending criminals more efficiently.
Enhanced… Read more
@B6NRQW33wks3W
Only if the government can figure out a way to use technology such as without hindering the privacy of the public
@B6N66SN3wks3W
Both yes and no. Though it may seem too extreme, it is somewhat dangerous for the government to have so much control over its citizens.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
