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:
Discussions from these authors are shown:
@ISIDEWITH1yr1Y
No
@9ZPKT3R11mos11MO
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.
@9ZPMLGN11mos11MO
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.
@9ZPNZ6911mos11MO
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 7mos7MO
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
@ISIDEWITH11mos11MO
No, it sets a dangerous precedent for government control over citizens
@B3VCF6N7mos7MO
I believe it is more dangerous to not use facial recognition when it has the ability to reduce crime rates.
@ISIDEWITH11mos11MO
Yes, but only if it’s tightly regulated and used with transparency
@9ZPNZ6911mos11MO
Even with tight regulations, it is similar to a future oppressive government, and it's still an invasion of privacy of the people.
@9ZPLCHMWomen’s Equality11mos11MO
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.
@ISIDEWITH1yr1Y
Do you think facial recognition could make your community safer, or would it just make you feel more controlled?
@9V72N941yr1Y
It would make our lives safer but there is a lot of room for misuse and the mishandling of such personal information
@9V6FRH9Republican1yr1Y
If a criminal are walking out there, the government has the right to find the criminal.
@9V9BBS91yr1Y
It would just make me feel more controlled and trapped
@9V77CZS1yr1Y
Though it could lead to the enhancement of security in areas, it could also lead to infringement and discrimination against ethnic groups.
@ISIDEWITH11mos11MO
Yes, but only targeting criminal hotspots to protect vulnerable communities
@B2XXCS58mos8MO
If hackers jack into the government database stored all citizens facial recognition, all people are in risk.
@ISIDEWITH11mos11MO
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.
@9VLZGRV1yr1Y
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.
@ISIDEWITH1yr1Y
Who should be held responsible if facial recognition technology is used to discriminate or unfairly target individuals?
@9TNKLXX1yr1Y
It should not be used, this is some Soviet era KGB type **** .
The source /companies that are engaging in facial recognition.
@9TNMQP81yr1Y
The company or agency responsible for the discrimination
@9TNM4VB1yr1Y
The company that runs the facial recognition software and the people who allowed it to be put in place.
@ISIDEWITH1yr1Y
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.
@9TSZ3HDProgressive1yr1Y
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.
@9TT442G1yr1Y
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.
@ISIDEWITH1yr1Y
How do you balance the need for safety with the risk of compromising personal freedom if such technology becomes widespread?
@9THRNVN1yr1Y
People being armed with guns to protect themselves and family from harm.
@9THQW791yr1Y
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.
@9YLTPPK11mos11MO
No, there are too many people that look similar for such a method to be effective. Fingerprints would be more acceptable.
@9W6782412mos12MO
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.
@ISIDEWITH1yr1Y
Can you imagine a situation where facial recognition might help you in a positive way, and if so, what would that scenario look like?
@9TSCCHNIndependent1yr1Y
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.
@9TSC85GRepublican1yr1Y
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.
@B7LYW8Y1 day1D
Only to target high level criminals and repeat offenders, but the people could misuse it so I am in the middle/ would need more information about this.
@B7LMXC41 day1D
It has to be extremely regulated on usage and not used in any other situations other than a criminal in the area.
@B7LJPYQ1 day1D
We shouldn't need such technology, we should be able to defend ourselves on an individual level, and anything below the reach of the government, not sacrifice our privacy and infomation
@B7LFL4K1 day1D
I trust the technology but the people behind it I don't trust as well as the government already has enough power over us and it feels like there is enough security measures as is.
@B7LD6P41 day1D
Only for people with existing criminal history; this would tie into they're name being in the FBI's criminal database.
@B7L364H2 days2D
No, but Artificial Intelligence is becoming more powerful. So as long as AI doesn't get cooperated into surveillance systems there shouldn't be a need for facial recognition, people can make their face look different on AI anyways.
@B7KR555Independent3 days3D
I support yes surveillance to ensure safety, but we live in a world where we cannot trust the government for that role, just too much corruption
@B7KQRXG3 days3D
I feel like this is beneficial if they are trying to catch criminals and keep people safe but at the same time if this system is implemented it can watch everybody's every move which is an invasion of privacy
@B7KQDNC3 days3D
The idea that AI is completely neutral is a myth. The data and algorithms are created by humans and are inherently influenced by human bias. Being transparent about this prevents misinterpretation and over-reliance.
@B7KKYRL4 days4D
No, as I don't have the trust in the technology and the humans that could have access to the information. Causing ourselves to be under more identity theft then ever before.
yes, but it must be highly regarded as useless and on the same level of account for if a person was to pick from a line of criminals and try to pick the right one off of memory, thus being highly insufficient and known as pointless if it was to be in the attempts of criminal judgment or impersonation
@B7KFFTS4 days4D
HELL NO the government should not have mass surveillance over our entire population because it would end up like China
It would be an expensive implementation, but it would be nice to have in more vulnerable communities
@B7K44654 days4D
Yes, if it is used with full transparency & only to track down criminals. Dat must be protected and stored correctly.
@B7JZNN4 4 days4D
No, there is no guarantee it would be effective. We see this with current FaceID on smart phones, where a twin can unlock a phone, or it does not recognize someone wearing glasses. It would be too expensive to get it to the point where it would be reliable.
@B7JZSB54 days4D
I think it would be a good idea, but the only problem is that people will get annoyed if they have to stand in line while waiting to enter Target, knowing they will have to have facial recognition
@B7JXL9G5 days5D
Yes, only because it could increase public safety by identifying criminals. However, it should be under strict surveillance, because if unsupervised, it could fall into the wrong hands and be taken advantage of. For instance, someone could literally use random people’s faces to make payments for their own purchases.
@B7JS43B5 days5D
Yes, but only if it is used properly with laws and/or regulations protecting people from misuse and discrimination.
I would be for it if it was used correctly and for the sole purpose of protecting people but I do not trust that the people.
@B7JRBJB5 days5D
I agree if it's used to track down criminals using surveillance, but it could also set a dangerous precedent for the government control over citizens.
@B7JPSB65 days5D
or we can use our blood samples for recognition for mass surveillance. with the blood sample it contains all the history of your own life. so this way no misuse rousing.
@B7JN52T5 days5D
Yes, but only looking for violent criminals that have an actual background of criminal history and in criminal hotspots to protect communities
@B7J3VTZ6 days6D
I trust the tech and believe if used should be tightly regulated and used with transparency. However, while I trust the technology, I don't trust the humans who can misuse it.
@B7J36CQ6 days6D
yes and no because it obvious because you have to know who might go hurt someone important and no becuase as a public citizen I would want my face on the governments system if Ives never committed a crime
Whether the government should use facial recognition for mass surveillance is a contentious issue, with proponents citing enhanced public safety for major crimes and security while opponents raise concerns about privacy, potential for misuse and abuse, inherent biases in the technology, and its negative impact on civil liberties and marginalized groups. Despite some public support for its use in specific high-security contexts like airports, general mass surveillance is broadly met with discomfort, as reflected in the limited regulatory framework and ongoing debate over appropriate safeguards and a national standard for its use.
@B7HYK7P6 days6D
If it is tightly regulated and used transparently. But there is a concern about some people who may misuse it.
@B7HVLZX6 days6D
No, I think that the technology would fail/make too many mistakes, and the wrong people would get punished for it.
@B7HTVZF6 days6D
This is a huge human privacy violation, privacy is already on the decline you can research someone and for as cheap as 50$ you can find almost everything about their life like social security number address job, we should not add to this societys already bad privacy invasion.
@B7HHZ446 days6D
Yes but only when our facial recognition technology become more efficient with minorities and identifying people (less racist).
@B7HC5Z27 days7D
No. All this does is turns regular citizens into vigilantes, who will fly drones with spray cans attached to nullify any attempt at surveillance by spraying the lens.
@B7H34331wk1W
As much as I love the increase in public safety I think this violates my rights and I don't want the government constantly looking at me and everything I do.
@B7GSZ671wk1W
No, I don't trust that the facial recognition is good enough for this, we should wait until it improves.
@B7GMPXH1wk1W
I think it would be a good idea for targeting criminals, but it sets a dangerous precedent for government control over citizens
@B7GHG3F1wk1W
Fingerprint are likely to be copied, people can hack or hijack a person’s identity. Also, changing fingerprint from pinky to thumb per year is a better idea.
No all the public safety is a must that we need too many instances of happened with the government and law enforcement that they would misuse it and arrest the wrong person because they in quotes fit the criteria as we seen before
@B7GB6QM1wk1W
Not a no or a yes but I would say use it in moderation and very strictly regulated and monitored with, transparency.
@B7G73W51wk1W
yes and no, yes because it can help find highly wanted criminals. No, because it gives the government too much to know who everyone is, and I don't want them to use it on people that mind their own business.
@B7G6WSV1wk1W
This seems rather unnecessary considering that we already have security cameras and such. This would just be another example of the government wasting money on fancy equipment.
@B7G3RZ91wk1W
Only to government place with important info or sensitive info only. As I don't want technology to hold such important info.
@B7G34771wk1W
Yes in center situations, like involving people's work environment and cashing checks to make sure people aren't committing fraud.
@B7FZSD21wk1W
It could be useful, but it should be heavily moderated by people, and other people can moderate the people working with the software
@B7FWJNL1wk1W
The government doesn’t need more control over us, and it would also be too expensive to implement. We are already trillions of dollars in debt.
@B7FWBMS1wk1W
Yes and no. It should ONLY be used for repeat or violent criminals. It should not recognize innocent people with no crime record as I feel like that adds pressure and violates their privacy. I am not against FLOK camera systems on roadways
The historical activity of users engaging with this question.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
