SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the false-positives-are-a-bad-thing-said-one-of-the-twins dept.
If you've watched any sort of spy thriller or action film over the last few years – think Jason Bourne or Mission: Impossible – the chances are you've seen facial recognition software in action. These movie scenes often involve an artist's sketch compared to mug shots, or sometimes even a live CCTV stream, and with the clock ticking, a match is usually found for the culprit in the nick of time.
It seems natural then to assume that what happens in the film world is similar to what happens (most of the time) in the real world. We might think that our faces are constantly being tracked and recognised as we walk past security cameras in city centres – but this is not actually the case.
Not only would such a system require millions of cameras capable of producing high-quality footage, but it would also require the integration of photo-ID databases such as mugshots from every police force, previous passport images, and driving license images for everyone in the country.
And yet even if this high level of integration was possible, a far more basic problem still exists – facial recognition systems are still not 100% accurate.
(Score: 2) by Snospar on Friday December 16 2016, @03:11PM
Totally agree with these comments and would add that when you factor in the forced 10-year photo renewal on all UK Driving Licences and Passports with very strict rules about how visible (and recognisable) the face is, I think they could successfully spot most people almost everywhere. Cameras on all public transport (for safety of course). Private cameras - with little or no security - in every business premise/shop/etc.
Here in the UK Big Brother is already watching - and trawling your internet history too - all in the name of "safety".
Huge thanks to all the Soylent volunteers without whom this community (and this post) would not be possible.