Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
posted by chromas on Wednesday May 15 2019, @06:50AM   Printer-friendly
from the uncover-camera-for-verification-before-commenting-citizen dept.

San Francisco is the first major United States city to restrict the use of facial recognition technology by government and law enforcement.

San Francisco has become the first major city in America, if not the world, to effectively ban facial recognition technology and other forms of state surveillance.

In an 8-1 vote on Tuesday, the city's Board of Supervisors passed a new ordinance that requires all local government departments – including the police – to follow a series of new policies and get explicit permission from the Board before introducing any new technology that stores information on individuals.

The ordinance also will require all departments to provide a report listing any and all technologies and software in use to "collect, retain, process or share" a person’s data "audio, electronic, visual, location, thermal, biometric, olfactory or similar" within 60 days.

It provides an extensive example list of the sort of technologies included: cell site simulators, license plate readers, closed-circuit television cameras, gunshot detection hardware, body cameras, DNA capture technology, biometric software and so on.

The ordinance makes it plain what the intent and concern is behind the new law by referring to all such efforts as "surveillance technology." After it has reviewed all the reports, the Board will decide which technologies are appropriate and change the ordinance in response.

Going forward any city department will have to go through an extensive multi-step impact and public review process culminating in obtaining final approval from the Board.

The tech-industry-backed Information Technology and Innovation Foundation opposes the ban, while the American Civil Liberties Union supports it.

San Francisco's civil liberties first approach stands in contrast to that taken in other cities such as London which have instead aggressively rolled out such technologies.


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by black6host on Wednesday May 15 2019, @07:33AM (9 children)

    by black6host (3827) on Wednesday May 15 2019, @07:33AM (#843724) Journal

    The ordinance makes it plain what the intent and concern is behind the new law by referring to all such efforts as "surveillance technology." After it has reviewed all the reports, the Board will decide which technologies are appropriate and change the ordinance in response.

    I hope they change the ordinance so as to give a list of what's allowed, rather than what is not. That would eliminate (to some extent) the threat of as yet undisclosed, or not yet invented, technology/methods being considered legal without further approval. Doesn't mean such tech wouldn't be used...

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 15 2019, @10:13AM (8 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 15 2019, @10:13AM (#843753)

      The whole thing is bullshit. They didn't ban facial recognition but created a board, which is not under control of the voters, to make decisions on what's allowed or not. In other words, the board can simply agree with whatever law enforcement suggests and nothing has changed except another middleman taking a cut. And now that they have nicely documented all the services they're using, it becomes so much easier to link it all together.

      • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 15 2019, @10:34AM (4 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 15 2019, @10:34AM (#843760)

        It didn't create a new board, it gives the existing Board of Supervisors authority over surveillance tech. And the Board of Supervisors *is* an elected body.

      • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 15 2019, @02:10PM (2 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 15 2019, @02:10PM (#843823)

        They didn't ban facial recognition but created a board, which is not under control of the voters, to make decisions on what's allowed or not.

        Except they are elected. In fact, the Board of Supervisors [sfbos.org] in San Francisco is equivalent to the City Council in many municipalities.

        Why are you lying, or if not lying, talking out of your ass?

        What is your agenda that you ignore the facts and spout off a bunch of bullshit?

        • (Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 15 2019, @04:40PM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 15 2019, @04:40PM (#843881)

          They didn't ban facial recognition but created a board, which is not under control of the voters, to make decisions on what's allowed or not.

          Except they are elected. In fact, the Board of Supervisors [sfbos.org] in San Francisco is equivalent to the City Council in many municipalities.

          Why are you lying, or if not lying, talking out of your ass?

          What is your agenda that you ignore the facts and spout off a bunch of bullshit?

          How is that a troll? I can see flamebait, with the "talking out of your ass" bit, but troll? Not so much.

          OP provided information (with relevant links even!) If I and my brethren had mod points, I could mod this up as informative. More's the pity

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 16 2019, @12:28AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 16 2019, @12:28AM (#844039)

            Except they are elected. In fact, the Board of Supervisors [sfbos.org] in San Francisco is equivalent to the City Council in many municipalities.

            Why are you lying, or if not lying, talking out of your ass?

            What is your agenda that you ignore the facts and spout off a bunch of bullshit?

            Y'know it is a real human when it can't even tell that the word it is offended by wasn't even there.

            Better luck next time, maybe less moonshine?

  • (Score: 2) by krishnoid on Wednesday May 15 2019, @07:41AM (1 child)

    by krishnoid (1156) on Wednesday May 15 2019, @07:41AM (#843725)

    The ordinance also will require all departments to provide a report listing any and all technologies and software in use to "collect, retain, process or share" a person’s data "audio, electronic, visual, location, thermal, biometric, olfactory or similar" within 60 days.

    Eventually you can read it straight from the data. Engineer ... hipster ... homeless ... etc.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 15 2019, @07:43AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 15 2019, @07:43AM (#843727)

      Homeless... homeless... homeless... Google hipster... homeless...

  • (Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 15 2019, @02:24PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 15 2019, @02:24PM (#843828)

    Those 'murikkka hating socialists in San Stalingrad want to take every bit of power from free people and concentrate it in the hands of a bunch of pinko, freedom-hating apparatchiks who hate our way of life and seek to destroy our great nation from within!

    That's why they're allowing the police state to spy on everyone. Part of the "law" passed by these un-elected, authoritartian scumbags requires that all residents put surveillance cameras and microphones in every room of your house, especially your bedrooms and showers, as well as state-owned door locks which require state IDs to access so you can be tracked anywhere in the city.

    Except that's not what's happening at all. Apparently, those elected "authoritarians" in San Francisco care more about privacy than anywhere else in the country. But that doesn't fit the bullshit narrative about "socialism" and the "deep state" and "Democrats trying to destroy our republic."

    As such, any more discussion about this must be filled with trolls blathering on about piles of shit on the sidewalks and homeless stacked three-deep on every street.

    Gotta maintain the narrative at all costs, and damn the facts, they just serve to confuse things, right?

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 15 2019, @03:14PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 15 2019, @03:14PM (#843853)

      Good points! Their new mayor is pretty kickass, local woman who actually cares about her city.

(1)