- How to stream Browns vs. Jets on Monday Night Football Today 7:00 AM
- What are anons? Today 6:30 AM
- How to stream Eagles vs. Falcons on Sunday Night Football Today 6:00 AM
- How to stream ‘Power’ season 6, episode 4 Today 5:00 AM
- How to stream WWE’s Clash of Champions 2019 Saturday 8:00 PM
- How ‘F*ck off Scotland’ became a Scottish rallying cry amid Brexit madness Saturday 6:28 PM
- A Missouri officer resigned after his Islamophobic Facebook posts surfaced Saturday 5:08 PM
- Adding ‘Triggered’ to stock photos of white men creates Netflix comedy special thumbnails Saturday 3:10 PM
- New restaurant in New York has a seriously unfortunate name: ‘Qanoon’ Saturday 1:38 PM
- These are the 10 best ‘Star Wars’ ships Saturday 12:41 PM
- Google Maps helped solve a decades-old missing persons case Saturday 12:27 PM
- Teen who plotted deadly swatting prank over Call of Duty argument gets prison time Saturday 11:58 AM
- RIP to the real star of ‘Stranger Things’: Steve Harrington’s mullet Saturday 11:04 AM
- People are sharing their wholesome stories with #Hey19YearOldMe Saturday 9:20 AM
- Review: The Joule is a pricey, sleek, easy-to-use entry into sous vide Saturday 8:00 AM
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) just published a damning test of Amazon Rekognition, the company’s facial recognition system.
The ACLU compared photos of our lawmakers with Amazon Rekognition’s database of 25,000 publicly available mug shots. It incorrectly matched 28—primarily Black and Latino Congresspersons—with those mug shots. It seems to be another instance of AI and risk assessment algorithms being biased against non-white individuals. However, Amazon Web Services representative Nina Lindsey told the New York Times that the ACLU used Rekognition in a different way than law enforcement would typically employ the technology.
“It is worth noting that in real world scenarios, Amazon Rekognition is almost exclusively used to help narrow the field and allow humans to expeditiously review and consider options using their judgment,” Lindsey said in a statement. She also noted that the ACLU used the system’s default match setting of 80 percent. This means that it identified matches with a “confidence threshold” of 80 percent. For law enforcement agencies, Amazon recommends using a setting of 95 percent.
Amazon Rekognition can do a variety of image recognition-related tasks. It can identify whether an object is a person, as well as other aspects of a scene (whether it’s indoors or outdoors, and if it contains objects like rocks or a bicycle, for example). It can also identify aspects of a face, like whether someone is smiling, has their eyes open, and a mood such as if they’re happy. It can identify celebrities or specific people in images, and can compare and match faces based on previously known images—the case that law enforcement are most typically interested in. It can detect up to 100 faces in a crowd, in real-time.
Amazon Rekognition has already come under fire for its use by law enforcement agencies, though. Amazon employees themselves have also spoken out against practice, writing an open letter to CEO Jeff Bezos that they do not want the technology to be used by ICE. In June, Orlando’s police force ended its trial of Amazon Rekognition’s real-time facial recognition over security concerns raised by citizens, the ACLU, and other privacy advocate groups.
The ACLU hopes that its test of the technology will spur Congress to take action on law enforcement’s use of facial recognition tech. If it can so easily misidentify lawmakers as criminals, how does the average citizen fare? For people of color, it’s a particularly concerning issue.
H/T New York Times
Christina Bonnington is a tech reporter who specializes in consumer gadgets, apps, and the trends shaping the technology industry. Her work has also appeared in Gizmodo, Wired, Refinery29, Slate, Bicycling, and Outside Magazine. She is based in the San Francisco Bay Area and has a background in electrical engineering.