AI Facial Recognition and Privacy Rights Essay

Artificial Intelligence and Facial Recognition have been more prevalent in our society than ever before. With discoveries being made and technologies being developed, more information is available in the web world now more than ever. While this is a great discovery, there have been many conflicting opinions about whether or not this should be allowed. There are many great opinions on this and the questions about the ethical challenges and the legality of these programs as well as what regulation if any needs to be enacted upon these tech companies.

One of the main issues with these facial recognition programs is the violation of privacy that many feels are involved with the obtained information. There is an argument made in the article that it is not a violation of privacy but instead a protected right. “The fact that Clearview’s database is made up of public photos is the core of Abrams’s defense. “We’re saying that where information is already out, already public,” Abrams said, “the First Amendment provides enormous protection.” (NY Times pg. 17). The opposing argument is that it could encourage more privacy violations from companies and violate the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, passed in 1986 to help prevent the hacking of personal information. The ethical issue that is seen with this is that people may not know that their pictures and information are being used by the companies in this manner.

The next issue with facial recognition software is the accuracy of these programs and the human reliability of these programs as well. Kashmir Hill mentioned that people trust computers a little too much. Even though as humans, we know it can be flawed, in her words, “if it’s a computer telling us to do it, we just think it’s right.” She even mentions back when Apple Maps first started, people would drive into lakes and over cliffs, because the app said “turn right” or “turn left” and we as humans are naive and will do so.” (Hill) In the Robert Williams case as another example, the Police trusted a facial recognition system a little too much. The police had a low-quality, grainy photo of who they thought was Robert Williams from a surveillance video, and instead of investigating further they immediately took action in arresting Williams. The systems that have been used by law enforcement are different from what Clearview was developing where they had access to any public photos that are posted so it can bring the argument that the police had a smaller pool of resources to pull from when running facial recognition software to try and prove the identity of a suspect. Law enforcement programs use mug shots along with driver’s license photos and any other government identification which can impact what results are pulled. “In the police’s defense is that they never arrest somebody based on facial recognition alone, that facial recognition is only what they call an investigative lead. It doesn’t supply probable cause for arrest” (Hill). This is one ethical and legal issue that has occurred from the use of facial recognition software and the lack of regulation and protocols.

The advancement of technology is no secret and it has been a very fast-paced world of change along the way. There is quite a bit of law and regulation that can be put into play with these types of programs, but even just the minimum would make a big impact on these technologies. “As technology advanced, policymakers didn’t keep up. In the absence of robust regulations, the only thing that kept companies like Facebook and Google from going beyond those basic features we’d grown accustomed to was their restraint.” (NY Times pg 10). The main issue with not having much regulation for these programs is circling back around to the legal and ethical issues of using the software. In the podcast with Kashmir Hill, she says, “The police had no idea since they contract out to DataWorks Plus then they contract out to two other companies called N.E.C. and Rank One that supply the algorithm. It’s this whole chain of companies that are involved. And there is no standardized testing. There’s no one regulating this. There’s just nobody saying which algorithms, you know, pass the test to be used by law enforcement. It’s just up to police officers, who, for the most part, seem to be just testing it in the field to see if it works, if it’s identifying the right people.” (Hill) There should be a series of tests that each facial recognition software should have to go through periodically to make sure that the program is still accurate and should have to be updated so many times a year to help ensure accuracy. There should also be a series of procedures even after these standardized tests are run. These tech companies should also make sure that consumers are aware of who they are working with to obtain the photographs and information so they can make an educated decision about who they decide to share their personal information. This can help eliminate the feeling of violated privacy when there is a clear intention established.

In the final analysis of both of these sources, it can be seen that there is a significant amount of information that can be used in the law enforcement field to help catch criminals. While it may seem that it is an invasion of privacy, it does more good than harm when regulated and used properly. With more regulation, society could reap the benefit of facial recognition, algorithms, and artificial intelligence.