Introduction

Sharing space with the rest of humanity isn’t always sunshine and roses. You could be forgiven for having it crossed your mind that a more ordered society, where people were held to account for their inconsiderate actions, would be a good thing. Like most in society, I wouldn’t be willing to engage in a confrontation over the little things, but they get under my skin. For example, using phones at traffic lights and not noticing when other cars pull away or (most egregious) walking two abreast crossing the Salmon Weir Bridge. I sound like I’m great fun to have at parties, but negative externalities can have real social costs. We want to get home to spend time with loved ones not sit in traffic just so Jim or Joan can choose the most poignant gif to post in the group chat. Recently, we’ve seen countries take severe measures to address these behaviours. Using facial recognition software, linked to a network of surveillance cameras, Chinese citizens are being graded in a system of social credit scores. Despite my occasional frustration with members of the public, I’m concerned about this level of social control happening anywhere in the world, especially because the software which makes it possible is becoming more of a part of the social fabric.

Facial Recognition: Convenience

Despite the controversy, facial recognition (FR) is already becoming normalised. Do you travel regularly? Are you up to date with your digital device purchases? If so, facial recognition has likely been a part of your life for some time now. Sources claim that facial recognition has made the iPhone more secure, suggesting a substantial advantage over Touch ID. There is an apparent 1 in 1,0000,000 chance of unauthorised access to an iPhone X using FR compared to 1 in 50,000 with Touch ID. It’s not just the iPhone either. Last year we saw the top phone brands delivering new models with a version of the convenient software, inviting consumers to “unlock the screen (and sometimes even pay for stuff) with your face”. You can now make your purchases by simply looking at your phone. The ease of consumption is almost exhausting. If we wish to escape from all this progress and take a holiday FR awaits ready to improve your airport experience. A recentarticle detailed the impacts of tighter EU passport regulations on European airports during peak times. Airports with a high volume of traffic from outside the Schengen area are now subject to excruciatingly long wait times. Of the top ten busiest airports in Europe, Heathrow in London was most congested year-round. It’s no wonder then that they are adopting the software in order to streamline their airport experience. According to airport representatives, its adoption will be in line with GDPR as “consent management” has been considered. However, there are concerns that consumers may not be aware that they can opt-out of the scheme with only “vague signs” in place in Gatwick airport, who have already adopted the technology.

GDPR

Despite the controversy, facial recognition (FR) is already becoming normalised. Do you travel regularly? Are you up to date with your digital device purchases? If so, facial recognition has likely been a part of your life for some time now. Sources claim that facial recognition has made the iPhone more secure, suggesting a substantial advantage over Touch ID. There is an apparent 1 in 1,0000,000 chance of unauthorised access to an iPhone X using FR compared to 1 in 50,000 with Touch ID. It’s not just the iPhone either. Last year we saw the top phone brands delivering new models with a version of the convenient software, inviting consumers to “unlock the screen (and sometimes even pay for stuff) with your face”. You can now make your purchases by simply looking at your phone. The ease of consumption is almost exhausting. If we wish to escape from all this progress and take a holiday FR awaits ready to improve your airport experience. A recent article detailed the impacts of tighter EU passport regulations on European airports during peak times. Airports with a high volume of traffic from outside the Schengen area are now subject to excruciatingly long wait times. Of the top ten busiest airports in Europe, Heathrow in London was most congested year-round. It’s no wonder then that they are adopting the software in order to streamline their airport experience. According to airport representatives, its adoption will be in line with GDPR as “consent management” has been considered. However, there are concerns that consumers may not be aware that they can opt-out of the scheme with only “vague signs” in place in Gatwick airport, who have already adopted the technology.

The EU’s recent rollout of its new data protection scheme GDPR classes biometric data exceptional. It is defined as “personal data, resulting from specific technical processing relating to the physical, physiological or behavioural characteristics of a natural person, which allow or confirm the unique identification of that natural person, such as facial images or dactyloscopic data” (dactyloscopic data is a fancy way of saying fingerprints). Those who do not adhere to strict data regulations risk heavy fines. This year alone, a Swedish school has had to pay 19,000 krona for failing to obtain legally binding consent from students to take attendance using FR. The fine, which can eventually amount to one million euros, was considered lenient. This is likely because the case was isolated to a small group and GDPR’s relatively recent introduction. Because biometric data can now be used to make purchases, or even travel across borders, it must be safeguarded. The key difficulty for regulators and more importantly for the public, is the ease with which a face print can be captured compared to a fingerprint. GDPR regulations does place consent as the consideration of primary importance, which offers some hope for the future of public privacy. However, as we see from the case of airports consent management, there is a need for clarity, to all bodies, as to what this means and how it will be implemented throughout different sectors

Security for whom?

Beyond what has already been discussed, FR does have some benefits for society. One study, for example, demonstrated its use in identifying victims of natural disasters. The software scanned subjects with facial trauma prosthetics, returning a positive ID 40% of the time, and is considered significantly beneficial to responders. The New York Times documented cases in the US where FR had been used. They range from property crime to child sex abuse and homicide. The Times article stated that, although effective, police use of FR lies within an ethically grey area as there are no national guidelines that govern the practice and use of such technology. They cannot make a legal arrest from simply matching photo evidence to database photos, but can obtain leads which are then verified. Databases such as the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), mugshots or social media photos have all been used, often without the consent of those pictured. This has led to complications regarding suspects having information withheld from them, which pertains to how they were identified, which limits their ability to defend themselves. The ethical quandaries have been too much for some states, as another article in the New York Times shows. Citing the lack of transparency and consent of government agencies’ use of the technology, San Francisco made their position clear. Despite its benefits as a public safety measure, the risks far outweigh the benefits, and it will remain banned until a more stringent policy is enforced regarding its use. Matt Cagle stated of San Francisco’s decision; it “is really forward-looking and looks to prevent the unleashing of this dangerous technology against the public”. The cost of failure to adopt this attitude is seen to the East. In an article from May this year, Zac Doffman stated that new data revealed that Chinese surveillance companies were using FR to identify members of the Muslim Uighur population. This month, Time magazine revealed leaked documents which outlined barbaric protocols within internment camps where now house over one million Muslims being held against their will. China refers to this as “vocational training” “re-education” and is part of its Strike Hard Campaign Against Terrorism.

Discussion and Conclusions

I get a sinking feeling when I think that such powerful technology is becoming so familiar and widespread. So close now that it is in our own very pockets. I think of Hartzog, in his article about the pitfalls of the user agreement, and how he outlines how society and tech companies have an often-toxic relationship. He sees the failure of the user agreement as a symbol of society’s wilful ignorance in their interactions with technology, accepting potential negatives for short term convenience. I don’t think that facial recognition is any kind of panacea right now. It certainly has its uses but just look at the problems that have been caused through the rapid roll-out of technology like the smartphone. You have new addictions, mental health issues, revenge porn, and the 24-hour news cycle. It’s a mess. I gave FR its due diligence, I’ve looked at the positives and they really are amazing and potentially revolutionary. But, we’re not ready. We are in a place in human history where we have insatiable appetites for the new and the exceptional and we need to slow it down and look at what we have already created and invest in those avenues, not a technology that has so much potential for abuse. We are whipped into a security frenzy here in the West. With terrorist attacks battering our spirit over the past two decades we want some stability. We want security and we want justice. Are we comfortable with pre-emptive justice? Looking at China I am shocked and terrified. Their attempt to control the movements and the very minds of ethnic groups is an Orwellian nightmare. I’m looking at my Huawei right now and I’m not quite sure how I feel about it. Recent events in Ireland and Europe have shown that there is significant energy in the nationalist movement. “Ireland for the Irish,” they say. The idea that a campaign, under the ‘right’ conditions and using the right software could result in friends of mine being rounded up and “re-educated” will keep me from sleep tonight.

Jessica Bredican is currently an undergraduate student on the Bachelor of Sciences (Applied Social Sciences) Degree Programme at the National University of Ireland Galway