Re:Defense of Amazon's Face Recognition Tool Undermined by O...
by dsfyu404ed on Monday February 04, 2019 @08:34AM
(#19076201)
>Thinking they don't "utilize" one means they don't understand the first thing about it.
They probably have at least one person (or several) who knows what they're doing. After discussing the situation with the department They probably just told the department to set it to whatever the minimum is because the department probably expressed a desire for the maximum possible number of matches because they want to manually pick through the list rather than trust the (new and untested) machine to spit out a short list.
As other commenters have mentioned, setting the software wide open has the side benefit of exposing the users to a lot of obvious false positives which (hopefully) prevents them from forming a habit of assuming the machine is usually or always right. Unless there's a drastic increase in transparency I'm still not a fan of the police deploying facial recognition tech.
They probably have at least one person (or several) who knows what they're doing. After discussing the situation with the department They probably just told the department to set it to whatever the minimum is because the department probably expressed a desire for the maximum possible number of matches because they want to manually pick through the list rather than trust the (new and untested) machine to spit out a short list.
As other commenters have mentioned, setting the software wide open has the side benefit of exposing the users to a lot of obvious false positives which (hopefully) prevents them from forming a habit of assuming the machine is usually or always right. Unless there's a drastic increase in transparency I'm still not a fan of the police deploying facial recognition tech.