There Really Are Privacy Issues Out There; Facebook Using Facial Recognition Is Not One Of Them
from the crying-virtual-wolf dept
There's been a lot of fuss over the news that Facebook extended a feature on its photo tagging to Europe, using facial recognition to try to help people more easily tag photos of their friends. Of course, as with almost everything Facebook does, this kicked off a firestorm of protest concerning privacy issues, though I have to think that most of those complaining don't actually understand the technology in question. The privacy-extremist group EPIC, along with some other anti-tech/anti-innovation groups like the incredibly misnamed "Consumer Watchdog" asked the FTC to investigate. US Congressional Rep. Ed Markey has warned the company and also asked the FTC to get involved. And, of course, the EU announced its own investigation. Amusingly, all of the US outrage over this seems to miss out on the fact that this feature was rolled out in the US months ago.And what's all of the fuss about? The ability of your friends to more quickly identify you in a photo? Where is the privacy violation? There isn't any.
It doesn't run the facial recognition and identify everyone in all photos. It just means when you upload new photos, it suggests who might be in them for you to tag. The user still needs to officially do the tagging, which they could have done already. And, if it really bothers people, it's easy to turn the feature off. The whole thing is a clear moral panic, and as some people are noting, these sorts of things take attention away from actual privacy issues. On top of that, the technology is already in use in lots of other places that no one complained about. The whole thing just seems like a bunch of people getting angry over something they don't understand... which makes it perfect for a bit of XtraNormal video action, and Kashmir Hill delivers an excellent video highlighting the absurdity:
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: facial recognition, privacy, social networks
Companies: facebook
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
There is a danger because this is data agregation
Yeah, actually, there is a danger. By running facial recognition facebook is making data aggregation public. Individual details about your life on the internet aren't a big deal--until they are aggregated. When you aggregate many small details, you get a detailed picture, and privacy erodes.
In most cases, data agregation happens behind the scenes, at companies like Google, Facebook and Doubleclick, all of whom have detailed profiles about us--profiles that are made up out of aggregated data, when combined with other databases, like loyalty card data, credit card purchase data and so on, you have less privacy than every before. The Facebook facial recognition program may seem trivial compared to that, but it really isn't, because it is data aggregation that is made public, without permission. It is invasive. Granted, Google could do this, too, as part of its image search. Should it? Just to be competitive.
Just because something isn't the worst privacy violation doesn't mean it isn't one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: There is a danger because this is data agregation
I'm betting it's in their terms of service somewhere. Have a problem with this whole facial recognition on Facebook thing? Ditch Facebook, problem solved. To use the site and not expect these kinds of things to be added is just plain ignorant!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: There is a danger because this is data agregation
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: There is a danger because this is data agregation
:facepalm:
The data is already public.
Here's how it worked before:
1) Alice uploads photo with Bob in it to Facebook.
2) Alice takes 3 seconds to tag photo with Bob's name.
Here's how it works now:
1) Alice uploads photo with Bob in it to Facebook.
2) Facebook runs facial identification and suggest that the photo has Bob in it.
2) Alice takes 1 second to click OK to tag photo with Bob's name.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: There is a danger because this is data agregation
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: There is a danger because this is data agregation
I really doubt it was happening as often as you think. Now will surely do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
HM
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Features in that video
I can think of many privacy infringing uses of this new tech and the fact that it was deployed six months ago and didn't get a lot of attention doesn't make it OK. Note, there are also no stated limits on what they can do with it, so just because they're using it in one way now doesn't mean they won't use it in more privacy infringing ways later.
Our privacy is eroding a little bit at a time. At some point we either have to draw the line on what is acceptable or simply find other platforms that have shown themselves to be more respectful of users. To suggest that this new auto-tagging feature is really that useful is also somewhat ludicrous. It's just the lowest barrier to entry for Facebook to deploy it claiming some utility for users ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Features in that video
So are we now to freak out because of the potential of anything.
Hey google remembers what you searched for and has google voice and gtalk it could start suggesting that people with similar searches call you and contact you on chat....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Features in that video
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Features in that video
The tech isn't dangerous, it is how it is used. That applies to many techs.
This implementation only suggests people YOU ALREADY KNOW. If you can't remember who that is they won't (or shouldn't) be in your friend list.
There are certainly ways facial recognition could be used to erode privacy. If Facebook ever implements one of them I'll be right there with you storming their gates. This use of the tech however, isn't any more risk than what you already assume by having a Facebook account at all.
Our privacy is being taken away by lots of things. Heck, with Facebook you give it away willingly. The addition of this feature doesn't make Facebook any less private.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Recognition
Upset about your friends tagging you faster on Facebook? Yes, I'm sure the government would love you to be concerned about that instead.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That's why I'm uploading and tagging myself in only photos in which I'm wearing a full-body animal costume. Just to fuck with the algorithm.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
People screw up (hack, file share copyrighted materials, whatever) they get a ticket, then eventually lose their license just like driving.
Idiots don't want to be identified in Face Book...
Then don't post your pictures. Dumb asses.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
the problem is that as a company, facebook has access to this facial recognition database in aggregate. what responsibilities does facebook have not to sell that data to every buyer, whether corporate or government, in the world? a privacy policy that changes on a daily basis and is 56 pages long?
i've lost count of the companies that have the legal right to turn me into a humancentipad because of all the "agreements" i've clicked through. i would be uncomfortable with it from any company, but this makes me more nervous than most precisely because it is facebook, a company with a dismal record in privacy related issues.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Biometric
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That's a very bad assumption on the part of facebook. Remember, this isn't twitter, they likely won't challenge the US gov and will simply roll over.
And the user can't opt out. Ever. At all. If I don't put my pictures on facebook, other people can, and can tag me, and now facebook has my face in their DB.
So.. if I don't want to be in facebook`s DB (and the US govt`s in the process) then I should just never leave my home again? Thanks facebook.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Facebook has a new competitor
Perhaps the reason onlymeworld is experiencing this kind of growth is because it doesn't it's users for their real names & email addresses. Or maybe because it has custom privacy settings. Or maybe because if you were to combine facebook, twitter, and linkedln all into one your have onlymeworld. Or maybe it's because they don't track their users on the web.
I don't know about you, but I don't think Facebook is worth $100 Billion in Q1 of 2012.
ONLYMEWORLD the new facebook alternative, or perhaps the New Industry Standard?!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Facebook has a new competitor
What do you do when you built your business on a business model that was proved to fail after a few years? You add stupid features to keep your users and keep banking in the millions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Privacy made easy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Based on what I see on Facebook, most people don't appear to be very aggressive about tagging images. They sometime tag a couple of images in a set, or only tag the main subject, and don't tag all the others.
With the new system, there is potential that in a series of 20 images, you could be tagged in all 20. That increases you online exposure, and increases the time required to untag yourself from each image.
Facebook does it to try to push more social links. The result? Facebook is losing subscribers in the US now. It's hard to deny facts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Who thinks suckerberg works for the US gov? Raise hands! Wow, that's a lot.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]