Become a citizen of Amazon today!
Or someone you have a restraining order against.
Strangely, for all the data collected from the keyboard next to the door, the results are the same as for a simple colormetric scale.
And then the bots came for gladys’ job…
Kiss
Your
Sweet
Arse
Goodbye
What ever gave you the idea that you’d even be part of the equation and notified of anything? Oh, because the surveillance mechanism is hanging on the side of your house? Ha! This tech isn’t for you, it isn’t for me, it ain’t for Joe Public at all. You won’t be notified of anything.
Nope, nope, nope, a 1000 times nope. And, uh, Facebook only wishes they could be Amazon Creepy! The Facebook Portal is a cartoon compared to this Bezos monstrosity.
How about the bedroom camera that automatically figures out when to order condoms?
The data set should include the following in it’s field test case.
Congress people declared felons by Amazon facial recognition system.
Will they pay for false positives - say maybe $1,000 to cover the taxes for the police - like when a burglar alarm goes off.
But for women victimized by stalkers or malicious ex’s, perhaps not a bad thing.
Yeah, saying that, “face surveillance technology is less accurate for darker skinned faces” doesn’t quite capture the true horror of the situation - that, when it comes to non-white-male faces, it generates massive numbers of false positive matches. (The problem which then further compounded if it calls the police, who are infamous for going after all black males of all ages in an area if there’s a reported problem with one specific black man, regardless of how much they don’t resemble the suspect.)
@Melz2
Besides…
In that situation, it wouldn’t work any better than any other porch camera, of course, since, as you point out, it involves cops showing up long, long after the thief is gone.
I rather suspect that if the system did directly call the police, they’d quickly learn to totally ignore it, like every other system that generates too many false positives.
Not sure it makes sense if you’re a dark skinned person and the tech is worse at matching that kind of skin, as the ACLU says this is. I knew an American of African descent who had to ask his small campus police force to stop putting out text alerts for “a black male” wanted for holding up a nearby 7-11. False positives are a real problem if it’s always you that’s the false positive.
Will they pay for false positives - say maybe $1,000 to cover the taxes for the police - like when a burglar alarm goes off.
I rather suspect that if the system did directly call the police, they’d quickly learn to totally ignore it, like every other system that generates too many false positives.
Why would the police ignore it. The police would pursue every (false) lead as this would be a terrific revenue opportunity against the homeowner/tenant using the camera. If a police officer can investigate six false leads in a 12 hour shift, that would more than cover their annual salary. Not quite as revenue positive as parking enforcement in San Francisco, but still a worthwhile revenue opportunity.
Buying the “wrong” Amazon-purchased book or music may cancel that out.
“We’ll take your green… but what’s your scene?!”
Locally the police don’t respond to burglar alarms. They don’t get paid to respond to false alarms. Unless someone verifies that a burglary is in progress and calls that in, they ignore them. (And they’re honestly not all that likely to respond to a burglary in progress, at least in a particularly timely manner, either.)
Hmmm I wonder if the training data is deficient in dark skinned faces.
This was my reaction- what, the police suddenly cares about theft? In my town if no one is hurt police don’t care. And the state even passed a referendum saying if it’s under $1000 we officially don’t care.
At your trial, the doorbell will swear blind that it’s never met you before, and produce documents showing that your house is a wholly-owned subsidiarly of Amazon EU S.a.r.L.