Facial-Recognition Technology Doesn’t Have to Destroy Privacy

Regulation moves at a snail’s pace, so it’s up to CEOs, executives, and employees to reject projects that put profit over privacy. Clearview AI facial-recognition tech is just the latest example of ‘innovation’ that could quickly get out of hand.

By Adam Smith

When the US dropped two atomic bombs on Japan in 1945, it was justified as a way to save more lives, despite the staggering death toll. And proponents argued that if the Americans hadn’t developed the bomb, someone else would have done it. Robert Oppenheimer, the father of the atomic bomb, had doubts. “The physicists have known sin; and this is a knowledge which they cannot lose.”

Fast forward to 2020, and engineers and computer scientists are grappling with ethical quandaries of their own. Last week, the New York Times reported on Clearview AI, a small facial-recognition startup that “might lead to a dystopian future,” one of its investors admits.

According to the Times, “You take a picture of a person, upload it and get to see public photos of that person, along with links to where those photos appeared.” Scraping image data from Facebook, YouTube, Venmo, and myriad other websites, the system obliterates any sense of privacy on the internet.

Clearview AI has already attracted the attention of law enforcement; more than 600 agencies in the United States have started using it in the past year, according to the company. “The tool could identify activists at a protest or an attractive stranger on the subway, revealing not just their names but where they lived, what they did and whom they knew,” the Times writes.

That, of course, is extremely dangerous. At the very least, it potentially breaches the terms of service for the social networks and websites Clearview is scraping, like Facebook. Clearview founder Hoan Ton-That is not concerned. “A lot of people are doing it,” he told the Times. “Facebook knows.”

Facebook told the Times it was “reviewing the situation with Clearview.” Peter Thiel, a Clearview investor, sits on Facebook’s board.

If Clearview’s technology does violate those terms, then the police appear willing to use a tool that collects data without the owners’ permission. And if they and the tech companies in question fail to stop this invasion of privacy, what recourse does the average person have?

As technology develops, this will be the tip of the iceberg; the way that you walk, or even your heartbeat, could be used to identify you. And, much like the development of the atomic bomb, such transitions are viewed as inevitable. “Laws have to determine what’s legal, but you can’t ban technology,” said Kirenaga Partners founder and Clearview investor David Scalzo.

But those in charge can place ethics and privacy over profit. It does not have to be inevitable that automation, or artificial intelligence, will take your job; that Google will make a search engine for the Chinese government; or that your personal information will be routinely leaked.

These choices are made by human beings, not some otherworldly force. Technology develops too quickly to be effectively checked by regulation-however necessary that may be-so it’s up to CEOs, executives, and at times employees to reject projects that could so easily be used for malicious purposes. Left unchecked, companies like Clearview and their clients could irrevocably change how people live their lives in public.

Originally published at https://www.pcmag.com.