Post a Comment Print Share on Facebook

Facial recognition: Microsoft, Amazon, and IBM are clamoring for clear laws

The debate is not new, but it has taken a new turn this week, following protests against racism and police violence in the United States. At one time, three of

- 75 reads.

Facial recognition: Microsoft, Amazon, and IBM are clamoring for clear laws

The debate is not new, but it has taken a new turn this week, following protests against racism and police violence in the United States. At one time, three of the major technology companies Microsoft, Amazon and IBM have had to explain their position on the issue and call for legislative guidance for this technology.

Last date to express: Microsoft will deny access to its technology to police forces in the united states. "As long as there will be no federal legislation in the solid based on the rights of man, we will not sell this technology to the forces of order," said Brad Smith, president and chief legal officer of Microsoft. Beyond the forces of the order, the company, long-time supporter of legislation in this area, plans to "strengthen the review process of the requests of our customers who wish to use this technology on a large scale".

one-year Moratorium for the software Amazon Rekognition

Highly anticipated on the subject, Amazon has decided Wednesday to ban the police to use its facial recognition software called Rekognition, for a year. This moratorium should give Congress time "to put in place appropriate rules". "We are advocating regulations that are more stringent government on the ethical use of the technologies of facial recognition, and the Congress seems ready for the challenge", said on Wednesday the giant of online commerce in a press release. Amazon had until now resisted the pressure exerted by the powerful American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and other organizations that call for the past two years to cease providing Rekognition to the police, because of the challenges for the protection of privacy and issues of the algorithms to be biased. A pressure that is amplified this week with the call of associations of struggle against racial inequalities, urging him to cease any technological collaboration with the american police force. Amazon had acknowledged in October that, "as with all technologies, the facial recognition could be mis-used. The company has not said anything on its surveillance cameras, (Ring), which is widely used by local police forces, which are also in the sights of these associations.

see also : facial recognition technology Amazon used by the american police

At the beginning of the week, it is IBM who had revived the public debate by announcing withdrawal from the market of facial recognition, in a letter sent to the Congress. "If all of the responsible companies in the country will cede this market to those who are not ready to take a position, we will not necessarily the national interests or the lives of the black people and afro-american of this nation," said its new CEO, Arvind Krishna. This market is not, however, much in the income of IBM.

In January, Sundar Pichai, the Google's CEO, one of the largest players in this field, was called to Brussels to the european Union to adopt a "regulatory-wise" for the artificial intelligence in adapting the regulations to each sector. He had explained to Brussels that the group would not provide turnkey service of facial recognition so that rules and safeguards were not put in place by the authorities.

The editorial team conseilleLa facial recognition, a technology far from being neutreQu'is Alicem, the project identification by facial recognition of the French State?Facial recognition: what do the French think of this technologieSujetReconnaissance facialeAucun comment

there are currently no comments on this article.
Be the first to give your opinion !

I write a comment
Avatar
Your Name
Post a Comment
Characters Left:
Your comment has been forwarded to the administrator for approval.×
Warning! Will constitute a criminal offense, illegal, threatening, offensive, insulting and swearing, derogatory, defamatory, vulgar, pornographic, indecent, personality rights, damaging or similar nature in the nature of all kinds of financial content, legal, criminal and administrative responsibility for the content of the sender member / members are belong.