FBI has 411 million photos in its facial recognition system, and a federal watchdog isn't happy

a reply to: dreamingawake

This is not a good idea. I have seen programs that would compare a face to all sorts of famous people, and there were several who matched different family members. A program like that would end up listing as suspects people who weren't involved at all. Plus, it seems like a tech version of a warrant-less search. It's also a way they could track peoples' movement, using cameras that are already everywhere.

Welcome to the Machine, people.

originally posted by: odzeandennz
the same people upset about it, are the same whom allowed it to become what it is today.

its not like the patriots werent giving total control an administration [or two] ago.

bills allowing this all had to be passed, correct?

dont blame the fbi.

It was likely put into another bill, if even, that politicians "do not read before signing".

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: dreamingawake

I'm not quite sure how this is new news.
I pretty much assumed for years that all of our drivers license pictures were collected someplace for this purpose.

True, guess it's just another one of those confirmed CTs.

a reply to: dreamingawake

Facial recognition is one thing but biometric profiling is another. To put this into context, it is my firm belief that if the authorities have a few dozen pictures of an individual, assuming they are of good quality, then they can potentially create a 3D image of that person. If genuine imaging surveillance comes into it, and I mean in respect of IMINT, then it probably wouldn’t be immensely difficult for them to be able to isolate an individual in and amongst a few thousand people.

If somebody has a unique feature, particularly such as from injury (like a limp) or even something as simple as a tattoo (since ink would probably stand out pretty well if spectroscopy is relevant), then it could be even easier for them. For those with metal implants for shattered bones, it is absolutely inevitable that they would be detectable very, very easily. Heck, they could probably tell if somebody has cancer simply by watching minerals flowing through the body.

Another way to look at this is that it might be similar to some radar alternatives. Take for example a fast and low-flying jet; what good is radar in terms of navigation if there are large obstacles in the way, such as buildings, forests or hills - or likewise if communication with satellites is impractical? A solution there is previous and regular photographic updates of the terrain, in that a craft can watch the ground below it and compare it to records so that it can determine its precise location. In fact, this concept itself is also used in detection of aircraft - the terrain can be monitored for arbitrary changes and certain patterns could indicate that something which was not there before is in fact an aircraft avoiding conventional radar. If that’s possible then go figure as to what they can do in a sense of tracking people.

This is no joke, guys... this is serious technology.

We should certainly be concerned.

If you're patriotic and you think
'well it's ours so it will be used righteously'
It's not ours and no they won't .

At the top of surveilence are SuperUsers,
and they have a mosaic of the entire
picture.

High paying Corprate surveilence
is the game from here on out.

In smoke filled rooms, money has
always whooped any passionate liberty laden prose
Tom Jefferson ever uttered.

a reply to: dreamingawake

Only 411 million? That seems a bit low...

"FBI has 411 million photos in its facial recognition system, and a federal watchdog isn't happy"

Because it doesn't know who I am or what I look like.

Shhhhhhhhhhit

originally posted by: doggoneit666
a reply to: dreamingawake

Only 411 million? That seems a bit low...

Higher than the population of the US where the FBI is centered.

In particular,

originally posted by: IllegalName
a reply to: dreamingawake

If somebody has a unique feature, particularly such as from injury (like a limp) or even something as simple as a tattoo (since ink would probably stand out pretty well if spectroscopy is relevant), then it could be even easier for them. For those with metal implants for shattered bones, it is absolutely inevitable that they would be detectable very, very easily. Heck, they could probably tell if somebody has cancer simply by watching minerals flowing through the body.

Exactly and added features as addressed by the EFF;
"FBI aims to catalogue and track people by their tattoos" - Source

a reply to: dreamingawake

That’s not much different to taking prints or blood. What I’m talking about is remote imaging - I wouldn’t go so far as satellites, and nor would I rule that out, but drones could potentially be used to accurately pinpoint people based on profiles.

Actually, you might have a point now that I think about it - if they already have a particular tattoo design on their database and they can scan somebody down in the way I described, then in theory they could probably quickly identify a tattoo as well. The key here is that they are ink-based so it would probably stand out pretty well under good conditions for spectroscopy.