Who has power to collect my face data?CHINADAILY
Guo Bing, an associate professor of law at Zhejiang Sci-Tech University, is also a member of the local Hangzhou Safari Park.

Yet on Oct 17, Guo received a message from the park, reminding him that the fingerprint recognition devices at the entrance would no longer be in use, and all members must register their facial information in order to enter the park via facial recognition devices.

"The previous fingerprint recognition was rather slow," said a staff member of the park. "Especially during holiday peak, there were often long queues formed at the gate because some of them lagged."

Guo, who owns a doctor's degree of law, said he could not agree. "How does the park have the power to collect my facial information?"

As the two sides could not reach a consensus, Guo sued the park at a local court. On Nov 1, the case was formally accepted. As the first case about facial recognition in China, it became a legal focus for media outlets, with a reading count of 96 million on the micro blog Weibo.

People.com.cn launched a poll in which 2,017 of the 7,214 persons surveyed believe facial recognition should not be abused, while 3,093 said mandatory collection violates people's privacy.

The zoo is not the first commercial company to collect facial information, nor is Guo the first person whose information has been collected. For years, many gyms, office buildings, even zoos have installed facial recognition devices at the entrances and their members must submit information via their faces in order to pass through.

The advantage they list is always the same: convenience. With facial recognition, each member can easily pass within one second, and the organization itself can easily store the information of members and match them with its database to know who is who, and provide tailored services if they want to.

However, they won't tell you that the disadvantages and risks are also obvious, too. Facial information should be considered one's personal privacy, not to be used for data collection, but by installing facial recognition devices, these agencies have de facto collected information from the private person. In all aspects of the law, that is a kind of violation of privacy and individual rights.

Further, as a relatively new technology, it is not yet fully understood — where is all the facial information stored? Is it safe or can the information be obtained by hackers? Is the organisation that stores the information trustworthy? Is there a risk of third-party collaboration? And is there any possibility of reselling members' facial information to any underground illegal profit chain?

All these questions are there, waiting for answers, and people are rightfully worried until they come to light.

This does not mean that facial recognition technology should be forbidden. As a result of AI (Artificial Intelligence) and fast computing, facial recognition as a technology can benefit the public — if correctly used.

However, the prerequisite of using the technology requires making proper rules and offer ample protection of the facial information of residents, so that they can be assured that their information is safe.

For example, police and other institutions that serve the public can use the technology under proper regulation of law, but they must be responsible of the information they collect and store. Essentially, public institutions that store so much human facial information must be regulated.

With regards to commercial companies, such as the zoo, it is going too far to allow them to freely collect facial information and use it at their will. It is important to legislate first, so that legislators and the public can openly discuss the issues and concerns, and figure out solutions to the problems if there are any.

How accurate is it?

So... Facial recognition technology...
Pros and cons?

Who has power to collect my face data?CHINADAILY
Guo Bing, an associate professor of law at Zhejiang Sci-Tech University, is also a member of the local Hangzhou Safari Park.

Yet on Oct 17, Guo received a message from the park, reminding him that the fingerprint recognition devices at the entrance would no longer be in use, and all members must register their facial information in order to enter the park via facial recognition devices.

"The previous fingerprint recognition was rather slow," said a staff member of the park. "Especially during holiday peak, there were often long queues formed at the gate because some of them lagged."

Guo, who owns a doctor's degree of law, said he could not agree. "How does the park have the power to collect my facial information?"

As the two sides could not reach a consensus, Guo sued the park at a local court. On Nov 1, the case was formally accepted. As the first case about facial recognition in China, it became a legal focus for media outlets, with a reading count of 96 million on the micro blog Weibo.

People.com.cn launched a poll in which 2,017 of the 7,214 persons surveyed believe facial recognition should not be abused, while 3,093 said mandatory collection violates people's privacy.

The zoo is not the first commercial company to collect facial information, nor is Guo the first person whose information has been collected. For years, many gyms, office buildings, even zoos have installed facial recognition devices at the entrances and their members must submit information via their faces in order to pass through.

The advantage they list is always the same: convenience. With facial recognition, each member can easily pass within one second, and the organization itself can easily store the information of members and match them with its database to know who is who, and provide tailored services if they want to.

However, they won't tell you that the disadvantages and risks are also obvious, too. Facial information should be considered one's personal privacy, not to be used for data collection, but by installing facial recognition devices, these agencies have de facto collected information from the private person. In all aspects of the law, that is a kind of violation of privacy and individual rights.

Further, as a relatively new technology, it is not yet fully understood — where is all the facial information stored? Is it safe or can the information be obtained by hackers? Is the organisation that stores the information trustworthy? Is there a risk of third-party collaboration? And is there any possibility of reselling members' facial information to any underground illegal profit chain?

All these questions are there, waiting for answers, and people are rightfully worried until they come to light.

This does not mean that facial recognition technology should be forbidden. As a result of AI (Artificial Intelligence) and fast computing, facial recognition as a technology can benefit the public — if correctly used.

However, the prerequisite of using the technology requires making proper rules and offer ample protection of the facial information of residents, so that they can be assured that their information is safe.

For example, police and other institutions that serve the public can use the technology under proper regulation of law, but they must be responsible of the information they collect and store. Essentially, public institutions that store so much human facial information must be regulated.

With regards to commercial companies, such as the zoo, it is going too far to allow them to freely collect facial information and use it at their will. It is important to legislate first, so that legislators and the public can openly discuss the issues and concerns, and figure out solutions to the problems if there are any.



So... Facial recognition technology...
Pros and cons?

Who has power to collect my face data?CHINADAILY
Guo Bing, an associate professor of law at Zhejiang Sci-Tech University, is also a member of the local Hangzhou Safari Park.

Yet on Oct 17, Guo received a message from the park, reminding him that the fingerprint recognition devices at the entrance would no longer be in use, and all members must register their facial information in order to enter the park via facial recognition devices.

"The previous fingerprint recognition was rather slow," said a staff member of the park. "Especially during holiday peak, there were often long queues formed at the gate because some of them lagged."

Guo, who owns a doctor's degree of law, said he could not agree. "How does the park have the power to collect my facial information?"

As the two sides could not reach a consensus, Guo sued the park at a local court. On Nov 1, the case was formally accepted. As the first case about facial recognition in China, it became a legal focus for media outlets, with a reading count of 96 million on the micro blog Weibo.

People.com.cn launched a poll in which 2,017 of the 7,214 persons surveyed believe facial recognition should not be abused, while 3,093 said mandatory collection violates people's privacy.

The zoo is not the first commercial company to collect facial information, nor is Guo the first person whose information has been collected. For years, many gyms, office buildings, even zoos have installed facial recognition devices at the entrances and their members must submit information via their faces in order to pass through.

The advantage they list is always the same: convenience. With facial recognition, each member can easily pass within one second, and the organization itself can easily store the information of members and match them with its database to know who is who, and provide tailored services if they want to.

However, they won't tell you that the disadvantages and risks are also obvious, too. Facial information should be considered one's personal privacy, not to be used for data collection, but by installing facial recognition devices, these agencies have de facto collected information from the private person. In all aspects of the law, that is a kind of violation of privacy and individual rights.

Further, as a relatively new technology, it is not yet fully understood — where is all the facial information stored? Is it safe or can the information be obtained by hackers? Is the organisation that stores the information trustworthy? Is there a risk of third-party collaboration? And is there any possibility of reselling members' facial information to any underground illegal profit chain?

All these questions are there, waiting for answers, and people are rightfully worried until they come to light.

This does not mean that facial recognition technology should be forbidden. As a result of AI (Artificial Intelligence) and fast computing, facial recognition as a technology can benefit the public — if correctly used.

However, the prerequisite of using the technology requires making proper rules and offer ample protection of the facial information of residents, so that they can be assured that their information is safe.

For example, police and other institutions that serve the public can use the technology under proper regulation of law, but they must be responsible of the information they collect and store. Essentially, public institutions that store so much human facial information must be regulated.

With regards to commercial companies, such as the zoo, it is going too far to allow them to freely collect facial information and use it at their will. It is important to legislate first, so that legislators and the public can openly discuss the issues and concerns, and figure out solutions to the problems if there are any.



So... Facial recognition technology...
Pros and cons?

It probably won't, unless you become wanted for anything, and you will be spotted wherever facial recognition systems are in.

I'm a fan of it, say used at Trump rallies to where anyone with warrants could be easily picked out of a crowd. I'm thinking I was reading about that exact thing being done in China. The problem is with the potential for political abuse, say those opposing a regime being targeted and picked up for being a dissident?

Casinos have been using it for decades, they measure the distance between eyes, apparently it is spot on and helps them spot people they have banned for winning too much. Now it is more sophisticated than that. Computing power has progressed to where 8000 people in a crowd could be scanned and anyone in a criminal database could be picked out of that crowd.