San Francisco Considers Ban on Government's Use of Facial Recognition Technology

This seems like a bad decision to me. We have a crime epidemic and it seems to me like facial recognition can help. My house has been broken into several times and I've been assaulted in areas of SF with clear video footage; why wouldn't we want to use tech to solve this problem? Forgetting my own situations, why wouldn't we want it for sex traffickers or terrorists? I don't understand why the tech issues should prevent it from being used- it isn't as if people are being locked up solely based on what the technology sees, there are humans involved too, and I think we should enable the humans with better tech. What are some good counter arguments?

Critics quoted in this article and many others I’ve read argue that the technology is deeply flawed, highly inaccurate. Does anyone have actual stats on this? Furthermore, does anyone working in the field have any facts or opinions about the rate at which the technology is improving? Left unchecked, how far off is the day when a city could implement widespread facial recognition that has terrifying accuracy?

I’m sure the usual fearmongering arguments will be used to promote the technology. But I have to ask: what’s the upside of this tech? It needs to scan everyone’s face at all times to get a match. What are the applications and what’s the upside? How does it compare with a CCTV system like in London or Singapore? I’d like to understand the trade off.

While I have a very high disregard for San Franseptic, I do applaud this decision if it comes to pass.<p>I think the broad use of facial recognition by governments will lead to nothing but disaster for its non-violent citizens.