As facial-reading technology gains momentum, policymakers are stepping up to check inherent privacy risks connected to the technology.
“[Facial-recognition technology] has serious implications for consumer privacy and personal safety,” Franken said in a letter to NTIA. “Unfortunately, our privacy laws provide no express protections for facial-recognition data; under current law, any company can use facial-recognition technology on anyone without getting their permission—and without any meaningful transparency.”
The technology presents numerous opportunities to make customer service seamless, improve identification, and create opportunities for innovation. For example, The New York Times reports face-reading software could detect if a student was confused and provide them with extra tutoring.
But as facial data is collected and becomes readily available, there is a deficiency of laws to protect a user’s control over the use and distribution of this information.
“Digital images are increasingly available, and the importance of securing faceprints and ensuring consumers’ appropriate control over their data is clear,” said Lawrence Strickling, assistant secretary for communications and information for the Commerce Departgment and NTIA’s administrator.
Stakeholders will convene for the first meeting on Feb. 6, with additional meetings to be scheduled throughout the spring and summer.
The Commerce Department agency began the privacy multistakeholder process in 2012 as part of the Obama administration’s effort to implement a Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights. Its first topic—privacy notifications on mobile devices—took more than a year to complete.
What We're Following See More »
The Commission on Presidential Debates put out a statement today that gives credence to Donald Trump's claims that he had a bad microphone on Monday night. "Regarding the first debate, there were issues regarding Donald Trump's audio that affected the sound level in the debate hall," read the statement in its entirety.
"A video of Donald Trump testifying under oath about his provocative rhetoric about Mexicans and other Latinos is set to go public" as soon as today. "Trump gave the testimony in June at a law office in Washington in connection with one of two lawsuits he filed last year after prominent chefs reacted to the controversy over his remarks by pulling out of plans to open restaurants at his new D.C. hotel. D.C. Superior Court Judge Brian Holeman said in an order issued Thursday evening that fears the testimony might show up in campaign commercials were no basis to keep the public from seeing the video."
No matter that his recall of foreign leaders leaves something to be desired, Gary Johnson is the choice of the Chicago Tribune's editorial board. The editors argue that Donald Trump couldn't do the job of president, while hitting Hillary Clinton for "her intent to greatly increase federal spending and taxation, and serious questions about honesty and trust." Which leaves them with Johnson. "Every American who casts a vote for him is standing for principles," they write, "and can be proud of that vote. Yes, proud of a candidate in 2016."
"By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump." That's the message from USA Today editors, who are making the first recommendation on a presidential race in the paper's 34-year history. It's not exactly an endorsement; they make clear that the editorial board "does not have a consensus for a Clinton endorsement." But they state flatly that Donald Trump is, by "unanimous consensus of the editorial board, unfit for the presidency."