Amazon Ring Doorbell Camera to Build Watchlist of “Suspicious” Neighbors for Police

in #news5 years ago

Ring, the home security system developed by Amazon, is planning to build a database of neighborhood watchlists using facial recognition technology.

Documents obtained by the Intercept revealed that the company is working with law enforcement on a system that will identify people who are considered “suspicious,” and let Ring owners know when these individuals are near their home, using the facial recognition software built into the security system’s cameras.

The software will also give the Ring owner the ability to notify police or call in the suspicious activity on their own.

According to the documents, the watchlists would be connected to Ring’s Neighbors app, where owners of the system communicate with their neighbors about packages being stolen from doorsteps and other potential security breaches. While this may sound innocent—or even helpful—critics worry that this technology may empower the kind of neighborhood snitches that call the cops on anyone who they find “suspicious,” typically based on their own prejudices.

In fact, a Ring employee, speaking to the Intercept under the condition of anonymity, admitted that “all it is is people reporting people in hoodies.”

While these plans are explicit in the documents, Ring spokesperson Yassi Shahmiri insisted that “the features described are not in development or in use and Ring does not use facial recognition technology.”

However, Amazon was later forced to admit that the facial recognition system is currently a “contemplated but unreleased feature” for Ring, in a response to a formal inquiry by Massachusetts Senator Edward Markey.

Mohammad Tajsar, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California, said that “‘watchlisting’ capabilities on Ring devices encourages the creation of a digital redline in local neighborhoods, where cops in tandem with skeptical homeowners let machines create lists of undesirables unworthy of entrance into well-to-do areas.”

Many of the questionable features proposed in the documents involve the identification of “suspicious” individuals, but the standards that are used to determine who is suspicious and who is not are unclear. However, if artificial intelligence is being used along with information is being crowdsourced by neighbors, there is a high likelihood that the inherent bias, both on the part of the algorithm and on neighborhood busybodies, will contribute to an overall bias in the artificial intelligence system.

An article published last year in Nature explores the ethical framework of technology like self-driving cars. The article notes that the ethics of self-driving cars are based on the trolley problem, an ethical lifeboat scenario that would prove extremely unlikely in the real world. According to the ethics of self-driving cars, informed by the trolley problem, the lives of old people are less valuable than those of younger generations, and the life of an athlete is likewise more valuable than a “large” woman or homeless person. Other studies have shown racial and gender bias “accidentally” coded into facial recognition systems.

The documents went into detail about a variety of the features that are currently being “contemplated” by the company, including phone notifications about “suspicious” individuals who may have been spotted in the area, which even allows the Ring user to notify their neighbors. Another feature identified in the documents is something called “proactive suspect matching,” and while the documents were unclear about how this would function, it seems like a program that would cross-reference faces that walked by a Ring user’s house with a police database of potential suspects.

“Ring appears to be contemplating a future where police departments can commandeer the technology of private consumers to match ‘suspect’ profiles of individuals captured by private cameras with those cops have identified as suspect—in fact, exponentially expanding their surveillance capabilities without spending a dime,” Tajsar said.

These features are not unprecedented for Ring or Amazon. Earlier this year, Motherboard reported that Ring was encouraging its users to snitch on their neighbors in exchange for discounts and free products.

Sort:  

Great post! Yea I’ve been hearing this issue discussed by Adam curry on No Agenda a lot lately. You put it in great format breaking the issues down. Thank U for posting

The only thing wrong with this technology is the people that are selling it, and how they're selling it. This is one of the most empowering technologies that exist: automated sentries that enable one to secure one's life and property.

This replaces, or can with nominal community security services, the standing army that today imposes institutional force on communities. As soon as open source software that enables communities to not provide surveillance to Amazon is available, greater freedom and power will be available to communities to effect their security.

That Amazon and government are seeking to use this against those communities is typical of police and fascist states, and something I hope is soon obsolete as this security technology isn't parasitized by oppressive institutions, but can be safely used by folks to secure their lives and property.

Thanks!

Such system would not work on a neighbourhood level, nor is it integrated in the camera. It only makes sense on a centralized data base source, most likely run by a federal agency. Also, information by civilians who "believe" they see a suspicious person is useless, unless they observe a actual crime in progress.
I assume, the data set would consist of everybody who has been in conflict with the law before. That can than easily sorted into different classes, like property, drug, violence related ect. And of course, also political, if desired.
I don't know if you ever came across the Video game "Watchdogs"? In that, there is exactly a system like that: ctOS, that makes the city so much safer and efficient - and everybody on the street transparent.

You seem to assume that communities cannot cooperate beyond their confines, and this obviates highly effective solutions to the challenges you pose. The eventuation of DLTs facilitates trivial data sharing voluntarily between communities, and highly encourages such cooperation.

Trust in centrally controlled institutions like Amazon or the USG is at an all time low as factual data regarding crimes at every scale is increasingly available. The less local the institution, the more such criminal effects discourage susceptibility to it, and the benefits of voluntary cooperation between highly localized communities are of potentially existential import.

I note that institutional power is being dramatically increased by consolidation of jurisdictions, which potentially decreases the cost of intersocietal competition potentially completely, while at the same time tech advance across industries is ubiquitously increasing decentralization. There will be diversity in adoption and it is provable that individuals and communities will profit most and more going forward by decentralizing institutional power. As a result intrasocietal competition will strongly favor decentralized communities, even as global societal consolidation is effected which strongly favors centralization.

Absent extinction, it is inevitable that institutional power will be rendered obsolete. The question is how dangerous that transition will be. I note the proposed global population of ~one billion indicates that centralized institutions expect the coming contest to result in the genocide of ~7 billion people.

You further neglect that common criminals rarely commit crimes beyond their local jurisdiction, which strongly empowers regional surveillance communities to functionally reduce criminal depredations even if only provided local data.

Well, the thing is, institutions like Amazon or the government don't need your trust. All they have to do, is make the people believe that they benefit from their doing.
Step one is to scare the people, something that is in progress with the help of the media for many years. Step two is to offer a solution, a method to improve safety.
Then people will love it - they will even pay for it, as they already do with Alexa.

The decentralised approach is a silly idea for several reasons. Mainly, because the data set that is needed already exists in the institutions. Whats the point of building it from scratch, based on questionable observations of amateur vigilantes? The other thing is: if you do something that involves the internet, there is no decentralisation. The infrastucture you are using is most like owned by - Amazon. Or Google. If they want, they can access it all.
You say that most criminals operate on a local base. That may be true - now.
With a automated local neighbourhood watch in place, they will soon figure out that its a better idea to travel a bit to pull off something. At least if they still have some functioning brain cells. Therefore it only makes sense to make such a system nationwide. If not even international, at one point.

I dont know if you heard about it, there was the idea of putting cameras on cars online, to create a similar system, or at least be part of a bigger one.
A Tesla today has already 6 or 8 cameras, that observe the whole surrounding of the car. This serves for the autonomous driving and as rear view "mirrors". No doubt this will be standart in all cars fairly soon.
The idea was, to keep them running all the time and upload the footage, in order to catch people who steal or damage the car.
Can you imagine what this would lead to one day? There would be not a single square foot that is unobserved anymore, at least inside towns.
And the people will love it.

"The decentralised approach is a silly..."

You point our yourself that institutions such as Amazon are untrustworthy, and depending on criminals to provide your security is foolish in the extreme, far beyond silly.

" Whats the point of building it from scratch, based on questionable observations of amateur vigilantes?"

While you ignorantly mock free people providing their own security, and neglect to consider how crime has been fostered and increased by orders of magnitude since the wide introduction of police forces that force individuals to depend on them for their security, you completely ignore that freedom is the creation of the free - not a service provided by overlords.

It is self defeating and absolutely irrational to delegate our personal security. This has never worked, and never will, because criminals corrupt institutions inevitably, and history is replete with examples demonstrating this. Remember the words of Ben Franklin who points out that trading freedom for security inevitably results in the loss of both.

Regarding surveillance cameras becoming ubiquitous, that genie will not return to the lamp. The choice we have today is not whether there will be surveillance cameras everywhere, but whether they are owned by us or not. Not possessing this technology leaves it to criminals and overlords to deploy for their own purposes, and while they may say they'll keep us safe, they are proven liars, and will use their possessions to aggrandize themselves.

In the final analysis, each of us is inherently responsible to exercise our sovereign authority to defend our lives, communities, and property, and failing to personally do so will grant our lives, communities, and property to those that seize them when delegated that authority.

Sheeple will be enslaved to overlords because they are evolved to eusociality. Psychopaths will seek power for themselves by enslaving who they can. Free people will make their freedom, and decentralization is the elimination of centralization that enables parasitism to empower overlords.

While there are some valid points in what you say, it has little to do with what is reality already today.
And yes, corporations (like Amazon, Apple, Google ect.) cannot be trusted, since they always put their agenda (making money) before anything else. That doesn't mean, that they are unable to provide a useful service - if it serves to achieve their goals, as I said. The same goes for the government.

Sure there is a lot of reason to be concerned, regarding personal freedom, privacy and such things.
However, we don't live in the 18th century anymore, and ideas and concepts of personal freedom from that time just don't work any longer.

Anyway, I prefer to work with what is, not with what I wish things to be. Whatever is coming, you and I won't change it.

"Whatever is coming, you and I won't change it."

Individuals just like you and are today and absolutely will.

" ...ideas and concepts of personal freedom from that time just don't work any longer."

The fact that you existing makes you both responsible and to have authority for effecting, your personal security has not changed one bit. Neither has the fact that you have no authority to delegate that personal responsibility to anyone else changed. All the other rights that derive from this inherent sovereignty are neither altered in the slightest.

I have already changed the world you live in, though you may not know it. I recommend expanding your concept of the nature of living things, which you are one, and recall that the unbroken chain of living cells that connects you to that original cell from which all life stems will never change, which makes you no less responsible for continuing that chain than for eating dinner your personal self.

Basic principles proven without exception to pertain to men ten thousand years ago and to men today continue to effect our sovereignty, no less than the responsiblity of beavers, mice, and birds for thier personal safety, and reveal why that safety must remain thier own purview. No delegation of it, no claim of responsibility for it, supercedes or invalidates it.

This is what is, and what will continue to existentially impact surveillance and police states in particular.

Scary. Where do I get my Steemit Door Bell?

Curated for #informationwar (by @wakeupnd)

  • Our purpose is to encourage posts discussing Information War, Propaganda, Disinformation, and Liberty. We are a peaceful and non-violent movement that sees information as being held back by corrupt forces in the private sector and government. Our Mission.
  • Discord, website, youtube channel links here.

Ways you can help the @informationwar!

To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.

Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvoting this reply.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.18
TRX 0.14
JST 0.030
BTC 59238.58
ETH 3176.28
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.45