An in-depth look at facial recognition technology, with a primer on how it works, who is using it in the US, and how to avoid it online and in public

The controversial and nearly ever-present technology that could replace the fingerprint — From iPhones and Snapchat filters …

The California Sunday Magazine 2020-01-26

Context & Ripple Effects

This explainer arrives days after the New York Times' reporting on [[a:949805|Clearview AI, the app that scraped billions of photos from Facebook, YouTube, and other sites for use by hundreds of law enforcement agencies]] — the moment facial recognition stopped being an abstract civil-liberties debate and became something readers could be identified by tomorrow. It also builds on earlier Financial Times coverage of the university- and government-supplied face datasets used to train these systems, giving readers the full pipeline: how faces are captured, matched, and deployed.

The piece matters because it converts a breaking-news story into durable consumer knowledge — who is running these searches in the US, and what an individual can actually do to stay out of them. The arc only sharpens with hindsight: by late 2021, [[a:971398|Clearview claimed more than 10 billion collected images plus new police tools like deblurring and mask removal]], making the avoidance techniques this article teaches more urgent, not less.

First-order effects

US consumers gain a practical map of where facial recognition touches them — iPhones, Snapchat filters, and public spaces — plus concrete steps to reduce their exposure online and offline.
Platforms named in Clearview's scraping claims, including Facebook and YouTube, now have their users' photos identified as raw material for police searches, putting their data-handling practices directly in the spotlight.

Second-order effects

The 600-plus law enforcement agencies reported to be using Clearview face pressure over procurement practices that bypassed the consent structures platforms built, forcing departments to defend or reconsider the tool.
Universities and US government agencies supplying face datasets upon request come under renewed scrutiny as training-data provenance becomes part of the public debate.

Third-order effects

If scraped-web identification scales the way Clearview's growth from billions to tens of billions of images suggests, anonymity in public becomes a policy question rather than a default — pushing toward rules on what constitutes a permissible public-data source.
Biometric identifiers, positioned here as a potential fingerprint replacement, raise the stakes of any breach or misuse in ways revocable credentials never did, which is likely to drive the next wave of privacy regulation around face data specifically.

The trend: Facial recognition is shifting from opt-in device features like phone unlocking toward mass identification built on scraped web imagery, with law enforcement adoption outpacing the rules governing it.

Discussion

@metpoliceuk @metpoliceuk on x
LIVE FACIAL RECOGNITION | We are using the latest technology to tackle crime and keep Londoners safe. Live Facial Recognition will assist us locate and identify those wanted by police for violent offences and serious crimes. 👉 http://news.met.police.uk/... https://twitter.com/...
@hkesvani Hussein Kesvani on x
London transitions into a full surveillance state: https://www.independent.co.uk/ ...
@calsunday @calsunday on x
An in-depth look at facial recognition software, the controversial and nearly ever-present technology that could replace the fingerprint https://story.californiasunday.com/ ...
@kmontenegro Ken Montenegro on x
“We've seen these kinds of tools being used in high-security places like hospitals and nursing homes, as well as in agriculture. We've also seen it being used by companies like Uber to verify remote workers” https://story.californiasunday.com/ ... go @aihanguyen
@joejerome Joseph Jerome on x
Buried in this feature on #FacialRecognition is another way technology can be deployed to hurt workers, make businesses more money, and bring on the heart attacks: https://story.californiasunday.com/ ... https://twitter.com/...
@dgambacorta David Gambacorta on x
“A technology that collects and analyzes the facial expressions and movements of students inside a classroom and categorizes the behavior it detects as “good” or “bad.” https://story.californiasunday.com/ ...
@dannyshawbbc Danny Shaw on x
Scotland Yard believes it has legal cover & public backing for ‘live’ facial recognition cameras to become a standard feature of policing in London - despite the concerns of civil liberty groups: https://www.bbc.co.uk/...
@kenroth Kenneth Roth on x
Moving beyond using facial recognition technology to determine where people have been, Britain plans to use it to track people in real time where they are at the moment—another example of why we urgently need stronger privacy protection. https://www.nytimes.com/...
@nxthompson Nicholas Thompson on x
Normally, with face recognition you choose between safety and privacy. London, by implanting a system that doesn't work, appears to want neither. https://www.nytimes.com/... https://twitter.com/...
@penamerica PEN America on x
London's police department said on Friday that it would begin using facial recognition technology in the city to identify people off the street in real time with video cameras, adopting a level of surveillance that is rare outside of China. https://www.nytimes.com/...
@calsunday @calsunday on x
One in two American adults is in a law-enforcement facial-recognition database, often without his or her knowledge. https://story.californiasunday.com/ ...
@_meher Meher on x
Facial recognition is everywhere, it's kind of scary, but also I compulsively do face filter apps and so do you. Anyway, here's everything you might want to know about it feat. @adrianchen and @chrisoutcalt https://story.californiasunday.com/ ...
@calsunday @calsunday on x
Investigators, high school administrators, radiologists, and even camp counselors share how and why they're using facial recognition software. https://story.californiasunday.com/ ...
@privacyproject @privacyproject on x
“Perhaps facial recognition has become a symbolic last straw in our techno-skeptic moment,” @AdrianChen writes in @CalSunday https://story.californiasunday.com/ ...
@elleosiliwood Elle Osili-Wood on x
Just a reminder that the @metpoliceuk have actually fined people for attempting to avoid facial recognition scanners. This is dangerous, dystopian tech, and no-one, let alone an organisation as fascist and irresponsible as the Met should be allowed to use it. https://twitter.com/…
@sigfpe @sigfpe on x
“Police say the cameras identified 70% of suspects” Do you know what that means? Does anyone? Are numbers anything other than symbols journalists can drop into stories to make them look pretty? https://www.bbc.co.uk/...
@respectisvital Alex Tiffin on x
Met Police to deploy facial recognition cameras in London. “The Met said it has a 70% success rate” “But an independent review of six of these deployments found that only eight out of 42 matches were “verifiably correct”. 🤔🤔🤔 https://www.bbc.co.uk/...
@davidjmadden David Madden on x
Facial recognition is a genuine threat to urban public space. But we can expect to see this rolled out in cities around the world, as part of a broader effort to try to fully criminalise anonymity (eg Hong Kong's face mask ban). https://www.theguardian.com/ ...
@metpoliceuk @metpoliceuk on x
#WATCH | this video which highlights how Live Facial Recognition technology will be used to help us bear down on serious violence and keep people safe in #London More info 👉 http://news.met.police.uk/... https://twitter.com/... https://twitter.com/...
@carolinerussell Caroline Russell on x
Really disturbing to see this. Especially after ⁦@sianberry⁩ exposed the police were covertly trialling facial recognition technology in Kings Cross last year. https://www.bbc.co.uk/...
@moltke Henrik Moltke on x
California: we're banning facial recognition in public spaces. EU: we might ban it until we figure out how to use it. Google: that's a good idea UK: http://news.met.police.uk/...
@markhorsleyuk Mark Horsley on x
FACIAL RECOGNITION CAMS Police say these cameras will only be used to detect ‘very serious’ offenders, yet categorisation of XR as ‘extremists’ hints at the potential for future abuse. Remember what happened to ‘our’ health records. PM will love them of course. Truly Orwellian! h…
@noelsharkey Noel Sharkey on x
FACE RECOGNITION After 2yrs trials which an independent review showed 9% accuracy, the Met police start live facial recognition in London. This is a shameful disrespect of the British people & we know it's racially biased. STOP IT Quotes @silkiecarlo https://www.theguardian.com/ …
@fabiochiusi Fabio Chiusi on x
Metropolitan Police to make ‘81% inaccurate’ live facial recognition operational https://news.sky.com/...
@futureadvocacy Future Advocacy on x
We are deeply concerned by this decision by the Metropolitan Police to roll out live #FacialRecognition technology across London. We join other organisations in calling for a pause until the social and ethical implications have been properly considered. https://www.bbc.co.uk/...
@geoffwhite247 Geoff White on x
Facial recognition: Information Commissioners' Office says Met Police are “taking steps to reduce intrusion and comply with the requirements of data protection legislation” as they announce their first operational use...https://www.bbc.co.uk/ ...
@charlesmok @charlesmok on x
We're Banning Facial Recognition. We're Missing the Point. The whole point of modern surveillance is to treat people differently, and facial recognition technologies are only a small part of that. https://www.nytimes.com/...
@hypervisible One Ring on x
“... if in the pursuit of innovation we lose the ability to shield citizens from private surveillance, we'll lose a lot more than ground in the so-called AI arms race.” https://venturebeat.com/...
@cam_kerry Cam Kerry on x
This is right. The Washington Privacy Act is a better bill than last year's WA bill, and better than CCPA. Washington DC, pay atttention. https://twitter.com/...
@far_hat Farhat Habib on x
The dangers of ubiquitous surveillance are underappreciated but facial recognition poses unique threats not the least of which is significantly higher misidentification rates in non-white populations. https://www.nytimes.com/...
@kenroth Kenneth Roth on x
Facial recognition technology is just one tool. We need to stay focus on the many other ways as well that mass surveillance can be conducted—and the ways that data is combined to create searchable profiles of us without any consent on our part. https://www.nytimes.com/...
@dahlialpeterson Dahlia Peterson on x
“A ban on facial recognition won't make any difference if, in response, surveillance systems switch to identifying people by MAC addresses...we are being identified without our knowledge or consent, and society needs rules about when that is permissible.” https://www.nytimes.com/…
@adfichter Adrienne Fichter on x
“People can be identified by their heart-beat, gait, fingerprint, iris patterns—all of which can be obtained remotely via tech. (...) we need rules protecting people's privacy and requiring their consent before any of these means are used” https://www.nytimes.com/...
@marietjeschaake Marietje Schaake on x
Facial recognition tech is under scrutiny but we need to have a serious conversation about all identification, correlation and discrimination technologies and decide how much we want to be spied on by governments and corporations ⁦@schneierblog⁩ ↘️https://www.nytimes.com / ...
@linds_anders Lindsey Andersen on x
Bruce hitting the nail on the head. A ban on #FacialRecognition won't stop mass surveillance. “The problem is that we are being identified without our knowledge or consent, and society needs rules about when that is permissible.” https://www.nytimes.com/...
@dietoff Dietmar Offenhuber on x
“focusing on [fac.rec] misses the point. We need to have a serious conversation about all the technologies of identification, correlation and discrimination” Bruce Schneider who started the 90s crypto battles by 1st publishing “forbidden” strong encryption https://www.nytimes.com…
@docrussjackson Russjackson on x
San Francisco & other US cities have already banned facial recognition. Activists are understandably calling for a nationwide ban. The @nytimes argues focusing on just one method of identification fails to address the wider problem of mass surveillance. https://www.nytimes.com/..…
@oscarpocasangre Oscar Pocasangre on x
Boarding at JFK now requires using a facial recognition machine. I tried opting out (on principle because they already have all my facial data) but airline employees didn't allow it. https://twitter.com/...
@attackerman Spencer Ackerman on x
“A ban on facial recognition won't make any difference if, in response, surveillance systems switch to identifying people by smartphone MAC addresses. The problem is that we are being identified without our knowledge or consent...” https://www.nytimes.com/...
@counternotions Kontra on x
“The whole point of modern surveillance is to treat people differently, and facial recognition technologies are only a small part of that.” https://www.nytimes.com/...
@dhh @dhh on x
“The large internet surveillance companies like Facebook and Google collect dossiers on us more detailed than those of any police state of the previous century”, https://www.nytimes.com/...
@privacyproject @privacyproject on x
“Focusing on one particular identification method misconstrues the nature of the surveillance society we're in the process of building,” writes @schneierblog https://www.nytimes.com/...
@drewharwell Drew Harwell on x
Facial-recognition surveillance on the general public is becoming the new normal today in London. Which city will be next? http://news.met.police.uk/...
@privacyint @privacyint on x
“We are being identified without our knowledge or consent, and society needs rules about when that is permissible”, writes Bruce Schneier in the NYT https://www.nytimes.com/... There are many ways you can be identified, some you might not know about. Here are some examples 👇 1/5

Chronicles