Naomi
Wolf, The Guardian
If you think that 24/7 tracking of citizens by biometric recognition systems is
paranoid fantasy, just read the industry newsletters
A
software engineer in my Facebook community wrote recently about his outrage
that when he visited Disneyland, and went on a ride, the theme park offered him
the photo of himself and his girlfriend to buy—with his credit card information
already linked to it. He noted that he had never entered his name or
information into anything at the theme park, or indicated that he wanted a
photo, or alerted the humans at the ride to who he and his girlfriend were—so,
he said, based on his professional experience, the system had to be using
facial recognition technology. He had never signed an agreement allowing them
to do so, and he declared that this use was illegal. He also claimed that
Disney had recently shared data from facial-recognition technology with the United
States military.
Yes, I
know: it sounds like a paranoid rant.
Except
that it turned out to be true. News21, supported by the Carnegie and Knight
foundations, reports that Disney sites are indeed controlled by
face-recognition technology, that the military is interested in the technology,
and that the face-recognition contractor, Identix, has contracts with the US
government—for technology that identifies individuals in a crowd.
Fast
forward: after the Occupy crackdowns, I noted that odd-looking CCTVs had started
to appear, attached to lampposts, in public venues in Manhattan where the small
but unbowed remnants of Occupy congregated: there was one in Union Square,
right in front of their encampment. I reported here on my experience of
witnessing a white van marked “Indiana Energy” that was lifting workers up to
the lampposts all around Union Square, and installing a type of camera. When I
asked the workers what was happening—and why an Indiana company was dealing
with New York City civic infrastructure, which would certainly raise
questions—I was told: “I’m a contractor. Talk to ConEd.”
I then
noticed, some months later, that these bizarre camera/lights had been installed
not only all around Union Square but also around Washington Square Park. I
posted a photo I took of them, and asked: “What is this?” Commentators who had
lived in China said that they were the same camera/streetlight combinations
that are mounted around public places in China. These are enabled for facial
recognition technology, which allows police to watch video that is tagged to
individuals, in real time. When too many people congregate, they can be
dispersed and intimidated simply by the risk of being identified—before dissent
can coalesce. (Another of my Facebook commentators said that such lamppost
cameras had been installed in Michigan, and that they barked “Obey”, at
pedestrians. This, too, sounded highly implausible—until this week in Richmond,
British Columbia, near the Vancouver airport, when I was startled as the
lamppost in the intersection started talking to me—in this case, instructing me
on how to cross (as though I were blind or partially sighted).
Finally,
last week, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg joined NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly
to unveil a major new police surveillance infrastructure, developed by
Microsoft. The Domain Awareness System links existing police databases with
live video feeds, including cameras using vehicle license plate recognition
software. No mention was made of whether the system plans to use—or already uses—facial
recognition software. But, at present, there is no law to prevent US government
and law enforcement agencies from building facial recognition databases.
And we
know from industry newsletters that the US military, law enforcement, and the
department of homeland security are betting heavily on facial recognition
technology. As PC World notes, Facebook itself is a market leader in the
technology—but military and security agencies are close behind.
According to Homeland Security Newswire, billions of dollars are being
invested in the development and manufacture of various biometric technologies
capable of detecting and identifying anyone, anywhere in the world—via
iris-scanning systems, already in use; foot-scanning technology (really); voice
pattern ID software, and so on.
What is very obvious is that this technology will not be applied merely
to people under arrest, or to people under surveillance in accordance with the
fourth amendment (suspects in possible terrorist plots or other potential
crimes, after law enforcement agents have already obtained a warrant from a
magistrate). No, the “targets” here are me and you: everyone, all of the time.
In the name of “national security”, the capacity is being built to identify,
track and document any citizen constantly and continuously.
The revealing boosterism of a trade magazine like Homeland Security
Newswire envisions endless profits for the surveillance industry, in a society
where your TV is spying on you, a billboard you drive by recognizes you,
Minority Report style, and the FBI knows where to find your tattoo—before you
have committed any crime: “FBI on Track to Book Faces, Scars, Tattoos”, it
notes; “Billboards, TVs Detect your Faces; Advertisers Salivate”, it gloats;
“Biometric Companies See Government as the Driver of Future Market Growth”, it
announces. Indeed, the article admits without a blush that all the growth is
expected to be in government consumption, with “no real expectation” of
private-sector growth at all. So much for smaller government!
To acclimate their populations to this brave new world of invasive
surveillance technologies, UK Prime Minister David Cameron and his Canadian
counterpart, Stephen Harper, both recently introduced “snoop” bills. Meanwhile,
in the US—“the land of the free”—the onward march of the surveillers continues
apace, without check or consultation.
No comments:
Post a Comment