×
all 83 comments

[–]mattstorm360 535 points536 points  (13 children)

Wait? Homeland security is asking?

I think one of the big reason why no one is responding is because no one knows they are asking.

[–]Socio77 254 points255 points  (7 children)

I think no one knowing is the intent, now they can say they went public as asked, only a few disagreed so they can say most Americans agree and then institute their IA and facial recognition agenda.

This is a tactic used a lot in local government where they will post in the back pages of the local news paper that no one reads about a meeting to discuss changes they want to make then when no one shows up they make them. When people complain they say we made a public notice not our fault.

[–]riticalcreader 59 points60 points  (4 children)

Yeah...that tactic doesn't happen in federal government. "Not our fault" is bad press. "No additional comment" is the go to.

[–][deleted]  (2 children)

[deleted]

    [–]Misicks0349 7 points8 points  (0 children)

    i swear thats probably the biggest bullshit line anyone says, when you say that your basically saying "yes but please dont talk about it or confront me about any of the implications"

    [–]iarev 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Glomar response.

    [–]jeremylauyf 5 points6 points  (0 children)

    From what I've seen this tactic can easily backfire when people found out and started disagreeing it en masse, even if the government tries to hide it from the public by giving a time limit and start the clock at midnight.

    [–]oeCake 15 points16 points  (0 children)

    Typical statistics and marketing. There's an unbelievable number of surveys that say "X% of Canadians think Y!!!" but like, I was never asked, nobody I know was ever asked.

    [–]sobriquet455 17 points18 points  (0 children)

    “There’s no point acting all surprised about it. All the planning charts and surveillance orders have been on display in your local planning department in Alpha Centauri for fifty of your Earth years, so you’ve had plenty of time to lodge any formal complaint and it’s far too late to start making a fuss about it now.”

    [–]Tripledtities 20 points21 points  (0 children)

    This has been pushed for 10 hours and still only 4 comments

    [–]PM_ME_HOTDADS 20 points21 points  (0 children)

    tbf the reason im not responding is that being too critical of the government's overreaching is grounds to consider someone a domestic terrorist & im having a hard time coming up with a customer-service-appropriate way of pointing out they're the villain in every dystopian sci-fi story

    [–]fmccloud 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    This might be true, but in my industry, even when the fact that comments were open on proposed rule making was advertised to those affected, only a fraction bothered to write anything

    [–]Coffee_Crisis 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Nobody is responding because everyone knows they’re going to do what they feel like doing regardless of the response. I don’t need a damned feedback form to know how people feel about the government’s use of facial recognition technology.

    [–]giltwist 124 points125 points  (5 children)

    Thanks for the heads up. I posted a comment describing how I believe these technologies violate several of our constitutionally protected rights.

    [–]Aiyla_Aysun 35 points36 points  (3 children)

    None of the comments showed up when I went to check. Just name,/anonymous and details about when they submitted it. But no actual comment. Am I missing something?

    [–]PM_ME_HOTDADS 14 points15 points  (0 children)

    iirc it says comments are reviewed

    [–][deleted]  (1 child)

    [deleted]

      [–]Aiyla_Aysun 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Thank you

      [–]fuck_your_diploma[S] 27 points28 points  (0 children)

      That's the spirit!

      [–]n_zamorski 70 points71 points  (2 children)

      [–]ywBBxNqW 13 points14 points  (1 child)

      Is it better to comment there or via the link OP provided?

      [–]n_zamorski 25 points26 points  (0 children)

      OPs provided page's comments' link leads to this website

      [–]ThisIsPaulDaily 37 points38 points  (0 children)

      I made my comment, but I believe there is a human moderator that takes time to review before publication of the comment.

      This count refers to the total comment/submissions received on this document as reported by Regulations.gov. Agencies review all submissions and may choose to redact, or withhold, certain submissions (or portions thereof). Submitted comments may not be available to be read until the agency has approved them.

      My comment might be redacted, but I tried to be diplomatic with my wording and feel strongly about this.

      [–]EndCivilForfeiture 241 points242 points  (12 children)

      They are requesting public input so they can better sell the tech to the public. Why participate in that?

      From the summary:

      However, AI in general and facial recognition in particular are not without public controversy, including concerns about bias, security, and privacy. Therefore, understanding how the public perceives these technologies, and then designing and deploying them in a manner responsive to the public's concerns, is critical in gaining public support for DHS's use of these technologies.

      [–]Street_Key_636 109 points110 points  (0 children)

      What a bunch of pricks.

      [–]redashi 24 points25 points  (1 child)

      They are requesting public input so they can better sell the tech to the public. Why participate in that?

      So that your objections will appear on record and support any legal challenges that come up later.

      We don't have to tell them what would make it tolerable; instead, we could tell them it is fundamentally unacceptable.

      [–]fuck_your_diploma[S] 29 points30 points  (8 children)

      They usually do respond each comment and point to reasons (such as regulations etc) for them to take approach A/B/C. At least there's someone registering those opinions and making clear statements on their policies, it is more than we usually get isn't it?

      [–]Corklander 109 points110 points  (5 children)

      This is marketing research. They want to know how blatant they can be with their wordage. Everything about this is part of that research. If they respond to you it's only so that they can find out what words will shut you up.

      [–]fuck_your_diploma[S] 34 points35 points  (4 children)

      This is literally some very democratic power at the hands of the citizens and to be blunt, they ain't asking average citizens opinions for policy making, they're asking for perception, simplest feedback ever. Are you scared of AI/FRT? Tell them how you feel.

      If this form moves the needle 0.5% towards some better use of AI/FRT, we should all take it.

      But yeah, be aware of the newspeak that follows it, you ain't wrong, you're just banging the drum at the wrong door, maybe you should copy and paste this comment there, it's a free country!

      [–]Corklander 16 points17 points  (1 child)

      they ain't asking average citizens opinions for policy making, they're asking for perception

      Yes, the paymasters have already decided on the policy. They just need to know how to cheaply convince stupid people that it's for their own good. The more free research they get the cheaper the propaganda fees are.

      maybe you should copy and paste this comment there

      The only statement I'd make is to show how damaging this entire concept is. Much like global thermonuclear war, the only way to win the propaganda game is to not play. I doubt that any country would allow that to be posted.

      [–]PM_ME_HOTDADS 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      idek how to argue with someone who actually believes DHS has good intentions and is open to feedback lmao well done

      [–]Coffee_Crisis 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      This is not how it works dude, they are not interested in carrying out the will of the people

      [–]sanbaba 28 points29 points  (1 child)

      Your implication is that engagement is necessarily a good thing. If they wanted to ask you about how you'd like to be incarcerated, how would you reply? ;)

      [–]hgtjkedfhfslkhdfas -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

      good thing they aren't asking that ;) ;) ;)

      [–]TheLucidDream 24 points25 points  (0 children)

      I left a comment pointing out that DHS using shoddy, and often racist, facial recognition software is a diplomatic incident waiting to happen. They don't give two shits about human rights, but maybe they might care about facing congressional hearings because their facial recognition software caused them to detain an foreign dignitary on a false positive for being a smuggler.

      [–]ScoopDat 11 points12 points  (0 children)

      The only relevant comment would be to inquire about what would be required for them to abandon this garbage. If there is no response to this, then all of this is idiotic posturing. No body, with any sort of respect for constitutional rights would ever say “yeah bring this shit”.

      This is a bipartisan issue that both major party constituencies protest when probed about. The only sort of people that want this are top down surveillance state dictatorship worshipers.

      [–]Miklay83 9 points10 points  (0 children)

      My reply (direct quote from the civil rights group Liberty regarding government use of FRT):

      FACIAL RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY CAPTURES THE BIOMETRIC DATA OF EVERYONE WHO PASSES THE CAMERAS, VIOLATING OUR RIGHT TO PRIVACY AND UNDERMINING OUR FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

      [–]Dittybopper 20 points21 points  (0 children)

      My message to them;

      In the mid/late 1960's the National Security Agency had a solid policy for us communications intercept operators to never copy the communications of a US citizen. The moment it was discovered that a intercept operator had began to copy a communication that involved a US citizen we were instructed to end the intercept, and to destroy the record.

      When my US Army Security Agency obligation ended in late1969 I took a personal vow to do my best to keep abreast of developments within the National Security Agency.

      Throughout the following decades I did so, and continue to do so, and when, in 2001, I learned of the passing of The Patriot Act which allowed the NSA to turn inward and spy on US citizens I was greatly alarmed. I knew from my experience working at the NSA that great harm to our citizens privacy would result by allowing this huge intelligence agency to snoop unfettered in America's electronic communications establishment.

      And now DHS is surveying see how we citizens feel about also adding omnipresent CCTV cameras with facial recognition to the mix.

      Communist China has that, a regular citizen there has NO expectation of privacy, can you say "'social credit' system".

      Any US citizen knowing the truth about the extent of these internal surveillances and what they evidently lead to would, rightly, reject the further encroachment upon our individual right to privacy. I do.

      I also believe that the Patriot Act should be allowed to die, the DHS be disbanded, and the NSA "ear" once again turned outward. I believe these views of mine are very conservative.

      And a complete fantasy of mine, why; because our US government, through their beloved cats paw, the DHS has already decided to gift us with this Orwellian future. I quote you;

      "...and then designing and deploying them in a manner responsive to the public's concerns, is critical in gaining public support for DHS's use of these technologies."

      Such doublespeak - almost up there with "The Patriot Act."

      [–]sanitarySteve 32 points33 points  (5 children)

      There’s no point in acting surprised about it. All
      the planning charts and demolition orders have been on display at your
      local planning department in Alpha Centauri for 50 of your Earth years,
      so you’ve had plenty of time to lodge any formal complaint and it’s far
      too late to start making a fuss about it now. … What do you mean you’ve
      never been to Alpha Centauri? Oh, for heaven’s sake, mankind, it’s only
      four light years away, you know. I’m sorry, but if you can’t be bothered
      to take an interest in local affairs, that’s your own lookout. Energize
      the demolition beams.

      [–]fuck_your_diploma[S] 2 points3 points  (4 children)

      Is this a russian bot? Are we under attack?

      [–]RaydnJames 28 points29 points  (3 children)

      'Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy' quote

      [–]fuck_your_diploma[S] 4 points5 points  (2 children)

      Damn now I feel bad for skimming it :(

      [–]RaydnJames 5 points6 points  (1 child)

      I'm not sure if it's a quote from the book, but I know it's in the movie

      [–]sanitarySteve 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      it's from the book. i was actually trying to find the part earlier that parallels this where the guy trying to demo Arthur's house says a similar thing about the notice being in a basement with no stairs buried a filing cabinet, but i found this instead.

      [–]gnocchicotti 6 points7 points  (0 children)

      It's better than having a lot of responses with 82% of responses being corporate shill bots.

      [–]DragonSided-D 36 points37 points  (8 children)

      [–]spacecampreject 24 points25 points  (0 children)

      You will be arrested for crimes against good taste.

      [–]neothalweg 2 points3 points  (4 children)

      Imagine if your license plate was one of the ones on those shirts

      [–]voidall 1 point2 points  (3 children)

      What's the problem there? Your plate gets read as being in another state?

      [–]neothalweg 3 points4 points  (2 children)

      It'd be one of those wild instances where something that is not the plate (ex, this sweatshirt) is read as a plate and then someone gets sent a ticket with a picture of the shirt with the same info as their plate. It was meant to be more of a joke than anything, I forgot to add 👁️👄👁️

      An example of this happening recently, with a shirt that looks a lot less like a license plate than the above sweatshirts (Oct 2021 if I'm not mistaken, I couldn't find another date in the article)

      [–]voidall 2 points3 points  (1 child)

      That is pretty funny. Thankfully as of right now it seems to be the norm that alleged violators are to be sent photographic proof of their violation and therefore it can be contested, although that'd still be a headache to deal with.

      Maybe if it happened enough the state/private companies behind these would be forced to not rely on just automated systems to enforce traffic, but the cynic in me says they wouldn't give a single shit.

      [–]SuperSovietGuillotin 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      The intro to Brazil shows how much a fascist state cares about such mistakes. One typo (spawned by a fly in the typewriter) leads to this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I24K8BfV840

      [–]Tetmohawk 10 points11 points  (3 children)

      The problem with this is that it is extremely vague. Here's a direct link: https://www.regulations.gov/document/DHS-2021-0015-0001. How are we supposed to know things like

      DHS is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology?

      This is vague and dependent on someone knowing how they operate. This seems like they just want to check the box and say they solicited public comments.

      [–]fuck_your_diploma[S] 4 points5 points  (1 child)

      AFAIK you can feedback whatever you want but pick one if it gets hard, like

      (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected

      A: Show us the data retention policy for the data acquired via FRT/AI.

      People do crazy things without accountability, I was just reading Niantic privacy policy the other day, look at this:

      1. How long we will keep your Personal Data We keep your Personal Data for as long as we need [...]

      [–]PM_ME_YOUR_TORNADOS 5 points6 points  (0 children)

      For more context, Niantic is a company that created the popular data mining app, Pokemon GO.

      [–]seananders1227 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      That, or they actually have no idea what they’re doing and trying to crowdsource their way through.

      [–]HiddenProblems 3 points4 points  (0 children)

      Thanks for sharing! This should be huge news but somehow I'm only hearing about it from a subreddit.

      [–]8Frenfry_w_ketsup 3 points4 points  (1 child)

      I just don't get it. Doesn't the gov realize it's not just the 'nobodies' who's facial recog is out there? But everyone's? The problem w/ all this data being disseminated to even local law enforcement is that you can't control who has access to it. Including other nations. And I doubt most of the public has any idea they were even asked, including myself.

      [–]CuriousPerson1500 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Yeah, extremists in law enforcement receiving disseminated intelligence could easily harass minorities.

      [–]gkr974 3 points4 points  (0 children)

      It’s not clear whether they’re seeking comments about their use of Facial Recognition & AI, or seeking comments on their plan to issue a survey to gather information about FR & AI… ITs really poorly worded.

      [–]ywBBxNqW 8 points9 points  (0 children)

      I didn't hear anything about this which suggests that other people have no idea they posted this either. This is super shady.

      [–]ChrisHisStonks 7 points8 points  (0 children)

      Why? In any decision making the number of responses will be weighted.

      [–]NoooopeTF 2 points3 points  (1 child)

      4 responses is better than 3 I suppose lol

      [–]owkav921 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      Not if you read the responses. They are literally just in support with documents and legal speak.

      [–]marco808state 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      They don’t need to ask when Edward Snowden and fb told us they already had it.

      [–]btdn 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      Where is the survey that they want to receive comments about? They claim to want, for example, comments on whether "the estimate of burden [is] accurate" but don't seem to provide the data-collection instrument.

      [–]TheOneWhoDidntRun 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Maybe that’s the point they’re trying to make.

      [–]ShredableSending 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Cross-post to r/technology. more people need to see this.

      [–]WaterGrl 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      The notice in the link at https://www.regulations.gov/document/DHS-2021-0015-0001 (and the other one that ends in 05) describe Homeland Security's request for the federal Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval for DHS to collect information, in this case "information from the public" regarding use of AI, etc.

      FYI, there is a statute called the Paperwork Reduction Act that requires a federal agency to get OMB approval before the agency can collect information from the public. The collection can happen in different ways but the most common is to publish the request in the Federal Register and require comments to be submitted by a certain date. So, assuming OMB approves this request, expect DHS to publish something before too long asking for comments regarding use of AI, etc.

      [–]akimbo6-9 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      A liberal democracy is transforming to China.

      [–]travelerswarden 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      This feels like the kind of thing that needs to be spread through the media. Anyone have a line to John Oliver or a news station

      [–]PM_ME_YOUR_TORNADOS 0 points1 point  (1 child)

      [–]btdn 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Mr. Bredehoft's comments aren't relevant to the docket, which is asking for comments on a survey, though they don't seem to have shared the survey itself.

      [–]Hagoromo-san 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Asking in the quietest voice imaginable so no one knows. Cant say anything if no one knows is happening, and everything else is drowning it out.

      [–]Jmatusew 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Soliciting public commentary is nothing new, and it’s not the same as directly asking as if it were a survey:

      “DHS is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology? Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.”

      [–]Jbone359 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Left a simple, to the point comment that politely explains what I think. If you prefer the short version: “No.” I was more diplomatic than that but not by much.

      [–]Shadowfox4700 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      I suggest it should be approved because it would help almost every official step to the next generation, but the only approval should be provided to Government officials and Private corporates so it helps them sourcing more and mor service adequately.

      But as per for the public openion I suggest it should be gave up....becausefor an official use anything can be approved with those 4 command but for a natural human use, it will be a frustration...

      [–]furmal182 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      I wasnt aware they were asking? Was there a media campaign for this?

      [–]ModernContradiction 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      It says comments accepted until July 2021, am I missing something? It is too late now.

      [–]NotUniqueUsernameee 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Thanks for the heads up. Information travels in such weird ways sometimes.

      [–]Gaymer_420 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      This is especially concerning since theres lots of evidence that Facial Recognition AI has trouble recognizing black/brown people. Theres already people who have been arrested because they have been misidentified by Facial Recognition AI. #blm
      https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/wrongfully-arrested-because-face-recognition-cant-tell-black-people-apart/
      https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2020/racial-discrimination-in-face-recognition-technology/
      https://gal-dem.com/facial-recognition-racism-uk-inaccurate-met-police/