Riconoscimento facciale, Microsoft come Amazon: non venderà il software alla polizia
(ansa)
Al no del colosso dell'ecommerce segue quello dell'azienda di Redmond che non fornirà la tecnologia alle forze dell'ordine Usa. "Servono nuove leggi"
PUBBLICATO + DI 6 MESI FA 1 MINUTI DI LETTURA
Poche leggi a regolarne l'uso e un margine di errore ancora troppo alto. Sono in sostanza queste le motivazioni dietro il rifuto di Amazon nel fornire il suo software per il riconoscimento facciale Rekognition alle forze dell'ordine. Diniego seguito da quello di Microsoft, che ha deciso altrettanto.
Ad annunciare la decisione dell'azienda Redmond è stato il presidente Brad Smith, nel corso di una conferenza virtuale del Washington Post: "Abbiamo deciso che non lo venderemo ai dipartimenti di polizia americani fino a quando non avremo una legge nazionale basata sui diritti umani che governerà questa tecnologia", ha detto.
Pochi giorni fa il dietrofront di Ibm con una precisa presa di posizione contro "l'uso per sorveglianza di massa, profilazione etnica e violazione dei diritti umani". Lo ha spiegato il ceo Arvind Krishna in una lettera al Congresso statunitense rilanciando sulla necessità di un "dibattito nazionale su se e come la tecnologia di riconoscimento facciale debba essere impiegata dalle forze dell'ordine interne".
Ci sono voluti focolai di proteste che hanno infiammato gli Usa per giorni, scatenati dalla morte di George Floyd durante un fermo di polizia a Minneapolis, per fare tornare sui loro passi i giganti della Silicon Valley. In realtà, gli algoritmi sviluppati per il riconoscimento facciale hanno dimostrato in varie occasioni di non essere ancora infallibili.
E i flop delle sperimentazioni, dal Regno Unito fino alla California, ancora troppo numerosi. Così come le denunce di associazioni per i diritti umani e digitali contro una tecnologia che si è dimostrata ancora troppo acerba per essere messa in mano a governi e autorità mettendo a rischio la libertà dei cittadini.
Uno studio canadese lo scorso anno metteva in guardia sulle defaillances della tecnologia sviluppata da Amazon e allenata a riconoscere sì i volti di bianchi, ma incappando in false corrispondenze che portavano a un errore dell'1,3% quando di trattava di persone di colore o confondendo il genere, soprattutto nel caso di donne asiatiche o afroamericane. Un problema dovuto principalmente al machine learning ma pur sempre legato al pregiudizio umano, poiché legato alla elaborazione di dati da parte dell'intelligenza artificiale.
Gli algoritmi non hanno convinzioni razziste, - concludeva il lavoro del Mit di Toronto - ma si espongono alle distorsioni perché "sono quel che mangiano". Cioè creano la propria visione in base ai dati che elaborano. L'analisi, oltre a sollevare i dubbi sul rischio per la sorveglianza di massa, ha fatto luce sul rischio che il riconoscimento facciale possa penalizzare le minoranze o determinati gruppi etnici. Una questione troppo rischiosa da affrontare nell''America di Trump attraversata dall'ondata di proteste contro il razzismo.
Der EU-Beamte Prabhat Agarwal soll an diesem Morgen die mächtigsten Konzerne der Welt bekämpfen, aber sein Sohn hat verschlafen. Es ist kurz nach acht, ein Dienstag Mitte November, als sich Agarwal, Vater dreier Teenager, aus dem Auto meldet: Es tue ihm leid, er habe seinen Sohn zur Schule fahren müssen. Jetzt habe er eine Stunde Zeit, um zu reden, danach müsse er dringend ein Treffen mit Vertretern der EU-Mitgliedsstaaten vorbereiten.
Agarwals Tage sind durchgetaktet: Auf Gespräche mit Experten folgen Treffen mit EU-Kommissar Thierry Breton, Agarwals Chef. Zwischendurch liest Agarwal Lobby-Papiere und spricht mit seinem 22-köpfigen Team, und das inmitten einer Pandemie, die selbst den Brüsseler Bürokratieapparat seit Monaten ins Homeoffice zwingt.
Verzögerungen kann sich Agarwal, ein Hamburger mit indischen Wurzeln, nicht leisten. Dafür ist die Aufgabe zu wichtig, mit der die EU-Kommission ihn beauftragt hat: Agarwal, 48, soll neue Regeln finden, um die Macht von Google, Amazon, Facebook und Apple zu beschränken. Er sagt: "Die Leute schauen auf das, was wir machen, auch weltweit. Natürlich lastet auf unserem Team großer Druck."
Agarwals Projekt gilt als eines der wichtigsten der EU-Kommission. "Wir akzeptieren die Machtstellung der großen Plattformen nicht mehr so einfach", sagte Kommissionspräsidentin Ursula von der Leyen kürzlich der ZEIT.
Übernächste Woche wollen Thierry Breton und Margrethe Vestager, die politisch verantwortlichen EU-Kommissare, das Gesetzespaket der Öffentlichkeit vorstellen. Dann wird sich zeigen, ob Agarwal und sein Team erfolgreich waren. Ob es der Brüsseler Bürokratie gelingt, die Internetnutzer und Kleinunternehmer besser vor Übergriffen auf ihre Daten und ihr Geschäft zu schützen. Oder ob es die Lobbyisten der Konzerne geschafft haben, das Vorhaben zu verwässern, so wie etwa Google das laut einem firmeninternen Papier beabsichtigte.
Google, Amazon, Facebook und Apple haben sich für Milliarden Nutzer unersetzlich gemacht und bestimmen de facto die Regeln im Netz. Die Suchmaschine Google drängt Konkurrenten angeblich aus dem Markt, weshalb das US-Justizministerium sie gerade verklagt hat. Amazon zwingt Tausenden Online-Händlern Geschäftsbedingungen auf, die viele von ihnen als ausbeuterisch empfinden. Facebook bestimmt, welche schmutzigen Inhalte es von seiner Plattform entfernt und welche nicht. Und Apple verlangt von App-Entwicklern eine so hohe Provision, dass diese öffentlich rebellieren.
Lange stand die EU-Kommission dem ohnmächtig gegenüber. Drei Kartellverfahren gegen Google, mit denen sich Wettbewerbskommissarin Margrethe Vestager als Schrecken des Silicon Valley profilierte, dauerten Jahre und änderten wenig. Irland und andere Mitgliedsstaaten verstehen sich als sichere Häften für die Digitalkonzerne und torpedierten die Politik aus Brüssel.
Es war das Jahr 2000, als die Beamten der Europäischen Union zuletzt eine Art europäisches Grundgesetz für das Internet verfassten. Die Gründer von Google waren damals gerade aus einer Garage in ihr erstes Büro umgezogen, Facebook existierte noch gar nicht. Seitdem sind aus Start-ups Weltkonzerne geworden. Das Gesetz von 2000 hatte sich schnell überholt, doch der EU-Apparat reagierte nicht. Frühere Kommissare sollen sogar stolz darauf gewesen sein, keine Ahnung vom Internet zu haben.
Article from the December 29, 1825 edition of the National Gazette and Literary Register published in Philadelphia reporting that Missouri Senator "Col. Palmer [Martin Parmer] is said to have taken French leave and gone to Texas."
Gone to Texas (often abbreviated GTT), was a phrase used by Americans emigrating to Texas in the 1800s.[1] During the Panic of 1819, many left the United States and moved there to escape debt.[2] Moving to Texas, which at the time was part of Mexico, was particularly popular among debtors from the South and West.[3]
Emigrants or their abandoned neighbors often wrote the phrase on doors of abandoned houses or posted as a sign on fences.[4][5][6][7]
This newspaper article is from page 99 of the April 9, 1836 edition of the Niles' Weekly Register, published in Baltimore. The article is the report of a notable Davy Crockett story about his threat to go to Texas if they did not re-elect him.
A gentleman from Nacogdoches, in Texas, informs us, that, whilst there, he dined in public with col. Crockett, who had just arrived from Tennessee. The old bear-hunter, on being toasted, made a speech to the Texians, replete with his usual dry humor. He began nearly in this style: "I am told, gentlemen, that, when a stranger, like myself, arrives among you, the first inquiry is—what brought you here? To satisfy your curiosity at once as to myself, I will tell you all about it. I was, for some years, a member of congress. In my last canvass, I told the people of my district, that, if they saw fit to re-elect me, I would serve them faithfully as I had done; but, if not, they might all go to h——, and I would go to Texas. I was beaten, gentlemen, and here I am." The roar of applause was like a thunder-burst.[8]
^National Gazette and Literary Register - December 29, 1825, "Col. Palmer is said to have taken French leave and gone to Texas." from online source, verified 2005-12-30.
^Smith, Sidney (1850). The Settler's New Home: Or, Whether to Go, and Whither?. London: John Kendrick. p. 128. Retrieved 2009-05-27.. This discouraged emigration by noting that "'Gone to Texas' has become the proverb for a scamp#PPA674,M1
^Thirty years' view; or, A history of the working of the American government for thirty years, from 1820 to 1850 (Vol. 1)Benton, Thomas Hart (1854), New York: D. Appleton and Company, p. 674 Missing or empty |title= (help)
^South-Western Immigration Company (Austin, Texas) (1881). Texas: Her Resources and Capabilities. New York: E.D. Slater.. This encouraged migration to the state of Texas and remarked on the "slang use" of the term a "generation ago" to refer to fugitives from justice.
Article from the December 29, 1825 edition of the National Gazette and Literary Register published in Philadelphia reporting that Missouri Senator "Col. Palmer [Martin Parmer] is said to have taken French leave and gone to Texas."
Gone to Texas (often abbreviated GTT), was a phrase used by Americans emigrating to Texas in the 1800s.[1] During the Panic of 1819, many left the United States and moved there to escape debt.[2] Moving to Texas, which at the time was part of Mexico, was particularly popular among debtors from the South and West.[3]
Emigrants or their abandoned neighbors often wrote the phrase on doors of abandoned houses or posted as a sign on fences.[4][5][6][7]
This newspaper article is from page 99 of the April 9, 1836 edition of the Niles' Weekly Register, published in Baltimore. The article is the report of a notable Davy Crockett story about his threat to go to Texas if they did not re-elect him.
A gentleman from Nacogdoches, in Texas, informs us, that, whilst there, he dined in public with col. Crockett, who had just arrived from Tennessee. The old bear-hunter, on being toasted, made a speech to the Texians, replete with his usual dry humor. He began nearly in this style: "I am told, gentlemen, that, when a stranger, like myself, arrives among you, the first inquiry is—what brought you here? To satisfy your curiosity at once as to myself, I will tell you all about it. I was, for some years, a member of congress. In my last canvass, I told the people of my district, that, if they saw fit to re-elect me, I would serve them faithfully as I had done; but, if not, they might all go to h——, and I would go to Texas. I was beaten, gentlemen, and here I am." The roar of applause was like a thunder-burst.[8]
^National Gazette and Literary Register - December 29, 1825, "Col. Palmer is said to have taken French leave and gone to Texas." from online source, verified 2005-12-30.
^Smith, Sidney (1850). The Settler's New Home: Or, Whether to Go, and Whither?. London: John Kendrick. p. 128. Retrieved 2009-05-27.. This discouraged emigration by noting that "'Gone to Texas' has become the proverb for a scamp#PPA674,M1
^Thirty years' view; or, A history of the working of the American government for thirty years, from 1820 to 1850 (Vol. 1)Benton, Thomas Hart (1854), New York: D. Appleton and Company, p. 674 Missing or empty |title= (help)
^South-Western Immigration Company (Austin, Texas) (1881). Texas: Her Resources and Capabilities. New York: E.D. Slater.. This encouraged migration to the state of Texas and remarked on the "slang use" of the term a "generation ago" to refer to fugitives from justice.
