Session 3 Portfolio Summary task
- This topic has 16 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Hello again.
Yesterday you were given two news reports from Sky News to read as a follow-up task. This is also part of your Portfolio.
Here’s what you need to do.
1. Choose one of the reports.
2. Write a paragraph summarising the key / most important points.
3. Write a second paragraph stating your opinion.
(You need to write between 300-400 words.Reply to this thread and ‘copy and paste’ your paragraphs and submit them.
Andy.
Nine schools in North Ayrshire are using facial recognition technology to reduce payment queues for students at school meal breaks, this solution should eliminate queues and minimise the contact for the transmission of COVID-19. Negative feedback was received from parents and campaigners as they were not aware of the project’s outcome. In return, the North Ayrshire Council said that 97% of children or their parents had agreed to the use of facial recognition. The company implementing the project spokesperson David Swanston, managing director of CRB Cunninghams, states that it is the fastest and easiest way to identify all students and thus reduce the waiting time to a minimum. The Department for Education states that it does not monitor facial recognition technology use in schools. Also, other critics stated that facial recognition is not monitored as strictly as other biometrics. At the Download Festival in 2015 at Donnington Park, the use of live facial recognition systems was applied to aid the Leicestershire police in trailing the queues to enter the venue. Campaigners are worried that this technology will instigate arrests without any reason. Although this system is used in public areas like E-gates at airports and public events like the Notting Hill Carnival, the Metropolitan Police found the technology to be highly inaccurate with an 81% error rate in an independent study. Big Brother Watch’s head, Silkie Carlo, criticized the use of such advanced technology for normal routine activities such as school lunch payments, stating that it is unnecessary to go to certain extremes since this is a school, not an airport.
Analysis of Article
In the world of today, people are relying on AI very easily even for the smallest of tasks. While this technology was introduced and implemented during COVID-19, and human contact had to be minimal, I feel we are starting to lose our identity with all these drastic measures. When kids line up for the meal, they have time to socialise among themselves and even with the person who is at the other end serving their meal. This kind of connection is important as this is an opportunity for kids to build social and relationship skills which could fade if we depend too much on technology.
On a positive note, this implementation of the project offers a practical solution for students not to wait in queue as valuable time is currently being lost. Overall, it shall prove to be a good initiative. This shall also ensure that the meal service runs smoothly and efficiently thus lowering also the risks associated with COVID-19.Article 1: Facial recognition used to take payments from school children
On the 18th of October 2021, nine schools in North Ayrshire have started using facial recognition software for lunch payments for students, claiming it will speed up service and reduce COVID-19 risks that was associated with card payments and fingerprint scanners. While 97% of parents consented to the system, some parents expressed concerns about exposing children to biometric surveillance and that they weren’t confident that the students were adequately informed about the privacy risks. David Swanston, managing director of the system’s provider, stated that the system significantly reduces transaction times during lunch periods. Schools in the U.S. have banned this technology indicating that they had concerns about the privacy and regulations of this product. Mr Fraser Sampson the Biometrics Commissioner for England and Wales, has argued that the facial technology is not covered under the same laws as those of DNA and fingerprint and that less intrusive payment methods should be used. Facial recognition systems were installed in the queues to enter Download Festival at Donnington Park by the police back in 2015. Non-live versions were used for mugshot matching and used as an authenticator to login to your phone. This is not privacy concerning as you have more control of whose face is being matched. Some campaigners have shown their concerns that this system exposes people in crowds to be arrested without a reason. However, following this no action was taken. Silkie Carlo, head of Big Brother Watch, criticized the use of biometric checks for everyday tasks like school lunches, stating, “There’s no need for airport-style technology.” Campaigners argue it’s unnecessary and invasive, especially since a study by the Metropolitan Police found that the system is 81% accurate.
My perspective:
Since this is initiative was launched in 2021 and COVID hit us in 2019, I believe these measures weren’t necessary. These students were already traumatised by the pandemic, having spent over two years living in a bubble in result of this situation. Now that they returned to school, they encountered systems they were unfamiliar with. From my perspective, before instructing them to use this system, it would have been more appropriate to provide a brief overview of its purpose and explain the situation, rather than simply asking for parental permission. Additionally, if the students’ parents had privacy concerns related to this system the school should have addressed them and gave them the reassurance that this system was only going to be used to refrain the spread of COVID and also to fasten the payment process during lunch time. On a positive note, this system could have encouraged the students to engage with advanced technology an understand its pros and cons. By fastening the lunch payment process students now may have more time to relax during their breaks, enjoy their meals without feeling rushed and spend more time with friends instead of waiting in long lines. While they may have used alternative solutions, it seems that this system is the norm not only in schools but in many other situations. For example, phone authenticator, airports and as a work punching system. Whether we like it or not, AI is here to stay, and we must adapt cause if we don’t, we will stay behind. I do believe that it’s crucial to provide more awareness and information especially for students and older generation. If this is done, they can familiarise themselves with these changes and they do not resist.
Article 2 – Metropolitan Police Facial Recognition Technology
The use of facial recognition technology used by the Metropolitan police force has attained the interest of independent researchers to shed some light on the use of this technology for crowd monitoring purposes.
The independent research conducted by professors from the University of Essex exposed several concerns about using this technology such as the lack of accuracy, the lack of explicit legal basis and a breach in fundamental human rights. The evaluation of the technology’s accuracy was done at 6 of the 10 trials conducted by the police, where only 8 matches were verified out of 42 hence, resulted in an 81% error rate, contradicting the error rate of the police which according to their metric the error rate is at 0.1%.
Reporters highlighted significant concerns about the use of this technology citing a range of technical, operational and legal issues such as gaining a meaningful consent from passers-by, however, the efforts by the police force to notify passers-by about the trials were noted. Another major concern is that avoidance of the facial recognition camera was treated as suspicious behaviour and that certainly raises issues regarding the extension of police powers and suspicions of creep surveillance.
Another concern raised by the research was the lack of validation of people on the watch list and to mitigate this concern a huge upgrade in the police IT system is needed to ensure that the people on the watch lists are there legally. Despite being challenged in court by an anti-surveillance campaign group and another judicial challenge by a human rights group to stop using this technology, the police force has the support of the government who believes that there is a legal framework for the use of live facial recognition technology and the use of facial recognition still intended to be used at the Wales National Airshow with an estimated attendance of 200,000 people.
In my opinion the use of facial recognition technology shall be used for the sole purpose of monitoring crowds or public spaces for suspicious behaviour however, I do not agree with using this technology to search and identify people in public spaces or crowds primarily due to the lack of accuracy and the validation of the watch list. There is no wrong doing by using such systems as an additional aid to ensure that public order is maintained and the laws respected but I do not agree with using the system to identify people.Article 1: Facial Recognition to take payments at school.
Nine schools have begun taking payment from children for lunch by using facial recognition software to automatically identify each student.
The system which the schools in North Ayrshire claim will speed up queues and reduce the Covid-19 risks of card payments and fingerprint scanners, is being launched today.
Similar uses in America schools have led to states such New York temporarily banning the technology. Fraser Sampson, the Biometric commissioner for England and Wales – whose predecessors have complained the facial recognition technology is not covered under the same laws as DNA and fingerprints- said if there is a less intrusive way for children to pay for their lunches, then it should be used. Despite the outcry following this event – that the technology was not regulated on an equal footing to other biometrics, such as fingerprints and DNA, despite potentially being even more invasive- no legislation had been introduced putting it on an equal statutory footingMy Opinion;
The usage of this technology is far for being safe, it has began as an application software by (Woody Bledsoe, Helen Chan Wolf and Charles Bisson) whose work focuses on teaching computers to recognize human faces. Then it has be evolved by (Takeo Kanade) publicly demonstrated a face-matching system that located anatomical features such the chin and calculated the distance ratio between facial features without human interventions. Later test revealed that the system could not always reliably identify facial features. In 1993 the ( Defense Advanced research project Agency (DARPA) and the Army research Laboratory (ARL) ) established the face recognition technology program (FERET) to develop “Automatic face recognition capabilities” that could be employed in productive real life environment “ To assist security, intelligence, law enforcement personnel in the performance of their duties”.
The list goes on who perfected the technology, the issue is that from something that has started from conception to be used for software application that today we are using as such as opening of laptops and mobile phones, the technology has been evolved for Army and Law enforcements. Which is good for public saftey but it is not safe especially when it comes to Children in schools. In the Data protection law, someone cannot post or make public a face of a minor on any platform due to predators or other dark individuals/organizations. My opinion is that in schools this cannot be happening, we should leave children as innocent as possible and not starting collecting data of face recognitions from a young age, which potentially can be leaked and used by predators or malicious organizations. It has to be legalized and monitored by law especially when it comes to private entities using this technology.Article 1: Facial Recognition to take payments at school.
Nine schools have begun taking payment from children for lunch by using facial recognition software to automatically identify each student.
The system which the schools in North Ayrshire claim will speed up queues and reduce the Covid-19 risks of card payments and fingerprint scanners, is being launched today.
Similar uses in America schools have led to states such New York temporarily banning the technology. Fraser Sampson, the Biometric commissioner for England and Wales – whose predecessors have complained the facial recognition technology is not covered under the same laws as DNA and fingerprints- said if there is a less intrusive way for children to pay for their lunches, then it should be used. Despite the outcry following this event – that the technology was not regulated on an equal footing to other biometrics, such as fingerprints and DNA, despite potentially being even more invasive- no legislation had been introduced putting it on an equal statutory footingMy Opinion;
The usage of this technology is far for being safe, it has began as an application software by (Woody Bledsoe, Helen Chan Wolf and Charles Bisson) whose work focuses on teaching computers to recognize human faces. Then it has be evolved by (Takeo Kanade) publicly demonstrated a face-matching system that located anatomical features such the chin and calculated the distance ratio between facial features without human interventions. Later test revealed that the system could not always reliably identify facial features. In 1993 the ( Defense Advanced research project Agency (DARPA) and the Army research Laboratory (ARL) ) established the face recognition technology program (FERET) to develop “Automatic face recognition capabilities” that could be employed in productive real life environment “ To assissecurity, intelligence, law enforcement personnel in the performance of their duties”.
The list goes on who perfected the technology, the issue is that from something that has started from conception to be used for software application that today we are using as such as opening of laptops and mobile phones, the technology has been evolved for Army and Law enforcements. Which is good for public saftey but it is not safe especially when it comes to Children in schools. In the Data protection law, someone cannot post or make public a face of a minor on any platform due to predators or other dark individuals/organizations. My opinion is that in schools this cannot be happening, we should leave children as innocent as possible and not starting collecting data of face recognitions from a young age, which potentially can be leaked and used by predators or malicious organizations. It has to be legalized and monitored by law especially when it comes to private entities using this technology.Facial recognition used to take payments from schoolchildren.
SummaryNine schools in the North Ayrshire have been under the spotlight for introducing facial recognition software to automatically identify the children to automatically pay for their lunches. This system was introduced after COVID-19 to contain the COVID risks and to make the lunch queue more efficient. Parents and campaigners complained that the students were not adequately informed about the privacy risk. Although 97% of children or their parents agreed to the introduction of the new system, in view of its sensitivity and legal uncertainties, there is concern for applying such a system for normal day to day activities. The Department for Education did not enter into the merit of the system because they do not monitor such technologies. Although this system has been used since 2015 for big event surveillance to identify individuals in a crown, an independent study by the MET police confirms the system is 81% inaccurate. It also seems that such a system already introduced in American schools have now been temporarily banned.
My Opinion;
I have to agree with what Silkie Carlo, the head of Big Brother said. I don’t think that there is the need to introduce such an intrusive system for school children. The facial recognition system is a security system that shall be used for more specific purposes, where there are large crowds and the security is high. I don’t think that the school lunch mirrors such security needs. While I acknowledge that the payment for lunch in school may be a challenge due to the limited time period for students to manage to purchase their lunch and eat it, I think that there are other easier ways to address such challenges. In addition, in view of the significant inaccuracy rate of the system, it is not worth considering investing in such a system; it will be a waste of resources. If a new system needs to be implemented in a school, more research and discussions with students and parents is needed to ensure that the system fits to school environment and to embrace the transition.Article 2 – Metropolitan Police Facial Recognition Technology
The headline speaks for it’s self and 81% of the suspects flagged by Met’s Facial recognition are innocent raises a lot of questions and doubt in the said technology. Concerns maybe raised such as the reliability and the ethical implications caused when law enforcement uses such technology.
Apart from its inaccuracies, a technical, operational and legal issues stated that this is operational in a way unlawfully if it is taken it into court. This may raise a lot of concerns in the public privacy especially if this can lead to surveillances without consent.In my opinion such technology should undergo through a lot of tests and certifications including legislations. I do not agree when Met prefers to measure accuracy by comparing successful and unsuccessful matches with the total number of faces processed by the facial recognition system as this dropped down the error to 0.1% where in reality it is not. That is a way how to turn around the numbers in your favour. The reality remains that 81% of those flagged were innocent.
Another issue that is facing the Facial recognition system is that this is not falling under any law such as DNA, therefore this must also be addressed to protect any individual being under surveillance and not infringing on personal freedoms and public rights.Finally, the public should have a say on how these technologies are implemented and monitored. We can all agree that this is all being done for the public safety however it’s unlawful to take advantage of such technologies and use them for other purposes or intentions rather than what initially has been invented for. We have seen it already in other technologies such as the mobile phones so this cannot be implemented especially on facial recognition where who knows what the full capacity is of its capabilities.
Article 2 – Metropolitan Police’s facial recognition technology
A recent report has put the Metropolitan Police’s facial recognition technology under criticism, which found it to be 81% inaccurate, or about four of five flagged people being innocent. Out of the 42 people matched by the technology, only eight were correctly verified. This evaluation, conducted by researchers led by Professor Pete Fussey and Dr. Daragh Murray, has questioned the reliability and has concerns about its legality and use on ethical grounds, and calls for Scotland Yard to stop its use of this technology.
The Police force however, has defended the technology and claim their system misidentifies only one in every 1,000 people. They explain that their figures are based on comparing unsuccessful matches to the total number of evaluated faces.
The report also highlights legal issues, including the challenges that might arise around obtaining consent from the public. People who were avoiding the cameras during the trials were sometimes treated as suspicious, and some were even fined or detained for unrelated small offense. The researchers pointed out in their findings that this approach diminishes the idea of consent and adds to the concerns of what they called “surveillance creep.” It also found that the databases of wanted individuals used by the facial recognition technology, called “watch lists” were sometimes outdated, which led to people being flagged even after their cases were resolved. In some cases, there was no clear reason for why a person was on the list, adding further concern.
This report has called for the Met to put a halt to the program. Legal groups like Big Brother Watch and Liberty and pushing for a legal review, arguing that this system is violating privacy rights. The director of Big Brother Watch, Silkie Carlo said the report is definitive enough to urge the Metropolitan Police to abandon the system, and privacy advocates are determined to see this issue resolved in court.
In my opinion while technological advances are exciting, relying on flawed systems like facial recognition is risky. While it does have some potential for future use, it is not yet reliable enough to serve as the primary method for critical decisions like distinguishing the difference between a criminal and an innocent person for public safety. If these systems are to be implemented, it is crucial that there would still be an element of human overseeing, as errors can have drastic consequences for innocent people. Better technology is crucial for moving forward, but for the time being, until it is consistently accurate, it should support police work, not manage it.Session 3 – News Article Summary
Nine schools in North Ayrshire are aiming to reduce and potentially eliminate payment queues and minimise contact to reduce the threat of Covid-19 with the use of facial recognition technology. The news of the new payment technology led to criticism from parents and campaigners worrying that they weren’t confident that kids weren’t adequately informed about the privacy risks. When asked about the situation the department of education stated that they do not monitor the use of the technology by schools. In response the North Ayrshire Local council stated that 97 percent of kids and their parents had agreed for the new technology to start being used.
David Swatson, the managing director of CRB Cunninghams which is the company providing the system spoke to the financial times newspaper and stated, ‘that its the fastest way of recognising someone at the till’, he also went on to say that ‘the average transaction time using the system was five seconds per pupil.’ Similar uses of the technology in American schools lead to states such as New York temporally banning the technology . In 2015 Leicestershire Police trialled for the first time the use of live facial recognition systems to enter Download Festival at Donnington Park. With the system being used in a range of environments to identify individuals in crowds such as airports, festivals and other gatherings. The technology has raised many concerns that it exposes people in crowds to potential arrest without reasonable cause, despite the public outcry that the technology was not regulated on an equal footing to other biometrics, and despite potentially being even more invasive, no legislation has been introduced. In a study commissioned by the Metropolitan Police found that the system is 81% inaccurate. The Biometrics Commissioner for England and Wales, Fraser Sampson said if there is a less intrusive way for children to pay for their lunches, then it should be used. Jumping to his defense when asked for his opinion about the situation, the head of Big Brother Watch, Silkie Carlo, said that you don’t need to resort to airport-style [technology] for children getting their lunch.”
In a world where everything is being done by a programme, we resorted to technology even more during Covid-19 when minimum contact between human beings was best, but now after covid and measures very much reduced, we need to go back to the way things were, kids lining up for lunch building different relationships, talking about what’s for lunch or what game they’ll play after school or talking to the lunch lady, the kind of relationships that form different characteristics in kids will be lost with the increase of technology in today’s society.
Facial recognition used to take payments from schoolchildren
The article from sky news provides information about the integration of facial recognition electronics in schools to process payments from juniors. Some of the schools in the United Kingdom are acquiring this technology payment systems to allow children to pay for their meals directly by scanning their faces. The innovation is a result from taken protections from COVID-19 to avoid any contact with the human body. Exponents support this idea as they think the same will result in effectiveness and security, however there are a lot of concerns regarding the privacy and the moral consequences of using this kind of technology. Ultimately, the article outlines the ongoing dispute between modernisation and the privacy rights in the educational systems.
My opinion:
Nowadays, living in such technology-oriented world, the idea to integrate modern payment system in the schools will be an advantage. The parent’s mind will be in peace as they don’t need to assure that their children will not forget the passwords to their cards or the fact that their cards won’t be stolen or lost. Moreover, this process seemed to be happening very quickly, which is very important for such a busy environment as schools. Everything have advantages and disadvantages, since this kind of electronics collets a biometric data, some of the people might be worried about. Even the fact that we don’t know how our data is collected and what is it used for, at some point this will be implemented in our routine, and we will need to adapt to the change. Nevertheless, since the world is changing and developing rapidly, I don’t consider collecting of biometric data as a something that I need to be concerned for, as in a few years more this will be unavoidable and part of our daily live situation. I believe that the protection system will continue developing more and more and issues such as a stolen data will be very rare situation.
Article 1 – Facial recognition used to take payments from school children.
Nine schools North Ayrshire have came up with an efficiente process for the queue to move more swiftly at lunch time and meanwhile reducing the COVID-19 risks of card payments and finger print scanners. This process includes using facial recognition when students go up to pay for their lunch.
This process has gained some backlash from the students parents & campaigners due to the fact that they think that the students are not being informed about the privacy risks that this process might cause. However, according to the North Ayrshire Council, 97% of children or their parents have agreed to use the facial recognition in schools.While David Swanston the Managing Director of CRB Cunningham the company that provided the system stated “It’s the fastest way of recognising someone at the till. On the other hand Fraser Sampson the Biometrics Commissioner for England & Wales stated ” if there is a less intrusive way for kids to pay for their lunches, than it should be used”.
Facial recognition systems have become quite popular, within policing it goes back to 2015 when it was used for the queues to enter Download Festival at Donnington Park. The Metropolitan Police commissioned an independent study and it turned out that the system is 81% accurate.
My Opinion
The facial recognition is an innovative system that should be used in schools for payments made by students because it quickens the process of payment and makes sure that everyone has paid what their supposed to. When it comes to facial recognition being used by the police I think they should definitely make use of this technology to help them with identifying people and catch criminals. Environments where high security is needed like airports, banks etc should also try it out and see the result that it brings.Facial recognition used to take payments from schoolchildren.
Nine schools in North Ayrshire have introduced facial recognition technology to reduce COVID-19 transmission risks and speed up lunch queues. David Swanston, Managing Director of CRB Cunninghams, the company providing the system, claims it’s the fastest method for identifying students at the till, with an average transaction time of five seconds per student. He noted the high demand for quick processing, as some schools serve up to 1,000 students within a 25-minute period. However, parents and campaigners have raised concerns about exposing students to biometric surveillance, arguing that students haven’t been adequately informed about potential privacy risks.Campaigners are raising concerns that the type of technology exposes people in crowds to potential arrest without reasonable cause. Despite their calls for regulation, no legislation has yet been introduced to treat this technology on an equal statutory footing with other biometrics like fingerprints and DNA. An independent study commissioned by the Metropolitan Police found that the system is 81% inaccurate. Silkie Carlo, the head of Big Brother Watch, stated that It’s normalising biometric identity check for something that is ordinary. You don’t need to resort to airport-style technology for children getting their lunch.
Despite these concerns, 97% of students or parents have consented to facial recognition for lunch payments. The Department for Education does not oversee the use of this technology in schools. In contrast, New York has temporarily banned facial recognition in schools due to similar concerns. Fraser Sampson, Biometrics Commissioner for England and Wales, noted that a less intrusive payment method should be used if possible. Facial recognition has been used previously in the UK, including a 2015 trial by Leicestershire Police at the Download Festival to manage entry queues. Today, it’s used in settings like airport eGates and Notting Hill Carnival, where crowd identification is needed.
My Opinion
In today’s world, where we rely heavily on technology, I believe it’s essential to take a step back and reflect on whether we truly need this level of assistance. While technology can be beneficial, it is not always accurate. Over time, it seems we are losing one of our greatest assets: the human mindset. Technology is helpful in improving our own content, but relying solely on AI to create content will likely not reached the results we hope for.Facial recognition used to take payments from schoolchildren.
On Monday 18th October 2021 , Sky News released an article stating that nine schools in North Ayrshire have implemented the use of Facial recognition technology to automatically identify each student.
This technology is aimed at speeding up transactions during lunch break and hence speeding up lunch queues.
This implementation can be very effective where you have a twenty five minute window to serve one thousand students, and on average each transaction was only taking five seconds at the till and Point of Sale.Some of the parents and campaigners were concerned about this initiative and that they were not adequately informed about these changes, they also warned that exposing children to biometric surveillance can lead to Privacy risks and breaches.
According to the North Ayrshire Council 97% of children or their parents have given consent to the use of facial recognition in their Schools. it was also stated that the department of education does not monitor the use of technology in schools.
Similar practices in American schools have banned such as the sate New York. If there is a safer and a less intrusive way then it should be used said Fraser Sampson, the Biometrics Commissioner for England and Wales , as facial recognition technology is not covered under the same laws as DNA and fingerprints.
Silkie Carlo, the head of Big Brother Watch finalised and stated that children do not need to be exposed to the (Airport style technology) to get their hand on their lunch.The use of facial recognition stretches back to 2015 where has been implemented in Donnington Park during a festival, later Campaigners have been complaining that this technology exposes people in crowds to potential arrest without reasonable cause. Despite all of this the technology has been, and still being used in places and environments like E-Gates at Airports through to Notting Hill carnival.
Studies and reports from the Metropolitan Police found that this system is 81% inaccurate.My Opinion
I fully agree with facial recognition even on children, the matter of the fact is that thanks to this implementation if a child is lost in a busy park or even worse kidnapped ,with the help of private and public CCTV cameras can be identified and tracked more easier by the police.
From my point of view I see that alot of people are not seeing the bigger picture of this technology , where it can be more useful in general than harmful , some honourable mentions that we can point out are illegal littering in the streets , riots and vindictive acts and so on.
The only the thing that we need to understand is that while the use of AI and technology had become a necessity and commodity, we still need to be vigilant and be smart to how we build the infrastructure around it, because if it falls into the wrong hands by means of hacking and data breaching , can lead to long lasting repercussions.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.