SPRINGFIELD – The City Council took its first steps on Monday to prevent, at least temporarily, the use of recognized face-to-face technology – technology which they say is inaccurate and women and women are likely to be unjustly suspected. color people.
The Consultant said that they are working to protect the general public from unnecessary surveillance.
His first action was successful with Victor Davila, Adam Gomez, Tracye Whitfield, Ramos, Marcus Williams, Jesse Lederman, Melvin Edwards, Malo Brown and Council President Justin Hurst by voting. Councilors Sean Curran and Kateri Walsh voted without a Councilor
Councilor Orlando Ramos described the measure as a moratorium. He said that he would like the question to change automatically on the council's agenda five years after the passage. The council could also reconsider the earlier measure, say in three years, if they decide to do so. Cllr Tim Allen was absent.
A number of discussions on this window were shortened to two or three years.
“We are dealing with new technology that is not controlled in any way,” he said at a Monday night meeting. "This affects everyone. If you are a taxpayer in Springfield city this affects you."
He said that if the city ignored the data and used the technology because of its defects, Springfield would be liable.
Monday night's vote was the first act on the measure. The Council intends to adopt a final vote in February following a further round of committee meetings.
Springfield police have said they do not use facial recognition and have no plans to use it, Ramos said.
Springfield police does not use facial identity programs. But there are high-tech companies including Amazon with its Rekognition system, taking the systems forward to police agencies.
Ramos mentions a study of the American Liberty Union of Massachusetts which was issued earlier Monday to use photos of Boston Red Sox and Celtics players to illustrate Amazon Rekognition software limits. The ACLU introduced 188 new England athletes to the system and introduced 28 misunderstandings, matching myths to the catch photo database.
“People should be free to bring their children to school, to visit a substance misuse consultant, to challenge the government, not to be in a government database,” said Ramos.
The technology is better distinguishing between medieval white men, according to the ACLU. It doesn't do a good job with women, blacks and Latinos.
If the moratorium goes ahead, Springfield would come with the neighboring community of Northampton and Somerville, Brookline in Massachusetts as well as Oakland and San Francisco, California, which have already prevented technology.
Councilor Tracye Whitfield stated the ACLU study which showed that black women were more likely to be identified by 35% compared to white men. She said there were suspicions of blacks already.
As a dark black woman, Whitfield knows, she is most likely to be unrecognized.
“This will protect my family,” she said.
Councilor Kateri B.Walsh said that the moratorium in technology was even a three-year moratorium.
Councilor Adam Gomez, defendant, said it is now time for the council to set a policy as Springfield Police Department is respecting vendors for police police cameras.
“We want to ensure that public safety is our priority,” he said. “I would like the bad men to be abused, to be canceled.” T
But he knows that technology is not working for people color and he knows that racial profiling takes place.
“I can't tell you how many times I have brought me down,” said Gomez. “This is not even without face recognition software. I can't tell you how many times I have been drawn down. ”
Gomez said that technology in a black and Latin city with a large majority like Springfield does not make sense.
“Let's regulate something the state should regulate long ago,” said Gomez.
Councilor Michael Fenton said it would support the use of technology to create a database, or to scan people at objections or public places.
But he said the city police said the technology could be useful – for example, finding a refugee or missing person – for example.
“It's also an opportunity to create innocent people,” he said. “I'm worried, human anxiety, because Springfield City is a Great Brother when you're watching you. But I don't think we have to do that with a complete ban. ”
Fenton also referred to DNA technology that helped police solve the case of Lisa Ziegert. It is not the same technology, but there is a risk that the identifier itself will lose itself because of the DNA analysis that would give the police an image.
Whitfield said that the technology already incorrectly identified and improperly bonded is not beneficial to minorities.