The use of face recognition technology creates "surveillance states" and violates the privacy of citizens.
Η technology is constantly growing. One of her most popular achievements is face recognition software. These software are used more and more frequently in various things. For example, you can use them to open smartphone just looking at you or unlocking your computer without importing codes access. You can still use it at ATM to make money or to airport, when you want to travel.
The list of things that software can be used for recognition face is constantly growing. In fact, it's not just the person who can be used to identify one. New technologies have taken some small steps for it recognition of emotional states. Soon, surveillance systems (eg cameras) will not only be able to recognize someone but also guess how this person is feeling.
One of the many applications of face recognition is related to law and public order. A lot governments have pushed them police authorities to use software identification of persons for the purpose of identifying criminals but also for a variety of other purposes (eg in the United Kingdom).
But there is one issue, as the Commissioner for Personal Protection points out data of the United Kingdom, Elizabeth Denham: "To what extent do we, as a society, have to agree with police violating our privacy in order to be safe?"
On face recognition software, he said: "We've never seen technologies with such wide-ranging capabilities (in privacy)." In addition, he raised the issue of discrimination, especially on the issue of nationality and asked her police, government and technology companies to work together to eliminate the bias in the algorithms used.
Many other experts have expressed concerns about the use of face recognition systems by the police.
There is a fine line between privacy and security and there is a lot to think about which is more important. But as it seems, governments have made the decision on their own and this is illustrated by the systematic use of facial recognition technology.
The United Kingdom can already be designated as a state that allows it full citizen monitoring ("States of Surveillance").
There are about two million security cameras around the country. If we include the cameras, that the citizens themselves have to watch at home or at home business To them, this number is much greater.
These small steps gradually create "surveillance states" which in her name security and effectiveness interfere with citizens' privacy and limit their freedoms.
Despite these concerns, new technologies have already entered society and are difficult to remove. Technology is constantly evolving and using the argument of security, while in fact it wants to create 'surveillance states' in order to have full control of citizens.
Of course, these technologies have many benefits, because they serve people in their daily lives and help police detect criminals. The problem is their full adoption in all areas and the fact that there is no discussion and negotiation on use, effectiveness and potential risks. Governments do not discuss it but enforce it.