Deep@mander.xyz to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 19 days agoGuilty until proven innocent: shoppers falsely identified by facial recognition system struggle to clear their nameswww.theguardian.comexternal-linkmessage-square37linkfedilinkarrow-up1448file-textcross-posted to: privacy@programming.dev
arrow-up1448external-linkGuilty until proven innocent: shoppers falsely identified by facial recognition system struggle to clear their nameswww.theguardian.comDeep@mander.xyz to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 19 days agomessage-square37linkfedilinkfile-textcross-posted to: privacy@programming.dev
People shamed and ordered to leave shops after being misidentified then ‘given no help’ to investigate verdicts
minus-squareRunawayFixer@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up12·edit-218 days agoPretty much this. A 0.02% error margin when there are tens of thousands of visitors per year, means it’s almost guaranteed to have errors. 99.9% ^700 = 49.6% chance of no errors occurring. 99.98% ^3466 = 50% chance of no errors occurring. 99.98% ^23000 = 1% chance of no errors occurring.
minus-squareTreczoks@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·18 days agoPretty much that. The customer wanted to use it for identification and authentification in one go, with lenience for dirty and injured fingers on top.
Pretty much this. A 0.02% error margin when there are tens of thousands of visitors per year, means it’s almost guaranteed to have errors.
99.9% ^700 = 49.6% chance of no errors occurring.
99.98% ^3466 = 50% chance of no errors occurring.
99.98% ^23000 = 1% chance of no errors occurring.
Pretty much that. The customer wanted to use it for identification and authentification in one go, with lenience for dirty and injured fingers on top.