minneapolis council clearview aihatmakertechcrunch- A resolution prohibiting the use of facial recognition technology by the police department has been approved by the Minneapolis City Council. This includes software from Clearview AI. Clearview collaboration had been roundly criticized for carrying out the severe immigration policies of the Trump administration. The article below helps us understand the details of this prohibition.
Who Is Clear View AI?
Clearview AI specializes in facial recognition technology. It offers a contentious software application that enables law enforcement and other organizations to identify people in real-time. This is done using a huge collection of photographs that have been compiled from social media and the internet. The business asserts that its software can identify a person’s name and other personal information from a photo of them when it compares them to pictures in its database. minneapolis council clearview aihatmakertechcrunch
That law enforcement agencies in the US had been using Clearview AI’s software. This bring Privacy and civil liberties issues to light. Privacy groups contend that the company’s use of facial recognition technology poses a severe threat to individual privacy. It allows law enforcement or other organisations to violate people’s rights, which has led to numerous lawsuits and condemnation from them. The headquarters of Clearview AI is located in New York City, United States.
Where Is Minneapolis?
The American city of Minneapolis is in the state of Minnesota. It is located in the Midwest region of the United States. Minneapolis, on the banks of the Mississippi River, is the largest city in the state of Minnesota. Many schools and universities, notably the University of Minnesota, are present there. It is famous for its parks and lakes as well as for having a flourishing arts and culture scene. minneapolis council clearview aihatmakertechcrunch
Minneapolis Bans its Police Department from Using Facial Recognition Software
Minneapolis decided to forbid the use of facial recognition software in its police force. This added Minneapolis to the list of significant cities that have municipal bans on the contentious technology. 13 members of the city council voted in support of the ban, with no one voting against it. An ordinance banning it was enacted earlier this week.
The Minneapolis Police Department won’t be able to use any facial recognition software going forward because to the new restriction. Access to a sizable database of facial photos, many of which were scraped from significant social networks. It is sold to private businesses, government law enforcement organizations, and a number of American police departments. The Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office, and the Minneapolis Police Department have connections with Clearview AI.
The Vote Is A Historic Move
The vote is a historic move for the city that last year saw George Floyd slain by a Minneapolis police officer, sparking nationwide racial justice protests. Since then, the city has been going through a police reform crisis. It led the country by promising in June to defund the city’s police department before changing its mind and implementing more gradual reforms in the fall of that year. minneapolis council clearview aihatmakertechcrunch
One focused action that can control growing worries about aggressive enforcement is banning the use of facial recognition technology. Several privacy advocates are worry that face recognition systems driven by AI will disproportionately target communities of color. The technology has problems distinguishing non-white faces.
Cities throughout the nation are attempting to outlaw the divisive technology and have put limits in place in a variety of ways. In Portland, Oregon, new rules approved last year prohibit private corporations from using facial recognition technology in public areas while simultaneously prohibiting governmental agencies from using it. The use of facial recognition technologies by local governments is not in use by San Francisco, Oakland, and Boston laws, but there was no equivalent provision for private businesses.