澳门六合彩

New technologies promise to help make America more safe and secure, or improve our quality of life. Chief among these are biometric technologies like facial recognition technologies (FRT)-- but academia, the private sector, civil society, and government actors are all flagging ethical concerns.听

When considering areas like criminal justice, Congress has tried to protect constituents through bills like . But despite a commitment to accelerate AI through the National Defense Authorization Act of 2021 (), many FRT bills are stop-gap measures that target a specific domain. Such narrow bans or moratoriums don鈥檛 account for the growth and proliferation of facial recognition in areas ranging from immigration control, airport security, autonomous vehicles, and social media, or recognize both challenges and opportunities. Further, while the Department of Defense (DoD) has issued , guidance on how to translate these principles into practice is lacking.

澳门六合彩鈥檚 Science and Technology Innovation Program (STIP) seeks to understand, translate, and demonstrate the complexity of emerging technologies, like FRT, including safety, security, and ethical concerns. We focus on audiences ranging from the public policy community, to academic researchers, the press, and the general public. 听Legislative and Executive Artificial Intelligence (AI) Labs are a nonpartisan, off-the-record forum for offering Congressional staff and Federal employees context and a deep dive on AI trends with leading experts from the field.

As part of this curriculum, we include training on bias. But we can鈥檛 yet offer cross-domain and actionable guidelines for mitigating ethical concerns, because these resources don鈥檛 yet exist. We would like to see that change.

STIP is launching a new research program, 鈥淏eyond Bans,鈥� to help fill this gap. Beyond Bans will establish and explore the complexity behind a range of AI ethical issues, beginning with facial recognition. 听Our research in this area shows this is not a simple issue and will take a unique approach with multiple stakeholders involved. One early publication on Policy Options for Facial Recognition and the Need for a Grand Strategy on AI advocates for considering ethical FRT through a more holistic lens that includes principles, definitions, standards, and concrete guidelines.听

We will build on this foundation to conduct new research into an under-explored aspect of facial recognition (FRT): consumer technologies.

Working Definitions

For the purposes of this research, a consumer is defined as a voluntary user of facial recognition technology. Consumers may include people who purchase - for example - cell phones and laptops with facial recognition security safeguards, or owners of autonomous vehicles. Consumers may also include people who select to use free facial recognition services, for example by downloading a social media app that uses FRT to tag friends in photos, or electing to walk through automated airport security control. They may use facial recognition technologies in public spaces, or in the privacy of their own homes.听

Much of today's public and policy discussions focus on mitigating the harms associated with the use of FRT in non-consumer contexts, like criminal justice. Analyzing such cases can help us understand where more attention is needed and, potentially, what potential pitfalls to avoid. But focusing on harms can鈥檛 shed light on whether, or how, to leverage FRT to benefit society.

Consumer technologies offer the opposite side of the coin. Understanding consumer applications can help elucidate the broad benefits of facial recognition, and specific use cases for how FRT can improve quality of life. Research on the consumer perspective can also help us understand what leads consumers to consider these technologies ethical. Words like 鈥渢ransparency鈥� and 鈥渄isclosure鈥� are . But what approaches do consumer FRT applications leverage to ensure that users have the information they need to trust an application? Understanding how to design FRT systems to ensure transparency, disclosure, and trust is necessary for any policy action on ethical FRT, in the consumer context, and beyond it.

Our research will begin with a survey of consumer FRT applications that are currently available on the market to understand high-level application domains and more specific use cases.听This work is important for painting a comprehensive picture of facial recognition, and elucidating the opportunities of these new technologies, in addition to the risks. To narrow the scope of research, we will be focusing on 听consumer FRT technology that:听

1. Reasonable steps are taken to make consumers aware that they are participating in a facial recognition system; and,
2. Consumers can meaningfully 鈥渙pt out鈥� of participating in the system, and have access to reasonable alternatives if they choose to do so.

We will then take a qualitative interview approach to understanding how these technologies are conceptualized, designed, implemented, and deployed. Taking a lifecycle approach will also help us understand opportunities for ethical interventions at various stages in the development process. There is currently a lack of research or guidance on best practices for developing and deploying these technologies, including considering which stakeholders might be considered 鈥渁ccountable鈥� at various times. As our research evolves, we hope to encourage and contribute to this discussion.

We want to hear from you. If you are a policymaker, an FRT practitioner, or another researcher with insights to share, please reach out to Dr. Anne Bowser, at anne.bowser@wilsoncenter.org. And stay tuned for more information on how to move beyond bans to consider a broader, more holistic approach to ethical AI.

Beyond Bans is supported by private foundations and public companies, including Amazon. 澳门六合彩 maintains full independence over the research process and results.

听