Facial recognition technology

Facial recognition technology involves the use of machines to scan an individual’s facial features and read his or her emotions and relate to what is happening inside their bodies. According to Dr Poppy Crum, technology seems to know more information about us that we do not even know ourselves. At times we smile when in the real sense, we are hurting inside, a technology that sees the internal side of our lives when we only choose to show the outside. Evan Sellinger and Dr Woodrow Hartzorgargue that facial technology invades people’s privacy and their freedom since, people only choose to show the world what they want to, they put their life in control by hiding a few things from the public which might make them very uncomfortable. Dr Poppy Crum, on the other hand, thinks that facial technology is the best since it will enable people to be transparent, to connect more with others by being open and, to be able to share what they feel without keeping any secrets about themselves. In this article, we are going to focus on the consequences that may arise from Crum’s argument when we apply Sellinger and Hartzog’s ideassuch as lack of privacy, violation of human rights, feelings of insecurity, and a lack of freedom among others.

It’s important to note what each side is arguing, Sellinger and Hartzorg look at facial technology as a threat to the public since it denies people the freedom of association, movement, and even speech for fear of being recognized in public. They support facial recognition only in the police force to track criminals, big companies to monitor their employees especially those in sensitive areas such as finance, to identify those who are lost; and as much as they are supporting these, it should be under government control before recognition technology is used against us where a few people are allowed to be incharge of the equipment(Sellinger&Hartzorg ).Those carrying out the exercise should have a search warrant from government officials, permitting them to carry out the activity. Dr Crum supports the technology and says soon it will soon take morepower; people should just be themselves and stop hiding who they are on the inside. Crum argues about how technology can really solve your personal issues, but Selinger and   Hartzog exacerbate this by talking about how it can be used to stigmatize, segregate, destroy individual opportunities and show less. When you get to share what you are going through, you might find help from people and even realize that they do care for you because they have a clear picture of who you are.

In support of facial technology, Dr Cum gives an example of a high school counsellor who usually sees a student as cheerful and always smiling. Still, the facial recognition results reveal that the student is going through a problem and isnot showing it from outside. This enables the teacher to find ways to help the student, which creates a positive impact on the life of that student(Crum).Without the facial recognition technology, no one would have known what the student was going through, and maybe he/she might not have gotten help from the teacher. Mental disorders, depression, etc. is a prominent issue in our society, Crum suggests that recognition technology would be a useful tool against it’s disturbing trends. Crum argues how technology can really view into your personal problems, but Selinger and Hartzog complicate this talking about how it can be used to stigmatize, segregate, and hurt. It’s just hard to tell people what you are going through in life for fear that they might laugh at you or make a mockery of you, but remember, a problem shared is half solved. The government should adopt the use of this technology in various sectors to realize the benefits it carries. Instead of making judgments based on a few arguments, the advantages and disadvantages should be weighed before a decision is made on whether to use it or ban it totally or maybe consider partial banning.

Sellinger and Hartzorg did not support the use of facial recognition at first, and they were advocating for a total ban but, they gave an exception in a few cases where it can be used for example, by the police, in public houses and schools and also to identify the people who are lost. This should only be allowed where a public warrant has been provided by the authorities (Sellinger&Hartzorg). For example, before scanning a person’s driving license, the traffic police should provide evidence to show that they have a right to do so and, they should not misuse the power bestowed on them. If a few chosen individuals are given the mandate to use face recognition they should ensure that the rights of employees are respected and their privacy protected to avoid exposing their real problems which they have chosen not to share with the public. It seems that the advantages of facial technology might outweigh its disadvantages and imposing a total ban would not be the best solution; people should learn how to live with it as long as its usage is limited to a few sectors. This might not be the case with the private sector, though because they work on their own and would decide whether to use it or not without restrictions.

Any technology has advantages and disadvantages. Whatever we choose to do with it is what matters. If you use it in the right way, then you will experience its benefit. Empathetic technology tries to help us solve the problems which we feel uncomfortable to share for fear of the public. As much as people would like to get solutions to their problems, it should not expose all their problems to the world. It should limit what kind of information it should share what should not be shared. Peoples’ rights should be respected, and technology should make the world a better place where people can interact freely without fear of being monitored.

In this analysis, we have discovered the connection between the two texts. The support for the expression. Both texts seem to give a different opinion but communicate the same information. The benefits of facial recognition technology do not outweigh the hidden risk. It isalsoevident from the text that human body language and facial expression will always send a message about how we feel about a situation. It is said that nonverbal communication is sometimes important bit from the two reading, we note that is maybe misunderstood. Facial technology may be best since it will enable people to be transparent, to connect more with others by being open and, to be able to share what they feel without keeping any secrets about themselves. The article also demonstrates that consequences that havearisen from Crum’s argument when we apply Sellinger and Hartzog’s ideas such as lack of privacy, violation of human rights, feelings of insecurity, and a lack of freedom among others.