Facial-Recognition Firm Ends Operations in Canada, Watchdog Says

Canada's privacy watchdog said facial recognition software provider Clearview AI will no longer offer its services in the country, suspending a contract with its last remaining client, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. From a report: The move comes almost five months after privacy authorities at the federal level and in three provinces launched an investigation into the New York-based firm over allegations it collected personal information without consent and provided data to law enforcement. That probe is still ongoing, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada said in a statement Monday. At the end of February, the national watchdog opened a separate investigation into the RCMP's use of Clearview AI's facial recognition technology and it also plans to complete that inquiry.

Provacy

[fluffernutter]

Nice to know that there are nations in the world capable of defending their citizens privacy rights. Call it "Anti-American" all you want.

Re:

[Press2ToContinue]

Or, are they doing intelligence the good-old "American Way" - saying they are ending the program and then taking it underground?

https://radioopensource.org/th... [radioopensource.org]

It seems aawwwwfly useful to just stop using it "because privacy."

https://slashdot.org/index2.pl... [slashdot.org]

Re:

[Actually, I do RTFA]

There's a simple solution to running such programs secretly - a government bounty program that pays people to whistleblow.

Re:

[weilawei]

The real criminals are the ones writing laws so they can claim to be victims and use that to enslave people. They wear suits and own yachts.

Re:

[Press2ToContinue]

Tone it down a bit FB36, your CPC overlord roots are showing.

https://slashdot.org/~FB36 [slashdot.org]

Re:

[bmimatt]

You should get back on your meds right away @FB36.

Re:

[Kernel Kurtz]

Winnie, is that you?

Re:

[Sebby]

What about privacy?

Cute how you say that, hiding behind an anonymous nick like the rest of us.

Re:

[satanicat]

Yeah but... we have to define this further than criminal or privacy.

Imagine a world where that guy who has the trigger (and was voted in) has his own agendas.

Imagine doing something purposeful, and then having to recall and explain it in court, dispute the fact that you have no context to why they are asking.

You don't need to have something to hide to have a right to privacy, nor to changing agendas.

Admittedly, currently the risk seems low of any sort of false accusations, but letting go of the last few rig

Copyright infrigment?

[Nlckname]

Did these guys get consent from the copyright owners of the photos they used and made money out of them? Unless they did this is massive copyright infrigment.