semi-anon test from a throwaway account part deux

[Jim Choate]

On Thu, 29 Mar 2001, Sandy Sandfort wrote:

> Yup.  We all know that photo recognition technology exists.  What is your
> EVIDENCE that right now, today, in the USA, this technology is on-line, and
> in use such that your claim that someone who buys a money order can be
> identified in three days.  No coulda, woulda, shoulda, but documentation
> that supports this fanciful claim.  I don't think you have that evidence,
> because I don't think it exists.  Jim, as usual, you are talking through
> your hat.  Put up or shut up, big mouth.

What was that sporting event again? How many faces searched for across how
many attendants REAL TIME? I'd venture they were searching n*m way in the
range of 100,000 comparisons a second (and a single photo is a 'm way'
search) and when one considers the base population of the US (300 million)
and the number with records (say 1/3 of that) divided up across 50 states
(remember the MO records reduce your geographic population to a couple of
million, with sex and age you reduce it to say half or quarter that). The
technology exists. Consider the police in London, from previous emails to
this list, about their experiments in using face recognition in
identifying in near real time. Consider the two posts I sent earlier that
demonstrate the unanimous state to state adoption of these sorts of
technologies to integrate their existing database with a variety of
'foreign' data bases over the last several years. Photo identification and
management is a primary goal in every one of them.

No, like it or not, the system is here and with sufficient motivation the
priority to apply could be arranged. They're not going to do it for buying
a nickel bag of pot at the park or running a stop sign. But that isn't my
claim anyway. Hell, taking the photo to the local cops (like the security
guards at the store) will at least determine if you're a regular or not.

If not that might delay it, might not. My suspicion is when we look at any
particular record (and my claim was an 'average' or statistical claim) the
results won't be necessarily predictable.

The primary factor will be if the particular local agency already has
access worked out as a matter of course. If not then it will be delayed as
it goes to the state police or perhaps a different community police force.
They will have their own priorities....

The value of video as a security agent is the fact that visual
identification has become routine.

    ____________________________________________________________________

         If the law is based on precedence, why is the Constitution
         not the final precedence since it's the primary authority?

       The Armadillo Group       ,::////;::-.          James Choate
       Austin, Tx               /:'///// ``::>/|/      ravage at ssz.com
       www.ssz.com            .',  ||||    `/( e\      512-451-7087
                           -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
    --------------------------------------------------------------------