European Union data protection regulators have called for a general ban on using artificial intelligence for facial recognition and other "biometric and behavioral signals" in public spaces. In their joint opinion, the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) and the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) also said using AI for social scoring should be outlawed. The EDPB and EDPS urged the bloc to prohibit AI "recognition of faces, gait, fingerprints, DNA, voice, keystrokes and other biometric or behavioral signals, in any context" in publicly accessible areas. They said it should be illegal for AI systems to use biometrics to categorize people "into clusters based on ethnicity, gender, political or sexual orientation," or other types of classification under which they could be discriminated against. On top of that, the EDPB and EDPS argued that there should be a ban on using AI to "infer emotions of a natural person." It would be allowed in specific situations, such as on certain medical grounds.

Civil rights activists have successfully pushed for bans on police use of facial recognition in cities like Oakland, San Francisco, and Somerville, Massachusetts. Now, a coalition led by Amnesty International is setting its sights on the nation's biggest city--New York--as part of a drive for a global moratorium on government use of the technology. Amnesty's #BantheScan campaign is backed by Legal Aid, the New York Civil Liberties Union, and AI For the People among other groups. After New York, the group plans to target New Delhi and Ulaanbaatar in Mongolia. "New York is the biggest city in the country," says Michael Kleinman, director of Amnesty International's Silicon Valley Initiative.

Massachusetts could make history as the first state to issue a ban on the use of facial recognition by law enforcement. The state's House and Senate lawmakers have approved a police reform bill that would prohibit police departments and other public agencies from using facial recognition systems. As Forbes notes, there will be exceptions, such as if cops can secure a warrant to use facial recognition against someone's driver's license. Officers can also write a request to be able to use the technology if they can show evidence that it's needed to prevent serious injury or death. In addition to the facial recognition ban, the police reform bill also prohibits cops from using chokeholds and rubber bullets.

Portland, Maine is the latest in the growing list of cities in the US to ban facial recognition technologies. According to Bangor Daily News, people voted in favor of of passing a new measure that strengthens Portland's existing ban on the use of facial recognition tech by law enforcement agencies and public officials. City councilors originally agreed on a ban back in August with the understanding that the voter referendum would replace their ordinance if it passes. Now that it has passed, it can't be touched for at least five years. Back in September, Portland, Oregon passed what could be the strictest municipal ban on facial recognition in the country -- one that prohibits even private businesses from deploying the technology in public spaces.

This week IBM, Microsoft and Amazon announced that they would suspend the sale of their facial recognition technology to law enforcement agencies. But the moves from the tech giants also illustrate the inherent risks of AI, especially when it comes to bias and the potential for invasion of privacy. Note that there are already indications that Congress will take action to regulate the technology. In the meantime, many cities have already instituted bans, such San Francisco. Because of the advances of deep learning and faster systems for processing enormous amounts of data, facial recognition has certainly seen major strides over the past decade.

This week IBM, Microsoft and Amazon announced that they would suspend the sale of their facial recognition technology to law enforcement agencies. But the moves from the tech giants also illustrate the inherent risks of AI, especially when it comes to bias and the potential for invasion of privacy. Note that there are already indications that Congress will take action to regulate the technology. In the meantime, many cities have already instituted bans, such San Francisco. Because of the advances of deep learning and faster systems for processing enormous amounts of data, facial recognition has certainly seen major strides over the past decade.

The European Union is backing away from its plan to introduce a temporary ban on facial recognition technology -- instead delegating decisions on the software to its member states. In a previous draft of a paper on AI, the European Commission had proposed introducing a five-year moratorium on the technology. But in a new draft seen by the Financial Times, that suggestion has been dropped. "The early draft floated the idea of a full ban, which is very popular among civil rights campaigners worried about abuse," a person with direct knowledge of the discussions told the FT. "But the security community is against the ban because they think it's a good tool."

After San Francisco in May placed new controls, including a ban on facial recognition, on municipal surveillance, city employees began taking stock of what technology agencies already owned. They quickly learned that the city owned a lot of facial recognition technology--much of it in workers' pockets. City-issued iPhones equipped with Apple's signature unlock feature, Face ID, were now illegal--even if the feature was turned off, says Lee Hepner, an aide to supervisor Aaron Peskin, the member of the local Board of Supervisors who spearheaded the ban. Around the same time, police department staffers scurried to disable a facial recognition system for searching mug shots that was unknown to the public or Peskin's office. The department called South Carolina's DataWorks Plus and asked it to disable facial recognition software the city had acquired from the company, according to company vice president Todd Pastorini.

San Francisco quietly amends its municipal surveillance legislation to permit for Apple's Face ID, although the ban on facial recognition nonetheless applies. After San Francisco in Might positioned new controls, together with a ban on facial recognition, on municipal surveillance, metropolis workers started taking inventory of what know-how businesses already owned. They shortly realized that the town owned numerous facial recognition know-how--a lot of it in employees' pockets. Metropolis-issued iPhones geared up with Apple's signature unlock characteristic, Face ID, had been now unlawful--even when the characteristic was turned off, says Lee Hepner, an aide to supervisor Aaron Peskin, the member of the native Board of Supervisors who spearheaded the ban. Across the similar time, police division staffers scurried to disable a facial recognition system for looking out mug pictures that was unknown to the general public or Peskin's workplace.

Which uses will face a ban, it's not yet clear: while some cities have banned use by police departments, Portland's focus is restricting use by the private sector. And the debate is not confined to the US. In the UK, there is growing concern over the use of live facial recognition after it emerged that a property developer had been collecting images of people's faces in an area of London for two years without informing them. We still don't know how that data was used, Daragh Murray, a human rights lawyer at the University of Essex, said on stage.