亚马逊环球的寻狗广告引发争议,引发人们对大规模监控的担忧。
Amazon Ring's lost dog ad sparks backlash amid fears of mass surveillance

原始链接: https://www.theverge.com/tech/876866/ring-search-party-super-bowl-ad-online-backlash

Ring最近在超级碗期间为其“寻犬队”功能(利用人工智能通过社区摄像头录像寻找丢失的狗)所做的广告,引发了重大的隐私担忧。批评者,包括参议员埃德·马基,认为这项技术并非为了宠物,而是为了实现大规模监控。担忧源于Ring与Flock Safety等公司的合作关系,该公司与移民及海关执法局(ICE)有关联,这引发了数据共享以及监控范围超出丢失动物的可能性。 Ring坚持“寻犬队”功能仅用于识别狗,并且与“熟悉面孔”功能分开,用户数据受到保护。然而,该功能默认情况下是为订阅者启用的,并且该公司与执法部门合作的历史,加上创始人杰米·西米诺夫利用人工智能“消除犯罪”的雄心,加剧了人们的怀疑。 担忧集中在技术有可能超越寻犬功能,并被用于追踪人员,尽管Ring对此予以否认。虽然该公司强调安全措施和透明度,但批评者质疑,鉴于广泛的人工智能监控网络所带来的固有风险,这些保护措施是否足够。

最近亚马逊Ring的一个广告,展示了利用邻里摄像头录像的“寻找丢失的狗”功能,引发了对大规模监控的批评和担忧。该广告立即引发了负面反应,包括受欢迎的“WeRateDogs”账号的批评,并引发了关于美国人对监控行为容忍程度的讨论。 Hacker News上的评论员指出,广告发布的时间点似乎是故意的,暗示可能与ICE(美国移民及海关执法局)合作。 一位用户质疑“反弹”的规模,而其他人则指出了Ring过去与警方共享数据且缺乏适当监督的争议。 讨论还集中在更广泛的问题上,即接受监控——似乎只有当它影响到特定群体时才会提出异议。 一些用户积极通过修改他们的Ring设备来缓解隐私问题,例如禁用麦克风或限制摄像头视野,尽管他们已经拥有了这些硬件。 由于可能存在付费墙,也提供了一个文章的存档链接。
相关文章

原文

Ring’s new Search Party feature has once again drawn backlash for the company. A 30-second ad that aired during Sunday’s Super Bowl showed Ring cameras “surveilling” neighborhoods to locate a lost dog. In the current political climate, a prime-time ad celebrating neighborhood surveillance struck a nerve.

People voiced concerns across social media that the AI-powered technology Ring uses to identify dogs could soon be used to search for humans. Combined with Ring’s recent rollout of its new facial recognition capability, it feels like a short leap for a pet-finding feature to be turned into a tool for state surveillance.

Privacy expert Chris Gilliard told 404 Media that the ad was “a clumsy attempt by Ring to put a cuddly face on a rather dystopian reality: widespread networked surveillance by a company that has cozy relationships with law enforcement and other equally invasive surveillance companies.”

“This definitely isn’t about dogs — it’s about mass surveillance”

— Sen. Ed Markey

The fears center on the Amazon-owned Ring’s partnership with Flock Safety, a surveillance technology company that has contracts with law enforcement to use its automated license plate readers, video surveillance systems, and other technologies.

The partnership connects Ring’s massive residential camera network with an organization that has reportedly allowed ICE to access data from its own nationwide camera network.

“This definitely isn’t about dogs — it’s about mass surveillance,” Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) posted on X. A vocal critic of Ring’s ties to law enforcement, Markey has pressed for greater transparency into Ring’s connections with law enforcement, along with stronger privacy protections for consumers.

Comments on the YouTube video of the ad ranged from “This is a huge problem disguised as a solution,” to “Smart way to gaslight people in mass surveillance.” Video: Ring

Ring spokesperson Emma Daniels told The Verge that Search Party is designed to match images of dogs and is “not capable of processing human biometrics.” Additionally, she maintains that the Familiar Faces facial recognition feature is separate from Search Party. It operates on the individual account level, she said, and there’s no communal sharing as there is with Search Party.

While Familiar Faces is opt-in for each user, Search Party is enabled by default on any outdoor camera enrolled in Ring’s subscription plan. It works by using AI to scan footage in the cloud for the missing dog once the owner uploads a picture to Ring’s Neighbors app. If a match is found, Ring alerts the camera’s owner, who can then choose to share the video or notify the owner through the app.

“These are not tools for mass surveillance.”

— Emma Daniels, Ring

“These are not tools for mass surveillance,” Daniels said. “We build the right guardrails, and we’re super transparent about them.”

While that may be the case today, I asked whether Ring cameras could one day be used to specifically search for people. “The way these features are built, they are not capable of that today,” she said. “We don’t comment on feature road maps, but I have no knowledge or indication that we’re building features like that at this point.”

Ring users can currently share footage from their cameras with local law enforcement during an active investigation through a feature called Community Requests. Unlike previous Ring police partnerships, Community Request goes through third-party companies — the Taser company Axon and, soon, Flock. “The reason we did that is these third-party evidence management systems offer a much more secure chain of custody,” says Daniels. If a user declines a request, no one will be notified.

The company maintains that neither the government nor law enforcement can access its network, and that footage is shared only by users or in response to a legal request. Daniels reiterated what the company had previously told The Verge, that it has no partnerships with ICE or any other federal agency, and said you can see every request agencies have made on its Neighbors app profile.

Additionally, the Flock integration is not currently live, although Daniels had no update on the company’s plans for the partnership following the backlash. She referred me to an earlier response. “As we explore the integration, we will ensure the feature is built for the use of local public safety agencies only — which is what the program is designed for.”

History has shown that tools capable of large-scale surveillance are rarely limited to their original purpose

The problem is that there’s nothing preventing local agencies from sharing footage with federal ones. And while the Super Bowl ad played up heartwarming images of a girl reunited with her puppy, the leap to this technology that can track people in your neighborhood is still very small. Combined with government overreach, it’s not hard to imagine how a powerful network of AI-enabled cameras goes from finding lost dogs to hunting people.

And Ring has a history of partnering with the police. While it has rolled back some of that in recent years, since founder Jamie Siminoff returned, the company has renewed its focus on using its products to prevent crime.

Siminoff said he came back because of the possibilities AI brings. With this technology, he believes neighborhood cameras could be used to virtually “zero out crime” within a year. Given these stated goals and the new capabilities AI can bring, why wouldn’t Ring be planning to add some form of Search Party for People to its cameras?

Eliminating crime is an admirable goal, but history has shown that tools capable of large-scale surveillance are rarely limited to their original purpose. Ring has a responsibility here to protect its users, which it says it is doing. But ultimately, it comes down to how much you can trust a company – and the company it keeps – to never overstep. If Ring is cloaking its ambitions behind our instinct to protect our furry friends, that trust will be hard to find.

Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.
联系我们 contact @ memedata.com