The DHS has illegally stuffed America's airports full of $1B worth shitty, malfing facial-recognition tech / Boing Boing
More than a dozen major US airports are now covered in facial-recognition cameras, installed by the DHS to scan people departing on international flights without the legally mandated federal review process.
The cameras suck, too: "the systems erroneously reject as many as 1 in 25 travelers using valid credentials." At that rate, 1,632 people flying out of JFK alone every day would be falsely flagged as potential criminals and subjected to additional screening.
The DHS cannot enumerate a single benefit from the cameras, either. Naturally, it's costing a fortune -- about a billion dollars.
The error rate in this system is an excellent example of the paradox of the false positive, which I discussed in my novel Little Brother:
Say you have a new disease, called Super-AIDS. Only one in a million people gets Super-AIDS. You develop a test for Super-AIDS that's 99 percent accurate. I mean, 99 percent of the time, it gives the correct result -- true if the subject is infected, and false if the subject is healthy. You give the test to a million people.
One in a million people have Super-AIDS. One in a hundred people that you test will generate a "false positive" -- the test will say he has Super-AIDS even though he doesn't. That's what "99 percent accurate" means: one percent wrong.
What's one percent of one million?
1,000,000/100 = 10,000
One in a million people has Super-AIDS. If you test a million random people, you'll probably only find one case of real Super-AIDS. But your test won't identify one person as having Super-AIDS. It will identify 10,000 people as having it.
Your 99 percent accurate test will perform with 99.99 percent inaccuracy.
That's the paradox of the false positive. When you try to find something really rare, your test's accuracy has to match the rarity of the thing you're looking for. If you're trying to point at a single pixel on your screen, a sharp pencil is a good pointer: the pencil-tip is a lot smaller (more accurate) than the pixels. But a pencil-tip is no good at pointing at a single atom in your screen. For that, you need a pointer -- a test -- that's one atom wide or less at the tip.
This is the paradox of the false positive, and here's how it applies to terrorism:
Terrorists are really rare. In a city of twenty million like New York, there might be one or two terrorists. Maybe ten of them at the outside. 10/20,000,000 = 0.00005 percent. One twenty-thousandth of a percent.
That's pretty rare all right. Now, say you've got some software that can sift through all the bank-records, or toll-pass records, or public transit records, or phone-call records in the city and catch terrorists 99 percent of the time.
In a pool of twenty million people, a 99 percent accurate test will identify two hundred thousand people as being terrorists. But only ten of them are terrorists. To catch ten bad guys, you have to haul in and investigate two hundred thousand innocent people.
Guess what? Terrorism tests aren't anywhere close to 99 percent accurate. More like 60 percent accurate. Even 40 percent accurate, sometimes.
What this all meant was that the Department of Homeland Security had set itself up to fail badly. They were trying to spot incredibly rare events -- a person is a terrorist -- with inaccurate systems.
Is it any wonder we were able to make such a mess?
Not Ready for Takeoff [Harrison Rudolph, Laura M. Moy and Alvaro M. Bedoya/Georgetown Law]
Airport Face Scanning Skates on Thin Legal Ice—and Doesn’t Work Too Well [Technology Review]
(via Naked Capitalism)
(Image: Randallbritten, CC-BY-SA)
760 flights diverted from Gatwick airport after drone scare, affecting 110,000 passengers
On Wednesday night, in a "deliberate act of disruption" (but not "a terror attack") someone flew a drone of "industrial specification" into the airspace of London Gatwick airport, the city's second-busiest, causing all flights in and out of the airport to be suspended; the disruption has affected 760 flights carrying 110,000 passengers (so far) and […]
READ THE REST
UK minister says airlines used "exploitative algorithms" to split up families unless they paid extra
UK Digital Minister Margot James has vowed to crack down on "exploitative algorithms" used by airlines that deliberately split up families' seat assignments if they did not pay for pre-assigned seats; James says that the airlines used these algorithms to coerce families into paying for pre-assigned seating.
READ THE REST
Cathay Pacific leaks 9.4 million travelers' passport numbers and other data
Cathay Pacific started investigating a potential breach in March; by May they'd learned of breaches to a system with 9.4 million travelers' data on it, then for some reason they didn't tell anyone about it, until now: "The following personal data was accessed: passenger name; nationality; date of birth; phone number; email; address; passport number; […]
READ THE REST
Move your data freely across all your devices with this key app
Ever lost music, contacts or priceless pictures during an iPhone upgrade? We’d pay for iMazing 2 just to avoid the hassle of going through that ever again. But the trusty app does more than just store your data. It lets you access them on any device and store them however you need. This all-purpose data […]
READ THE REST
This Raspberry Pi course teaches all makers need to know
Ask any maker: The key to Raspberry Pi’s popularity is its versatility. The mini-computer can help kids learn basic coding, but it’s also a gateway to everything from retro gaming to a full Internet of Things upgrade for your home. If you’re not sure where to start, the Complete Raspberry Pi Course Bundle is the […]
READ THE REST
This writing assistant is more than just a spell-checker
Whether it’s a simple work memo or a dating profile, make no mistake: You are being judged as much on your grammar as on your content. Maybe even more so. If you want to avoid the simple errors that cloud your message, the WhiteSmoke Writing Assistant guards against so much more than simple spelling errors. […]