Facebook in new privacy row over facial recognition feature

Facebook has come under fire for quietly expanding the availability of technology to automatically identify people in photos, renewing concerns about its privacy practices.

The feature, which the giant social network automatically enabled for its more than 500 million users, has been expanded from the US to "most countries", Facebook said on its official blog on Tuesday.

Marc Rotenberg, president of the non-profit privacy advocacy group Electronic Privacy Information Center, said the system raised questions about which personally identifiable information, such as email addresses, would become associated with the photos in Facebook's database.

He also criticised Facebook's decision to automatically enable the facial-recognition technology for its users.

"I'm not sure that's the setting that people would want to choose. A better option would be to let people opt-in," he said.

Internet security consultancy Sophos noted that many Facebook users had seen the facial recognition option turned on without any notice in the last few days.

"Yet again, it feels like Facebook is eroding the online privacy of its users by stealth," commented Graham Cluley, a senior technology consultant at Sophos.

Facebook's "Tag Suggestions" feature uses facial recognition technology to speed up the process of labeling friends and acquaintances in photos posted on the site.

Facebook has been repeatedly criticised for changing settings involving privacy and identity in favour of making more data public in ways that means its users have to opt out of, rather than opt in to, the service.

Facebook, which announced in December that it planned to introduce the facial recognition service in the US, acknowledged that the feature was now more widely available.

The site also said in an emailed statement that "we should have been more clear with people during the roll-out process when this became available to them".

The statement noted that the photo-tagging suggestions are only made when new photos are added to Facebook, that only friends are suggested and that users can disable the feature in their privacy settings.

While other photo software and online services such as Google Inc's Picasa and Apple Inc's iPhoto use facial recognition technology, its use on a social network like Facebook could raise thorny privacy issues.

Google has stepped away from the widespread implementation of its Google Goggles service, which would try to identify people based on facial recognition through mobile phones running its Android operating system. Instead it only uses it for translating text and identifying objects. Eric Schmidt, Google's chairman, said earlier in June that he had concerns about its use with people.

"We do have the relevant facial recognition technology at our disposal. But we haven't implemented this on Google Goggles because we want to consider the privacy implications and how this feature might be added responsibly," he said. "I'm very concerned personally about the union of mobile tracking and face recognition."

Rotenberg noted that Apple's iPhoto software gave users control over facial recognition technology by letting them elect whether or not to use it with their personal photo collections.

Facebook's technology, by contrast, operates independently, analysing faces across a broad swathe of newly uploaded photos.

Last year the Electronic Privacy Information Center filed a complaint about Facebook's privacy practices with the US Federal Trade Commission, which Rotenberg said was still pending.

He noted that he planned to take a close look at Facebook's new announcement involving facial recognition technology.

Source : http://www.guardian.co.uk

Read more »

Posted in: Internet

Appeals court judges skeptical of government's health care case

A federal appeals court in Atlanta was openly skeptical Wednesday that the sweeping health care reform law championed by President Barack Obama would survive constitutional scrutiny.

A three-judge panel heard arguments in a massive lawsuit brought by Florida and 25 other states.

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals was the latest of three similar federal panels across the country to hear challenges by states and private groups to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Separate rulings from those courts in coming months will form the basis of a certain appeal to the Supreme Court, which could offer the final word on the landmark legislation, perhaps in time for the 2012 election year.

Supreme Court won't jump into health care fray -- for now

The main issue was the law's so-called individual mandate, the requirement that most Americans purchase health insurance by 2014 or face severe financial penalties. Lawyers for the states said forcing people to buy a product like health insurance is unconstitutional and unprecedented.

"If we uphold the individual mandate in this case, are there any limits on congressional power?" asked Judge Joel Dubina, who was named to the bench by President George H.W. Bush. His daughter is a first-term GOP congresswoman from Alabama, Rep. Martha Dubina Roby.

The two other judges who heard the nearly 2 1/2 hours of arguments -- Judges Frank Hull and Stanley Marcus -- were also concerned the law went too far in mandating that states expand various Medicare health coverage requirements. Both judges were appointed by President Bill Clinton.

Health reform, one year later 

The case, Florida v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, was moved up from District Court after a judge in January declared key provisions of the health care law unconstitutional.

Initial arguments refocused attention on the issue of "coercion." Basically, the 26 states are arguing that the requirement that states expand Medicaid coverage amounts to compulsion and coercion of the states, in violation of the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The judges also heard arguments on "severability" -- whether the determination that one provision of the law is unconstitutional invalidates the entire act. District Court Judge Robert Vinson, who heard the case in January, ruled that the unconstitutionality of one individual mandate voided the entire piece of legislation.

The appellate court heard arguments regarding the individual mandate as well, but focused much of their time and attention on the issue of coercion.

Paul Clement, who argued for the state of Florida, said after the hearing, "We were very gratified that the court ... was very interested in the coercion arguments, and the fact that this is the most coercive statute ever passed, that really limits the ability of states to make a decision or not."

Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi issued a statement congratulating Clement on his work.

"Our attorney ... did an excellent job," the statement said. "The federal government could not rebut our argument that the individual mandate is an unprecedented intrusion on individual liberty. ... I am encouraged by the judge's response to our arguments that the health care law's Medicaid expansion unconstitutionally coerces the states by forcing them to assume billions in uncompensated Medicaid costs."

Acting U.S. Solicitor General Neal Kuma Katyal presented the Department of Health and Human Services' case. He specifically addressed the individual mandate. Katyal said it was a tax and, therefore, constitutional.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott picked at Katyal's argument: "The lawyer for the Obama administration actually threw President Obama under the bus, because the Obama administration lawyer came out and said, 'This is a tax,' which is contrary to what President Obama promised, which is that he would not raise taxes on people."

Joining Florida in its challenge are Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Washington, Wisconsin and Wyoming.

Virginia and Oklahoma have filed separated challenges, along with other groups and individuals opposed to the law.

There are about 450 components to the health care law. Some will not go into effect for another two years, but some have already gone into effect.

The parts of the law currently being administered include small-business tax credits, federal grants and consumer protection measures.

The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati heard arguments last week in another case related to the health care act. The 4th Circuit in Richmond, Virginia, heard two challenges last month.

Judges in Florida and Virginia have found parts of the law unconstitutional in recent months, while courts in Michigan and Virginia have upheld provisions.

Legal experts expect challenges to the health care law to ultimately end up before the Supreme Court, although that could take at least a year or two.

Source : http://edition.cnn.com/

Read more »

Posted in: Quick News

Hurricane Adrian expected to remain offshore

Hurricane Adrian churned across the Pacific early Thursday as forecasters warned of dangerous surf and rip currents on the southwestern coast of Mexico.

Adrian -- a Category 1 hurricane -- could intensify into a major hurricane in the next day or two, the National Weather Service said.

The first hurricane of the season is expected to stay offshore, sparing Mexico.

But "any deviation to the right of the forecast track could bring tropical storm conditions" to parts of Mexico on Thursday and into Friday, according to the hurricane center.

Adrian's maximum sustained winds increased to nearly 80 mph (130 kph) late Wednesday.

"Additional strength is likely," the weather service said.

The storm was about 275 miles (440 kilometers) south of the town of Zihuatanejo late Wednesday.

Swells caused by the storm were expected to affect the southwestern coast of Mexico.

Read more »

Posted in: Quick News

'Tattoo' of 152 Facebook friends a publicity stunt

When you want to get your name out there - sometimes you've got to come up with clever ways to do it.

That's something Rotterdam tattoo artist Dex Moelker and his company clearly hoped for when they were named as the ones who inked the Facebook tattoo requested by a Dutch woman of 152 of her Facebook friends. And boy, did it work. The story spread like a wildfire online. After newspapers and major online outlets, including CNN.com, put the story out – it was a hot-button topic. Ironically, as of this moment more than 7,000 people recommended this story on Facebook – perhaps in part because they thought it was ridiculous. And it turns out, that's just what it was.

The tattoo that sparked the Web frenzy isn't real. First off, I think a few people can give a sigh of relief that it isn't real. And we haven't really gone that far off the social media deep end to where our Facebook walls are displayed "Matrix"-style on our arms. As we said before, it wouldn't have been the first time someone tried to capture fame by using a social network site to name their kid or to get a tattoo. In this case it was all about publicity.

Moelker just came clean to the Dutch newspaper the Telegraaf, saying it was in fact a publicity stunt. The woman in the video didn't have the tattoo inked during a 30-hour period as the video claimed.

"It is a try out tattoo, a transfer, that washes off in a couple of days," he told them.

Phew. It may take some scrubbing to get it off, but I guess on the bright side that's all it will take. When it comes to viral videos, you never know what you're going to get (I'm looking at you, Rebecca Black. I still don't get if that song is real). But ironically, in this case, the ink shop got just what it wanted – a lot of free press. Hats off for an international viral campaign. It's not great when media outlets worldwide are duped by viral videos or stories – but if you're looking at it from a marketing perspective – you've got to "like" how well they pulled it off.

[Original blog posted at 11:24 a.m.] There are some people who "like" Facebook. And then there are people who are so devoted to their social media circle that they'll find some pretty extravagant ways to show it.

Mark down one woman in the Netherlands in the latter category. She's literally armed herself with the power of Facebook – in the form of a tattoo sleeve of her friends on Facebook.

Let's get the obligatory jokes out of the way: "What if someone unfriends her?" "Can I dislike this entire idea?" "I hope she saved the rest of her money for laser removal when she starts not to like these people." "Forget the new facial recognition technology Facebook just announced – she can look at her arm."

But this woman – who is gaining quite a bit of fame by posting a video last week on her "susyj87" YouTube account showing the process and her final tattoo of her 152 closest friends – said the tat wasn't about making a splash.

"My tattoo is not about up-to-date profile pics or fame (as you can see I want to stay anonymous)," she said to critics on her YouTube page. "These are the people closest to me (not all my facebook friends). It's a personal expression of who I am right now in this part of my life and the mediaworld we live in. And of course I love the way it looks. I understand if you wouldn't do this, I respect that. But to me it does have a lot of meaning."

Personally, we hope she really, really, really likes these friends. Or she's going to have a heck of a time getting those off – with a trip to have one laser-removed any time she has a really bad spat with a friend.

She says the ink was a way to embody, literally, the social media world we are immersed in.

"Of course I gave it a lot of thought. These are not all my friends. Just the people I care most about," she wrote. "I got their permission and they were very proud to be on it. To me it represents who I am right now and the time we live in. And of course I love the looks of it."

She's not the first one to use social media platforms in an over-the-top way. In fact, many folks on the Web who have seen this tattoo are remembering artist T-Pain, whose "You don't have to 'like' me" tattoo was pictured on CNET. Or perhaps you remember the man in Egypt who reportedly named his newborn daughter "Facebook" in honor of the role the social media network played in bringing about a revolution. Or the Israeli parents who named their child "like."Then there was the guy that Mashable wrote about a few years ago, who was trying to sell Ray-Bans by tattooing a pair of the shades on his face.

At least our newly tattooed Facebook woman adhered to some standards.Mashable points out she's stayed close to "Dunbar's number" – the "cognitive limit" of people you can be friends with, including real life and Facebook.

And hey, art is art, right? But you know what else art is – subjective. And it's apparent the same social media circles she drew inspiration from for her mosaic-style Facebook ink feel strongly about whether it's a cool, personal idea, or the most ridiculous thing on the planet.

Read more »

Posted in: Quick News