Cops Used DNA to Predict a Suspect’s Face—and Tried to Run Facial Recognition on It | Leaked records reveal what appears to be the first known instance of a police department attempting to use faci::Police around the US say they’re justified to run DNA-generated 3D models of faces through facial recognition tools to help crack cold cases. Everyone but the cops thinks that’s a bad idea.

  • paraphrandEnglish
    arrow-up
    80
    arrow-down
    0
    ·
    9 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    “As long as we can pin it on someone

    • ULSEnglish
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      9 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      They just look for anything to make the case Ruining lives. It’s so dystopian and sad.

    • MangoEnglish
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      9 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      Been the someone. It’s shit. ACAB.

    • neidu2English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      9 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      Police metrics are governed by clearance stats, and pinning a crime on someone is enough for a case to count as “solved”. If it goes to court, that’s all they need, and it doesn’t matter if the suspect is found guilty.

    • aaaantoineEnglish
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      9 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      There’s no way this would have been admissable as evidence on its own.

      • Rikudou_SageEnglish
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        0
        ·
        9 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        Heh, you wish. All it takes is one corrupt judge.

      • hostopsEnglish
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        0
        ·
        9 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        Well they do have a DNA of a suspect. It may be enough to get court order of DNA extraction of a subject. And matching DNA is definitely enough to get someone behind bars.

  • canEnglish
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    0
    ·
    9 months ago
    edit-2
    9 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    According to a report released in September by the US Government Accountability Office, only 5 percent of the 196 FBI agents who have access to facial recognition technology from outside vendors have completed any training on how to properly use the tools. The report notes that the agency also lacks any internal policies for facial recognition to safeguard against privacy and civil liberties abuses.

    How is this allowed?

    • SanctusEnglish
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      9 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      Because society is a farse that is only held together by the adhesive of the few people in positions of power who care to keep it alive over warring tribes? Either that or everyone is exhausted and ready to return to cave drawings.

  • dirthawker0English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    0
    ·
    9 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    It’s far too vague to be reliable. You notice how easily the facial construction became termed a “photo” as in “We have a photo of the suspect. DNA is not going to have info on hair length, facial hair, if the suspect dyed their hair, or weight.

    • 7heoEnglish
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      9 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      Any face mods, scars, etc will also render that totally useless. I can’t wait to have to register any cosmetic surgery with the state police

    • aeronmelonEnglish
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      9 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      Algorithm: “Police are much more likely to commit a crime.

      Police: “We’ve stopped using the algorithm because of inherit flaws in the code.

  • AbouBenAdhemEnglish
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago
    edit-2
    9 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    IMO, the only valid use of DNA-based face generation would be to rule out existing suspects, not to label random people as suspects based on their faces alone.

    • ZronEnglish
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      I hate to say it, but there’s a better way to eliminate suspects based on our current DNA technology.

      If all your suspects are black, and the dna is from a someone with Irish heritage, it’s probably not any of the black people.

      Trying to reconstruct someone’s face seems really inaccurate, considering I have the same DNA as I did 10 years ago, but I’ve had high school friends who have walked passed me without recognizing me because I lost a lot of weight and grew a beard since they last saw me.

      As much as racial profiling is shitty, it’s way easier to tell someone’s ethnicity from dna than it is to reconstruct their whole face. You can then use that to narrow down a list of suspects, similar to how we used to use blood type analysis before dna was a thing.

      • 𝕽𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖎𝖊𝖘𝖙English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        9 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        While I’m as skeptical as you are, I don’t think people recognizing you is a good metric.

        A better test would be if an AI trained on your younger face could accurately and reliably identify you with your adult face.

        The way AI and human face recognition work are different from each other. An AI may be able to identify you based on markers that human recognition doesn’t account for

        • Monkey With A ShellEnglish
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          0
          ·
          9 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          AI does a scary good job of recognizing age different photos sometimes. I’ve set up a couple self hosted photo management apps that contain such functions (photo prism and immich) and had surprising results. After feeding it a number of recent digital pictures I went on to put on n a bunch of old scanned photos from 10+ years earlier, and with a reasonably good accuracy it was able to dicern the difference in baby pictures between two kids to match with the older pictures.

  • aeronmelonEnglish
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    0
    ·
    9 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    Yay, the Department of Pre-crime.

  • agitatedpotatoEnglish
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    0
    ·
    9 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    Frenology 2.0, only difference is the science being misused to fuel it has bigger words and shinier tech.

  • Chemical WonkaEnglish
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    0
    ·
    9 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    The vast majority of the world’s population is feeding this entire mass surveillance system with their valuable personal and behavioral data, often without realizing that this system they feed is already oppressing themselves in the present. All in exchange for exaggerated convenience

    • maynarkhEnglish
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      iF yOu HaVe NoThInG tO hIdE

  • andrew_bidlawEnglish
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    0
    ·
    9 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    It’s a cold case of a single murder from 30 years ago. I thought they would use it on something more unique. Guess they thought it’s a way to silently normalize it via cases that are dead ends anyway to then bring it into a use on more recent stuff.

  • GorkEnglish
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    0
    ·
    9 months ago
    edit-2
    9 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    Archive link to bypass the paywall.

    Edit: on reading the article, I’m curious to know if anyone has actually gotten arrested or charged with a crime based on an algorithmically generated face which is then scanned though facial detection software.

  • TherouxSonfeirEnglish
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    That looks like the most average man possible. Surely no one will look like that except the perp.

  • SteveEnglish
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    9 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    This is an interesting idea. Absolutely worth looking into. But I wouldn’t approve it to use on active cases until the false positive rate was below 1:1000.

    • diabeetusmanEnglish
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      9 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      That would mean ~300k false positives with every search.

    • neptuneEnglish
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      9 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      Nature VS nurture heavily implies this will never ever work

  • randon31415English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    9 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    This new “finger-printing” technology is a bad idea, said cops in the 1800s. Few people are trained on how to accurately take and match “fingerprints”, so mistakes will be plenty, and innocent people will go to jail because if it. Everyone but the cops think it is a bad idea, so we should never use fingerprints to solve crimes.