Sure, I mean, look at those unshaven faces, with tattoos everywhere and hip hop t-shirts-
And then look at the wonderful variety of people you get from your standard set of mug shots.
Actually, I’d be OK with an 80% accuracy rate if this technology actually worked (which I highly doubt, BTW) if it were used as part of an algorithm to determine the sample of people who got pulled aside for a more thorough screening. The Israelis are the world authority on airport security and one of their main pillars is human interaction. The guards are highly trained in spotting “tells” through verbal interaction and simple eye contact.
They’re not perfect, but given the high value target they are defending they have a pretty damn good record.
Look at all the mug shots of prisoners in your local jail.
Then go to your local Walmart and look at the people there.
Notice any general differences? I SURE don’t!
Unless it’s 100% it’s easily defeated. I hesitate to say how.
The fact that they weren’t convicted is the saddest part of that article for me.
Why do you think Walmart has so many surveillance cameras? Hint!
For the same reasons as all of the other big stores, even the ones with more affluent clientele.
In any case, if we’re going to stereotype Walmart customers, the issue is with clothing and grooming, not facial characteristics. The same goes for mug shots.
Then consider this even sadder fact: A clone of the Quadro-Tracker, Sniffex, ADE-651, etc. is still being advertised:HEDD1.
If the device really were 80% accurate (which, you know, it isn’t) and you point it at everybody who walks through the airport then 1 in 5 people would be flagged as a terrorist.
If you screen 10,000 people in a day, then you you’ve identified 2000 people as potential terrorists. How many terrorists actually try to walk through the airport every day? Let’s say it’s 1. And so now you’ve got 1 guy correctly identified as a terrorist, and 2000 people incorrectly identified as a terrorist. How do you now pick the one guy out of 2000? I guess you’re slightly better off than when you were trying to pick 1 guy out of 10000.
But only slightly.
If it’s as poorly designed as that website…
Check out the description of how it supposedly works.
http://hedd1.com/content/how_does_hedd.html
Admittedly I’m not a chemist or physicist but that reads like bullshit to me.
If it lived up to the advertising hype, it should be used for employment screening!
“OK, Ms. Smith, just one last thing. Step up here and we’ll take your picture for personality analysis. And…oops – the machine says you are untrustworthy and should not be hired as a cashier. Sorry.”
IOW, not much different from Meyers-Briggs.
More on just the DKL Lifeguard.
But it sounds so sciencey! Ions and everything! Magnetic field! Internal energy!
Heck, just compare their driver’s license photos to the mug shots. I think DMVs are required to make DL photos look like mug shots.
Don’t worry - you don’t have to be one to tell.
From Wikipedia:
“They found that the Quadro Tracker contained no electronics whatsoever. It was merely an empty plastic box in which the only metal parts were a couple of wires and the antenna, which were not connected to each other.”
And people buy this! People who are responsible for security! People who are supposed to know their jobs. it’s astounding!
Nitpick, but a significant one. 1 in 5 would be 2000 people. If 1 was a terrorist, that would be 1999 who are not terrorists, not 2000.
Now if you bring in a DJ & a punch bowl all of the non-terrorists will party like they’re 1999; therefore, the one guy with his back up on the wall who doesn’t want to Get Down On It is obviously your terrorist. See, easy-peasy.
Time is fleeting… madness takes its toll.
Ah, they are bored. Terrorists are few and hard to come by in most places so they have to make up reasons to do stuff to enliven their lives. The dead ants in the box say we can drag you in and look in your suitcase to see what kind of underwear you prefer!
If this product actually worked, a nice application would be to route all the pedophiles and terrorists onto their own separate plane. A nice solution for everyone.
Myers-Briggs (which OK, I know is hated on the SDMB) at least provokes introspection. What can you do if the machine tells you that you have the face of a born paedophile?