In 2012, a U.S. Army Research Laboratory funded study, led by Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, presented a paper demonstrating how\u00a0activity forecasting<\/em>\u00a0<\/strong>would work.\u00a0The study focused on the \"automatic detection of anomalous and threatening behavior'\u00a0by simulating the ways humans filter and generalize information from the senses<\/strong><\/em>.\" Based on a high-level artificial intelligence infrastructure called a cognitive engine<\/em>, the program learned to connect relevant signals and behaviors with background knowledge.<\/p>\n For centuries, scientists, visionaries and leaders have warned us, not of the dangers of technology, but rather our short-sighted intention and implementations of these advancements. Science fiction authors, script writers and movie producers have been trying to wake us up. Science and research has proven the fiction writers RIGHT. Now the question is, who is listening, who will hear and WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT IT?<\/strong><\/p>\n The Guardian<\/em> article by Sam Levin, dated September 12, 2017, discusses the work of Stanford Professor, Michal Kosinkski, which suggests technology can detect whether a person is gay or straight and\u00a0will soon reveal traits such as criminal predisposition. His study has gained much attention, and criticism, but as he so correctly states his research and software is nothing new.<\/p>\n Is Kosinkski's research an exciting prospect, or the next step towards the \"Minority Report\" society, where our political beliefs, IQ's and behaviors will all be predetermined not by ourselves but by an algorithm?<\/p>\n Voters have a right to keep their political beliefs private. But according to some researchers, it won\u2019t be long before a computer program can accurately guess whether people are liberal or conservative in an instant. All that will be needed are photos of their faces.<\/p>\n Michal Kosinski \u2013 the Stanford University professor who went viral last week for research suggesting that artificial intelligence (AI) can detect whether people are gay or straight based on photos \u2013 said sexual orientation was just one of many characteristics that algorithms would be able to predict through facial recognition.<\/p>\n Using photos, AI will be able to identify people\u2019s political views, whether they have high IQs, whether they are predisposed to criminal behavior, whether they have specific personality traits and many other private, personal details that could carry huge social consequences, he said.<\/strong><\/p>\n Kosinski outlined the extraordinary and sometimes disturbing applications of facial detection technology that he expects to see in the near future, raising complex ethical questions about the erosion of privacy and the possible misuse of AI to target vulnerable people.<\/p>\n \u201cThe face is an observable proxy for a wide range of factors, like your life history, your development factors, whether you\u2019re healthy,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n Faces contain a significant amount of information, and using large datasets of photos, sophisticated computer programs can uncover trends and learn how to distinguish key traits with a high rate of accuracy. With Kosinski\u2019s \u201cgaydar\u201d AI, an algorithm used online dating photos to create a program that could correctly identify sexual orientation 91% of the time with men and 83% with women, just by reviewing a handful of photos.<\/strong><\/p>\n Kosinski\u2019s research is highly controversial, and faced a huge backlash from LGBT rights groups, which argued that the AI was flawed and that anti-LGBT governments could use this type of software to out gay people and persecute them. Kosinski and other researchers, however, have argued that powerful governments and corporations already possess these technological capabilities and that it is vital to expose possible dangers in an effort to push for privacy protections and regulatory safeguards, which have not kept pace with AI.<\/strong><\/p>\n Kosinski, an assistant professor of organizational behavior, said he was studying links between facial features and political preferences, with preliminary results showing that AI is effective at guessing people\u2019s ideologies based on their faces.<\/p>\n This is probably because political views appear to be heritable, as research has shown, he said. That means political leanings are possibly linked to genetics or developmental factors, which could result in detectable facial differences.<\/p>\n Kosinski said previous studies have found that conservative politicians tend to be more attractive than liberals, possibly because good-looking people have more advantages and an easier time getting ahead in life.<\/p>\n Kosinski said the AI would perform best for people who are far to the right or left and would be less effective for the large population of voters in the middle. \u201cA high conservative score \u2026 would be a very reliable prediction that this guy is conservative.\u201d<\/p>\n [..]<\/p>\n Facial recognition may also be used to make inferences about IQ, said Kosinski, suggesting a future in which schools could use the results of facial scans when considering prospective students. This application raises a host of ethical questions, particularly if the AI is purporting to reveal whether certain children are genetically more intelligent, he said: \u201cWe should be thinking about what to do to make sure we don\u2019t end up in a world where better genes means a better life.\u201d<\/p>\n Some of Kosinski\u2019s suggestions conjure up the 2002 science-fiction film Minority Report, in which police arrest people before they have committed crimes based on predictions of future murders. The professor argued that certain areas of society already function in a similar way<\/strong>.<\/p>\n [..]<\/p>\n Kosinski predicted that with a large volume of facial images of an individual, an algorithm could easily detect if that person is a psychopath or has high criminal tendencies. He said this was particularly concerning given that a propensity for crime does not translate to criminal actions: \u201cEven people highly disposed to committing a crime are very unlikely to commit a crime.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n [..]<\/p>\n The law generally considers people\u2019s faces to be \u201cpublic information\u201d, said Thomas Keenan, professor of environmental design and computer science at the University of Calgary, noting that regulations have not caught up with technology: no law establishes when the use of someone\u2019s face to produce new information rises to the level of privacy invasion.<\/strong><\/p>\n Keenan said it might take a tragedy to spark reforms, such as a gay youth being beaten to death because bullies used an algorithm to out him: \u201cNow, you\u2019re putting people\u2019s lives at risk.\u201d<\/p>\n Even with AI that makes highly accurate predictions, there is also still a percentage of predictions that will be incorrect.<\/p>\n \u201cYou\u2019re going down a very slippery slope,\u201d said Keenan, \u201cif one in 20 or one in a hundred times \u2026 you\u2019re going to be dead wrong.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n Source: https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/technology\/2017\/sep\/12\/artificial-intelligence-face-recognition-michal-kosinski<\/p><\/blockquote>\nInformational Insights: Face-reading AI<\/h2>\n