# Regulation for Facial Recognition Technology

By [Continuations](https://continuations.com) · 2018-12-07

microsoft, facial recognition, regulation

---

When [Brad Smith](https://twitter.com/BradSmi) from Microsoft had called for the regulation of Facial Recognition technology in [July](https://www.wired.com/story/microsoft-calls-for-federal-regulation-of-facial-recognition/) I was concerned about where that might go, as it could easily result in stifling innovation. I was therefore [relieved to see the principles that Microsoft put forth yesterday](https://blogs.microsoft.com/on-the-issues/2018/12/06/facial-recognition-its-time-for-action/), which are for the most part quite sensible.

![image](https://storage.googleapis.com/papyrus_images/7659ac8df986d347a35c2691a29869b5.jpg)

In particular, I agree and strongly support the due process suggestion on government’s use of facial recognition technology. Surveillance of an individual using facial recognition should require a court order.

I am also a big fan of requiring an API to enable third party testing. This is in fact the first instance I am aware of in which a large tech company proposes such a requirement which I have [written](https://continuations.com/post/172413445510/we-need-mandatory-enduser-apis-for-social-and) about frequently before and is a central part of what I call “[Informational Freedom](https://worldaftercapital.gitbooks.io/worldaftercapital/content/part-three/Informational.html)” in my book [World After Capital](http://worldaftercapital.org/). A great approach here would be for an organization such as [NIST](https://www.nist.gov/) to publish a reference data set against which all facial recognition systems could be tested.

The only section of the Microsoft proposal that I think is somewhat under specified and potentially subject to bad regulation is titled “Ensuring meaningful human review.” The goal of this section is laudable, which is to require a human in the loop for high stakes decisions instead of operating fully automated. But the criteria for when that might apply are broad and vague and could wind up encompassing a lot of the positive use cases. I would suggest limiting this part of the proposal to the exercise of government power.

Overall this is an incredibly thoughtful contribution from a technology leader to the discussion of how we can use our new capabilities for good.

---

*Originally published on [Continuations](https://continuations.com/regulation-for-facial-recognition-technology)*