Jo, living in a modern society involves rights and obligations. We are required to pay taxes in order to enable the state to provide for those less well off in society. We are also entitled to various benefits such as welfare, should we need it.

It is entirely reasonable that those seeking access to the benefits of a modern society should be required to identify themselves. And in fact, most of us identify ourselves to others perhaps several times each day. When we go to the bank, apply for a drivers licence, gun license etc.

My impression is that the only people playing the civil liberties card in an effort to frustrate the ability of authorities to easily identify them are those who have something to hide.

If you concern is that facial recognition technology might prove unreliable, then why not support a better alternative. Such as an Australia Card.

The Immigration department is already using facial recognition software. The last time I came back into Australia, instead of lining up with a couple of hundred others, all I had to do was put my new passport into a machine with my photo showing, stand on the appropriate spot while my photo was taken. After a brief period while the computer checked that I was the correct person, the gate opened and I was let through. There was nothing covert about it.

In Monarco, they have been using facial recognition software for several years to keep tags on undesirables.

It seems to me, that if you have nothing to hide, it should not be a problem. Just keep a diary of where you have been, in case the system has glitches.

David

Dear Herbert,

"It is entirely reasonable that those seeking access to the benefits of a modern society should be required to identify themselves."

I agree, but what about those who are not seeking such benefits?

As it becomes apparent that there is no free lunch, more people will finally get to doubt the overall benefit of a "modern" lifestyle.

"My impression is that the only people playing the civil liberties card in an effort to frustrate the ability of authorities to easily identify them are those who have something to hide."

-Indeed, with current technology, were the Nazis come to power again it would be much more difficult to hide Jews in double-walls.

Facial recognition technology: Big brother's ultimate weapon against civil liberties :
Without even reading this article I'm inclined to say that facial recognition should be seen as the ultimate weapon FOR civil liberties.

That's a bit of a reach, don't you think, Yuyutsu? That we should avoid facial recognition in case of Nazis? I think, in this day and age, organisations such as the National Socialist Party would number among those who 'have something to hide'. If they slipped under the radar and assumed power or, heaven forbid, if they were voted into power in free and open elections ... well, that would be a surprise.

The reality is that the software and hardware needed for facial recognition is being developed and will continue to be developed whether it is applied or not. If we are too precious to accept it in our society, we can't expect malevolent dictatorships to have the same reluctance to use technology. If we do accept it, we can learn to live with it, learn to work our way around it and see the benefits as well as the disadvantages.

I, for one, have nothing to hide - plenty that I don't want all my friends knowing about, but (like most Australians) few or no friends who are likely to view footage and identify me along with my groceries, my fuel consumption, my outings to the beach ... and people who don't know me are unlikely to care too much what I do.

Not a very useful article. Yes facial recognition is getting better. In a decade or two's time it is going to be very good indeed, literally allowing a 3D photo to be near solid for individual recognition as a DNA.

So now what? The article is silent. It's like running up to a house in the recent Brisbane floods, watching the inevitably of the creeping water submerging the house, and running around hysterically saying "your house is going to be flooded". It doesn't help. Yes, the house will be submerged, but life will go on. You can't resist some aspects of the tide of change, but that doesn't mean there aren't lots of things you can usefully do.

This article hints at none of them. It reads like alarmist journalism, written to attract page hits.