Facial recognition technology makes checking in for flights and baseball games much faster, so the government shouldn’t limit its use. That’s according to people responding to a new survey by the Center for Data Innovation, which has ties to the tech companies that are probably making facial recognition software.
The survey of 3,151 U.S. adult internet users comes from a “nonprofit, nonpartisan research institute affiliated with the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation.” Gizmodo can you tell about who donates to the group, but let’s say they have a stake in whether or not people are afraid of Big Tech.
According to the survey, only about one in four Americans, 26%, think government should strictly limit the use of facial recognition technology. That number drops to only 20% if it would mean airports couldn’t use facial recognition technology to speed up security lines. Apparently 54% of the public wants the government to back off of regulation if it it means making it easier to get through the TSA line.
Of course, facial recognition isn’t just about getting to your flight faster. The survey also asked about the use of facial recognition in public safety–specifically, whether the government should strictly limit the use of facial recognition technology even if it comes at the expense of public safety. Per the survey, 53% disagreed with that rather broad statement.
When asked whether police should be allowed to use facial recognition to help find suspects, support depended on the tech’s accuracy: If the software is right 80% of the time, then 39% of respondent think police can use the technology, while 32% disagree. If the software is right 100% of the time, then 59% agree with using it, while 16% disagree.
Overall, Americans were more likely to support limiting surveillance cameras (36%) than facial recognition technology (26%), perhaps because people don’t realize they go hand in hand.
They are interesting findings, if you trust them. Check them out here while thinking about where you draw the line on trading privacy for convenience.