Facial recognition to stop COVID is ridiculous, but it’s also a great example of tech solutionism—the unnecessary push to use tech to solve everything.

Here’s how this works: https://twitter.com/hypervisible/status/1299382648922664961

The problem to solve here is how to make sure people in a space will not transmit COVID to each other.

The proposed solution is to have people take COVID tests, link that data to a face database, and have venues use facial recognition to identify people at the door.

This is a classic example of tech solutionism. An attempt has been made to solve a difficult problem, using advanced, privacy-invasive tech, but it turns out: (1) you do not need the tech, and (2) the tech doesn’t even work.

If you want to make sure only people who test negative can enter a room, you do need a system to check and confirm test results.

But this doesn’t have to be facial recognition.

You can have folks check in with results at the door, pre-screen people before an event, etc.

Plus, the proposed tech solution doesn’t even do its job. It’s based on faulty premises.

COVID tests can be unreliable. Some tests are even built to be fast but less accurate. And it matters how long it’s been since a person was tested.

Facial recognition doesn’t solve this!

OK, so if you build in safeguards for test accuracy and recency, and you decide the convenience of FRT is better than other options, can you use facial recognition to stop COVID?

The question isn’t if you can, but if you should. Are the privacy risks really worth it?

Sometimes people choose the tech solution only after carefully considering all the risks and rewards. That’s OK!

But too often, we turn to a flashy tech solution that isn’t needed and doesn’t work. We end up giving up more of our rights and getting nothing in return.