Google accused of illegally shooting homeless people to improve Pixel 4 performance
Google has repeatedly blamed the violation of the confidentiality of users of its products, and the future flagship of the company called Pixel 4 was no exception. The corporation recognized the fact of shooting people for money to train the face recognition system, but later it turned out that in many cases such photos were taken without permission .
Several sources said that Google specifically sent entire teams to collect material, while the contractors did not warn passersby that they were shooting. Their main goal, according to available information, was students and homeless people who were offered to "test the new application" for a gift certificate of 5. In addition, both of these categories, as a rule, agreed to the privacy statement without reading it, and thereby gave Consent to shooting, as well as processing and storage of images.
“Due to the fact that homeless people rarely communicate with the media, Google chose these people as the target group for collecting information. Of course, no one warned them about the shooting, and the scan was presented as "selfie game". Black homeless people were simply offered a few minutes to twist a smartphone in their hands, sometimes offering 5. for this, the Daily News reported.
Volunteers involved in the collection of digital material, told reporters that Google representatives forbade people to be told that during the "testing" the shooting was in progress. According to them, any questions related to this had to be answered negatively, saying that the company was only testing a new application.
One of the goals of Google, the source says, is to get as many photos of people with dark skin color as possible to improve the performance of the face recognition scanner. Photos of the gadget from which the photo was taken fell into the network – presumably this is Pixel 4. It is enclosed in a hard case with screws and is protected from unauthorized access.
Google said that they did collect information for training the biometric sensor, but did not give contractors such instructions. “It is possible that the actions of the contractor are attributed to a company that has concluded an agreement with this organization in accordance with the law,” representatives of the corporation noted.