But buyers rejected the proposals at the organization’s annual standard assembly.
That meant much less than 50% voted for both of the measures.
A breakdown of the effects has yet to be disclosed.
The first vote had proposed that the agency should prevent imparting its Rekognition system to government groups.
The 2nd had called on it to fee an impartial have a look at into whether the tech threatened humans’s civil rights.
The ballot in Seattle would were non-binding, meaning executives would now not have needed to take particular movement had both been surpassed.
Amazon had attempted to block the votes however changed into instructed through the Securities and Exchange Commission that it did now not have the proper to do so.
“We will see what the tally is, but one of our primary goals became to bring this before shareholders and the board, and we succeeded in doing that,” Mary Beth Gallagher from the Tri-State Coalition for Responsible Investment advised the BBC.
“This is simply the beginning of this motion for us and this campaign will keep. We have constructed hyperlinks to civil rights organizations, employees and other stakeholders.
“And the most crucial factor is that regardless of the result, we nonetheless want the board to halt sales of Rekognition to governments, and it has the ability to do this.”
The American Civil Liberties Union introduced that the very fact there have been a vote turned into “an embarrassment to Amazon” and must serve as a “be-careful call for the organization to reckon with the real harms of face surveillance”.
Could facial recognition reduce crime?
San Francisco is first US city to ban facial recognition
UK police ‘missed’ probabilities to enhance face tech
Amazon has but to comment.
But in advance of the votes it stated it had no longer acquired a unmarried document of the system being used in a dangerous manner.
“[Rekognition is] a effective tool… For law enforcement and government organizations to capture criminals, prevent crime, and discover lacking humans,” its AGM notes state.
“New technology have to not be banned or condemned due to its capacity misuse.”
Face fits
Rekognition is an online device that works with both video and nonetheless pictures and allows users to in shape faces to pre-scanned subjects in a database containing up to twenty million people supplied by means of the client.
In doing so, it offers a confidence rating as to whether the ID is correct.
In addition, it is able to be used to:
hit upon “risky content” such as whether or not there is nudity or “revealing clothes” on display
propose whether or not a subject is male or woman
deduce a person’s mood
spot textual content in snap shots and transcribe it for evaluation
Amazon recommends that law enforcement sellers ought to only use the power if there is a 99% or higher self belief score of a match and says they need to be obvious about its usage.
But one pressure that has used the tech – Washington County Sheriff’s Office in Hillsboro, Oregon, – instructed the Washington Post that it had accomplished so with out enforcing a minimal self assurance threshold, and had run black-and-white police sketches thru the device similarly to pix.
A 2nd force in Orlando, Florida has additionally tested the machine. But Amazon has now not disclosed how many different public government have performed so.
Biased algorithms?
Part of Rekognition’s attraction is that it’s miles cheaper to apply than numerous rival facial recognition technologies.
But a have a look at posted in January through researchers at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of Toronto suggested Amazon’s algorithms suffered extra gender and racial bias than four competing products.
It said that Rekognition had a zero% error charge at classifying lighter-skinned adult males as such inside a check, but a 31.4% error fee at categorising darker-skinned females.
