backtop


Print 88 comment(s) - last by myocardia.. on Jun 2 at 3:09 PM


Happy days are over for drivers in Arkansas, Indiana, Nevada and Virginia, which have banned smiles on license photos.  (Source: NY Daily News)

Diana Kim, of Fairfax, Va. isn't smiling as she gets her license -- it's banned in her state.  (Source: USA Today)
Turn that smile upside down

As high-tech licenses become increasingly hard to forge, the Department of Motor Vehicles has found that one popular approach to obtaining fraudulent license is for someone to pose as a friend or colleague in an effort to get an official license.  New high-tech software uses facial recognition to warn officials if the face of the person being licensed matches someone already licensed.

However, there's one problem -- the algorithms often fail if people are making different faces in the two photos.  So four states -- Arkansas, Indiana, Nevada and Virginia -- are telling drivers to wipe that grin off their face.  No more happy days for licensing, the states have declared, drivers must adopt "neutral facial expressions".

Carnegie Mellon University robotics professor Takeo Kanade acknowledges that the move is necessary given the poor state of facial recognition technology when it comes to facial expressions.  Researchers still have yet to catch up to the inherent processing capability of the human brain, which can recognize familiar faces in a broad variety of expressions.

Karen Chappell, deputy commissioner of the Virginia DMV says that the smile ban is necessary to "make the comparison process more accurate."

Some citizens who were initially offended are changing their tune, deciding that the rule is in the best interest of national security.  States Elaine Mullen of Great Falls, Va., "It's probably safer from a national-security point of view."

Arkansas, Indiana and Nevada do still allow small smiles.  Currently 31 states in total do computerized matching of driver's license photos, and 3 others are considering it.  Of the 27 other states without anti-smiling policies, many are considering adopting similar measures.  Some states though are resisting the movement.  Pennsylvania Transportation Department spokesman Craig Yetter, states, "People can smile here in Pennsylvania."

Even without a smile-ban, Illinois stopped 6,000 people from getting fraudulent licenses since 1999, according to Beth Langen, the state head of Drivers Services.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

And the sheep say...
By Amiga500 on 5/27/2009 10:36:45 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Some citizens who were initially offended are changing their tune, deciding that the rule is in the best interest of national security. States Elaine Mullen of Great Falls, Va., "It's probably safer from a national-security point of view."


BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Too many buy it hook line and sinker when the national security excuse is brought into it.

Total BULLsh*t.

If the people endangering us are so inept they can be caught faking a licence by smiling, why are the governments of the world having to spend billions to try and combat them?

Errrr... does not compute.

Same as that security rubbish in the airports.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin




RE: And the sheep say...
By GaryJohnson on 5/27/2009 10:43:23 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin

I'm not sure "smiling for your ID card photo" is really what I would call an "essential liberty."


RE: And the sheep say...
By FITCamaro on 5/27/09, Rating: 0
RE: And the sheep say...
By Regs on 5/27/2009 11:19:59 AM , Rating: 5
In soviert russia - you do not bend technology, you must bend for technology.


RE: And the sheep say...
By wuZheng on 5/27/2009 10:56:32 AM , Rating: 5
No, its not so much an essential liberty in the sense thats its JUST your ID card photo. However, we have to look at this in relative terms. You have lost the ability to express yourself for an identification/license photo, in exchange for what exactly? What security benefit does NOT smiling for your ID have for the police, airport officials, or anyone else interested in national security for that matter? In the large majority of cases I'm willing to bet the benefit is negligible at BEST. They do that here in Canada too for our passports and driver's licenses. A comedian by name of Russell Peters once made a joke to that effect...

"I'm a brown man, and if that wasn't bad enough, now I looked pissed off." (or something similar... doing this by memory)


RE: And the sheep say...
By Lifted on 5/27/2009 11:07:37 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
You have lost the ability to express yourself for an identification/license photo


You also can't wear glasses, a hat, a hood, etc.

Were you crying over those as a loss of expression?

Do you really have nothing else going on in your life that losing the ability to "express yourself" in a drivers license is such a downer?

I'm guessing you're a total drama queen in real life.

I guess you could always tattoo a smile on your face if you really feel the need to express yourself.


RE: And the sheep say...
By wuZheng on 5/27/2009 11:10:09 AM , Rating: 3
*facepalm*

You obviously didn't read my post, let me rephrase, your PROPORTIONAL LOSS of freedoms is not EQUAL to the GAIN in BENEFIT for national security purposes.

Learn to read buddy.


RE: And the sheep say...
By b534202 on 5/27/2009 6:32:50 PM , Rating: 2
So what's the proportion of smiling on your id card to the freedom you enjoy in this society?

For me it is 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001%. I think having DMV's facial recognition software working is worth more than that.


RE: And the sheep say...
By Boze on 5/28/2009 3:23:50 AM , Rating: 2
The Department of Homeland Security spends billions and billions of dollars each year. State governments run off millions; some of them, billions.

And you're telling me they can't afford to hire a company to write extremely capable facial recognition software?

Look, I was prior military, the biggest problem with government, both large and small, is the "lowest bidder" mentality. Make a six foot noose and then put it over someone... tighten it over years and years - they'll never complain, even when it starts ever so slightly cutting off circulation.


RE: And the sheep say...
By tmouse on 5/28/2009 7:23:56 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
What security benefit does NOT smiling for your ID have for the police, airport officials, or anyone else interested in national security for that matter? In the large majority of cases I'm willing to bet the benefit is negligible at BEST.


From the article:

quote:
New high-tech software uses facial recognition to warn officials if the face of the person being licensed matches someone already licensed.
However, there's one problem -- the algorithms often fail if people are making different faces in the two photos.


You said:
quote:
Learn to read buddy


Sage advice


RE: And the sheep say...
By elgoliath on 6/1/2009 12:59:07 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, and most of those are just kids trying to get a license to enter a bar and drink, not terrorists. So, show me the national security issues that make this worth it.

And no, I don't think keeping 'kids' out of the bar is a good enough reason especially since I think the 'kids' should be allowed in the bar if the country says they are old enough to die for their country.

Also, if the states are having issues getting facial recognition software that isn't screwed up by someone smiling, I suggest they go talk to the casino's in Las Vegas as they have the ability to see through actual disguises.

But yes, lets continue to cut people's 'rights' so we can continue to use and prop up bad versions of good technology.


RE: And the sheep say...
By FaaR on 5/28/2009 8:46:43 AM , Rating: 2
Why do you feel a need to "express" yourself on your ID card photo?

ID card photos do not exist for purposes of expression, they exist for the express purpose of identification.

You sound like you're complaining just for the sake of it. I'm sure that you agree that since there are hucksters, fraudsters, criminals and (yes) terrorists out there, we need a means to identify ourselves and make certain we are who we say we are. Do you not also agree then that ideally this identification process should be as precise as we can make it, so that you can't fake your ID, or erroneously be mistaken for someone else?


RE: And the sheep say...
By mindless1 on 5/28/2009 9:06:46 AM , Rating: 1
Well in THAT case, someone who is apt to smile in real life would be more easily identified on their ID if it had a picture of them smiling.

Look at it the other way. Since someone now isn't smiling on their ID, all they have to do to avoid detection by security cameras with facial recognition is SMILE. Even worse, now they know to do such a simple thing and unlike a mask, there's no overt sign they are trying not to be detected by a security camera since people do routinely smile.

Either way the argument they make about security is a load of bull. They could simply require more proof for identification purposes, and they don't want you to know that whether someone is smiling or not is not the only problem with current facial recognition software.

No, I do not agree that facial recognition software would be, or needs to be, so accurate that something a person would naturally do has to be taken away from them. It seems such a trivial thing but you don't understand it is the principle, principles being worth far more than money.

Money where my mouth is, I'd rather pay a few bucks more for the license and not have to bend over for legislators deciding my rights aren't as important as the idea of safeguarding a country that claims to uphold our rights. A bit ironic.

Let me put it to you another way. Either nobody has ever faked my ID, or the consequence of it was irrelevant as it had no effect on my life. I have not been erroneously mistaken for something else because of this, in fact most states do not do it, in fact the states that do did not do it for many many years.

I totally disagree that we should change a process that thus far has worked well enough. If someone is going to forge a license in this day and age they can just do so instead of going to the DMV at all to get a fake, and I would speculate that is how the majority are done so this becomes even more off the wall an idea with more cons than pros no matter how you look at it so long as you look at all angles.


RE: And the sheep say...
By tastyratz on 5/27/2009 11:20:11 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
You also can't wear glasses, a hat, a hood, etc.


Wait wait I know this!
Does your character have red hair?
Does your character have facial hair?

Your Herman aren't you? I know your not Clair

(For those who don't remember or don't get it)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8iOvPOAerQ


RE: And the sheep say...
By Biggiesized on 5/27/2009 5:31:59 PM , Rating: 3
Does he look like a bitch?


RE: And the sheep say...
By croc on 5/27/2009 7:10:26 PM , Rating: 2
I always found that strange, frankly. My license here in AUS says that I must wear glasses, so I do. I also always wear a hat. I look nothing like my license photo.

As to the facial recognition sloppyware, either fix it or don't depend on it. At this point in time it is an unreliable technology, so I'd vote for the 'don't count on it' option.


RE: And the sheep say...
By Alexstarfire on 5/27/2009 8:08:34 PM , Rating: 2
I think there is a big difference between purposely, or what can be purposely, trying to make it hard to identify yourself based on the photo ID and just expressing yourself. I do say think that if you wear glasses all the time, like prescription, that you should be allowed to wear them.


RE: And the sheep say...
By boulder2 on 5/28/2009 7:10:15 AM , Rating: 2
No hoods ?
No wonder they couldn't find Osama.
I bet he went for his driving license, and they told him to first shave off the long beard, then remove his long muslim white dress and wear ordinary pants and a T-shirt.


RE: And the sheep say...
By tmouse on 5/28/2009 7:37:09 AM , Rating: 2
People will always complain, I'm not sure how I really feel about this issue its kind of surprising that facial recognition software is still so limited. I suppose this is only required for 100% identification because software is used to presort potential security risks in places like airports, but it is used only to alert security who can then go for personal identification. To bring up an extreme case remember the woman who wanted to sue Florida because she couldn't have her driving license picture taken while wearing a burka?


RE: And the sheep say...
By GaryJohnson on 5/27/2009 11:14:54 AM , Rating: 2
There is a tangible benefit to doing this. Facial recognition systems can be confused by exaggerated expressions. It's not about the large majority of cases where the benefit is negligible. It's about the small minority of cases where the benefit is invaluable.

You can still express yourself in your driver's license photo: just wear a smiley face pin on your shirt collar.


RE: And the sheep say...
By wuZheng on 5/27/2009 11:23:26 AM , Rating: 2
Huh?

quote:
exaggerated expressions


For most of the more advanced algorithms, you'd have to seriously contort your face to confuse them. Then on the other hand, similar facial features could do that as well, so I'm still not seeing where having a straight face benefits the citizens of America in terms of national security...

And remember, my argument is not that you can't "express yourself" so much as it is you've needlessly lost a freedom for extremely marginal or no gain in benefit somewhere else.


RE: And the sheep say...
By grandpope on 5/27/2009 11:51:10 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
For most of the more advanced algorithms


LOL, you DO remember that we are talking about the DMV, right?


RE: And the sheep say...
By Sazar on 5/27/2009 1:42:34 PM , Rating: 5
Why so serious?

Now we know. He had to have his picture taken at the DMV.


RE: And the sheep say...
By Omega215D on 5/28/2009 7:56:42 AM , Rating: 2
Let's put a smile on that face...

=)


RE: And the sheep say...
By tmouse on 5/28/2009 7:41:17 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Carnegie Mellon University robotics professor Takeo Kanade acknowledges that the move is necessary given the poor state of facial recognition technology when it comes to facial expressions. Researchers still have yet to catch up to the inherent processing capability of the human brain, which can recognize familiar faces in a broad variety of expressions.


Your credentials are.....?


RE: And the sheep say...
By omnicronx on 5/27/2009 3:46:29 PM , Rating: 2
Do you really think anyone here (aside from Canadians) are going to know who Russell Peters is?

As for the benefits, I can say the same thing about smiling, what benefit could this possibly give you? The answer is absolutely nothing, which is less than negligence last time I checked.. So there you go, the pros outweighing the cons.


RE: And the sheep say...
By Alexstarfire on 5/27/2009 8:12:58 PM , Rating: 1
I do and I'm in the US. He's funny as hell.

"My name is *clock* Belay." Fucking hilarious.


RE: And the sheep say...
By fic2 on 5/27/2009 1:04:14 PM , Rating: 2
So, we are free to pursue happiness, just not show it?


RE: And the sheep say...
By DeepBlue1975 on 5/27/2009 3:07:06 PM , Rating: 2
No, you are wrong.

It's as essential a liberty as using the ring finger or putting your butt instead of your face when the photo is being taken.

If you can't do any of those, then life is not worth living, and to those who complain, I'd advice them to go that route and terminate once and for all their miserably sorry lives.


RE: And the sheep say...
By mindless1 on 5/28/2009 9:15:35 AM , Rating: 2
Congrats, you're the kind of person who makes the world a far worse place to live in than it ought to be. People who disagree with you should kill themselves? Wow. Fruit loop city.


RE: And the sheep say...
By DeepBlue1975 on 5/28/2009 10:43:46 AM , Rating: 2
I won't discuss anything seriously with someone who calls himself "mindless".


RE: And the sheep say...
By mindless1 on 5/28/2009 4:53:58 PM , Rating: 2
Then what's the excuse any other time?


RE: And the sheep say...
By DeepBlue1975 on 5/30/2009 11:21:55 AM , Rating: 1
Congrats. You've just ruined my amusement routine. Oh well...

But you like being called mindless, don't you?
After all, you saw that some other who likes being called "mindless" reserved the nickname first, and just because you wanted to be "mindless" so badly, you added a "1" at the end to still have the privilege of being called mindless anyway.

Interesting! Now, pray tell us about your childhood...

PS: don't feel offended or blame me, I can't resist having some free virtual fun. After all, you started it by name-calling yourself!


RE: And the sheep say...
By myocardia on 6/2/2009 3:09:34 PM , Rating: 2
Lack of intelligence, obviously.


RE: And the sheep say...
By callmeroy on 5/27/2009 11:12:40 AM , Rating: 3
As most people do -- you are over dramatizing Ben's quote in this case and also thinking FAR too narrowly at the same time.

National security is a comprehensive concept -- it doesn't ONLY mean one area of security (example: foreign terrorist threats)...it doesn't even exclusively mean security from just physical harm. ID theft is a pretty bad experience to go through if you ever had to go through it. Its certainly not fun to try and clean up the mess that's for sure, let alone the feeling of your information --- private and financial -- being "out there" unsecured and in the hands of who knows and with what ethical or moral principles will guide their actions with said information.

I have not *knock on wood* it hasn't happened to me personally, but to folks I know and saw and heard what they went through.

Finally, in summation its about protecting YOURSELF from being a victim of fraud....nevermind anyone else....you don't like the idea of security measures to guard against you from being a victim of fraud?

Ben's quote doesn't apply at ALL in this case.


RE: And the sheep say...
By callmeroy on 5/27/2009 11:18:35 AM , Rating: 5
Btw, as someone with a profound interest in history - particular during our country's founding -- it peeves me to know end how out of context and over used most people apply the quotes from the country's Revoluationary days especially. I bet you half the people (being generous at that even) know the conditions of the times and the issues they faced to lead to those famous words we refer to or even the Constituation.....folks largely had a deep love for what they believed in and willingly put their lives in jeopardy (and indeed many died in fact) for those words....today a kid will quote a famous line in a debate for something silly...like someone denying his/her right to go to the mall or play a video game ......just peeves me...maybe i take that history stuff to serious I don't know.

Anyway..fin / steps off soap box.


RE: And the sheep say...
By Regs on 5/27/2009 3:53:43 PM , Rating: 1
I know what the problem is. We learn history in grade 2 and BULLSHIT in college.


RE: And the sheep say...
By Alexstarfire on 5/27/2009 8:19:55 PM , Rating: 3
Wait, kids these days actually know those quotes? I'm quite surprised they even know them. It might not be the same as them using it for representation, but I think being able to express yourself is just as important. Perhaps it's not that important for just ONE photo, but we know it never stops at just one anything.

And you should have taken English class a bit more serious.


RE: And the sheep say...
By mindless1 on 5/28/2009 9:22:00 AM , Rating: 1
That's ridiculous. No matter your interest in history you did not invent those words and have no more of an ownership or judgement of their use than anyone else, no particular justification to get upset about it.

The men that said or wrote them on the other hand, were they around today they might be more fairly upset.

It's not that you take history too seriously, it's that you're not seeing they are only words, these men throughout history ALSO acted, the words meant little without the will to act. It is only sensible to ignore someone who says something they have no intention of carrying through with.


RE: And the sheep say...
By aKarma on 5/27/2009 11:48:47 AM , Rating: 2
This is not a case of catching out fake by the smiles. here is a plausible benefit of not smiling on the ID cards.

Firstly, extreme expressions can give computer recognition solutions issues.

Also, when you smile, your cheeks are normally raised towards the eyes which can result in them being less clear than otherwise.

It what f**king way is it an affront to civil liberties to have a standardised expression for ID?


RE: And the sheep say...
By omnicronx on 5/27/2009 12:10:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Smiling on your ID is not an essential liberty, if Franklin knew of half the BS that people like you are throwing around these days he would be rolling in his grave.

P.S this is nothing new, you are not suppose to smile on your passport either, I've had my picture denied before because of this.


I was told
By Mitch101 on 5/27/2009 10:02:48 AM , Rating: 2
I was told don't smile in your license photo because when you get pulled over you wont be smiling. This way you will match your license picture.




RE: I was told
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 5/27/2009 10:05:54 AM , Rating: 2
I don't know about you, but I mooned the cop just before being pulled over. I was smiling. She on the other hand....


RE: I was told
By Indianapolis on 5/27/2009 10:08:03 AM , Rating: 4
DORK ALERT!


RE: I was told
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 5/27/2009 10:14:03 AM , Rating: 2
Person with no sense of humor ALERT…. Run every one it’s disease will spread.


RE: I was told
By Barfo on 5/27/2009 10:23:50 AM , Rating: 3
Bad spelling alert!


RE: I was told
By AnnihilatorX on 5/27/2009 10:28:41 AM , Rating: 5
Lost productivity alert!


RE: I was told
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 5/27/2009 10:35:01 AM , Rating: 2
I'm going with bad typing ALERT.... My bad.


RE: I was told
By FITCamaro on 5/27/2009 10:50:23 AM , Rating: 2
Do kids still use the word "dork"?


RE: I was told
By Bender 123 on 5/27/2009 10:06:13 AM , Rating: 5
After waiting in the DMV and experiencing the depression of their staff, I do not see how smiling would even be possible.


RE: I was told
By FITCamaro on 5/27/2009 10:51:01 AM , Rating: 1
Seriously. I think Family Guy's explanation of the invention of the DMV is quite accurate.


RE: I was told
By SpaceJumper on 5/27/2009 12:18:46 PM , Rating: 2
The cop can smile in his drivers license. That way it matches his face when he is pulling someone over.


California
By adiposity on 5/27/2009 10:28:18 AM , Rating: 2
I was forced to retake my license picture after I showed a giant grin.

The DMV person told me I would get arrested if a cop saw that picture...and therefore it wasn't "allowed."

Stupid, but who cares...

-Dan




RE: California
By acase on 5/27/2009 10:37:08 AM , Rating: 3
yah...same here. I just had a slight smile and had to retake which pissed me off. Now my picture looks like the mug shot of a serial killer.


RE: California
By FITCamaro on 5/27/2009 10:51:59 AM , Rating: 1
Welcome to Commifornia. Please bend over.


RE: California
By ClownPuncher on 5/27/2009 1:22:15 PM , Rating: 1
You were for the "no-smile" law in an above post, but if California does it, you don't like it anymore?


RE: California
By FITCamaro on 5/27/2009 6:10:38 PM , Rating: 2
I said I agree with not allowing it in a picture right from the start. I don't think you should get arrested for it if you already have a license with a smile on it as the OP implied.


RE: California
By ClownPuncher on 5/27/2009 7:22:17 PM , Rating: 2
Makes sense. I wonder how a law came to pass where you get arrested for smiling in an ID photo. Sounds like a waste of tax dollars and police time.


RE: California
By tmouse on 5/28/2009 7:50:29 AM , Rating: 2
In all probability it was just a BS reply from the DMV person.


Self-aware software?
By flyboy84 on 5/27/2009 10:01:30 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
However, there's one problem -- the algorithms often smile if people are making different faces in the two photos.


If the algorithm can express emotions, we have bigger things to worry about...

Skynet...is that you?




RE: Self-aware software?
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 5/27/2009 10:11:46 AM , Rating: 2
If you smile in the first one, then you just have to smile for the rest... Shouldn't the system pick up the facial features as long as you are doing the same time of face... Hence why they say do not smile (so you look the same in each posed photo.)?


RE: Self-aware software?
By acase on 5/27/2009 10:35:32 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
the Department of Motor Vehicles has found that one popular approach to obtaining fraudulent license is for someone to pose as a friend or colleague in an effort to get an official license.


It isn't about YOU it's so someone else can't make a different expression and use your name.


RE: Self-aware software?
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 5/27/2009 10:49:39 AM , Rating: 2
So your smiling face looks the same as others while your straight face looks like no other face??? No, I don't think so. It's about the software recognizing your face, not the expression. That's why I'm wondering if you have the same expression for each photo, why can it not recognize you?


RE: Self-aware software?
By acase on 5/27/2009 11:05:10 AM , Rating: 1
NO! For christ sake. If they do it so it is standardized and you can't smile they can have what you look like on record with no smile. That way, if someone else comes in with your information wanting a new license, when they take the picture it will realize it isn't actually you.

In the same way, if you already have a license (where you weren't allowed to smile), and then you go in with someone else's information and try and get one that maybe says you are 21, it will run your photo with all of them in the system and realize you have a license under a different name.

This couldn't be accomplished if they just told everyone to smile, because each individual person can smile in many different ways.

Get through that time?


RE: Self-aware software?
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 5/27/2009 11:20:36 AM , Rating: 2
So, twins can be an issue?? :)

OK, that I understood. Thanks.


RE: Self-aware software?
By tmouse on 5/28/2009 8:05:47 AM , Rating: 2
Only identical are a problem , but they impersonate each all of the time anyway. ; )


WTH?!?!
By Unfixedyouth on 5/27/2009 1:28:56 PM , Rating: 2
So. Let's break this down. Forget the whole no smile crap... I got my photo ID when I was 16. I'm 23 now. Is there a law that states how old the picture can be? Because I know that my face has changed since then... Probably so much that this facial software would not read it...

Haha... Facial software... sorry, little tangent...

Anywho... Point two... What about saying... screw you software dev companies trying to make money off of facial recognition software... Some punk landed a deal with the government selling this crappy software, and now those states are pissed off because it has a marginal failure rate... Maybe they should go to the software development company and make them figure it out...................
We saw what happened in the movie 21! Nothin beats a good old fashion casino security beating. Beating! Beat! beet. bee.... ttttt

Point three....
What happend to the old fasion double take?
License photo.
Persons face......
License photo.....
....
Persons face.....
Ooooookkkkkkk.... it's you..... Whatcha drinkin?
But Noooooo..... People checking id's are getting so lazy that they don't want to take the time to look at other human beings... Yes people look alike sometimes... But, you'd know your mothers face if you saw it... You just gotta get over yourself and pay attention if you’re in a position where you work with people very often....

Finally... I leave you with this little treasure....

http://www.hulu.com/watch/63896/family-guy-driver-...




RE: WTH?!?!
By tmouse on 5/28/2009 8:01:08 AM , Rating: 3
Point one: The purpose here is to stop people from GETTING a license in another name, of course they have to have one in the current state to compare. Many (most?) states issue new licenses at certain intervals, and at that time they can require a new picture, although most do not exercise this option. This is not for routine police checks.

Point two: look up Takeo Kanade before making stupid comments. The problem is most of the software is not good enough for 100% recognition when facial expressions are changed. Now they could allow some smiling and use a person to check any false positives that the computer comes up with but do we REALLY want to spend MORE time in the DMV?

Point three: again this is NOT for routine ID checks, it's to reduce fraud


RE: WTH?!?!
By mindless1 on 5/28/2009 9:38:47 AM , Rating: 1
Point one: Anyone who needs a drivers license instead of only a state ID will presumably find some way to access a vehicle and go to another state for that license.

Point two: The problem is the software isn't remotely close to 100% even with no smiling, Takeo Kanade didn't say this would fix the problem, rather the software was such crap it was taken out of context that this would improve it some.

Allowing smiling and waiting for a person to check is not necessarily going to cause more false positives. It could easily be the opposite, that they consider it a success if it makes as many similar comparisons as possible to try and catch as many people as possible by having they all take the same grim facial expression, meaning your wait could be longer. Part of what makes people look different is their normal facial expression, among other things like state of alertness, standing up straight (angle light usually hits their face), how oily their skin is, what hue of makeup for women, amount of tan, weight gain or loss. All things humans discriminate better than a computer.

Point three: They want to make it routine, and it is to check identity. What they later do with the information is out of our control as they are the government. Ever hear of illegal wiretaps?

What it is mostly is an idea by a small group that they should impose their will on the majority of society for reasons they deem to be more important regardless of what society wants. That's anti-American. Fraud is more likely with a totally fake ID than someone actually going to the DMV and posing as someone else. I'd wager that with a photoshopped picture printed on plastic stock then laminated on both sides you could easily make a license from a few states away and pass it off in your own state, so ironically enough if the idea of not smiling to aid facial recognition were for routine ID checks, then it might serve a greater purpose than it will.


RE: WTH?!?!
By Unfixedyouth on 5/29/2009 12:07:07 PM , Rating: 2
Thank you.


RE: WTH?!?!
By Unfixedyouth on 5/29/2009 12:04:40 PM , Rating: 2
Point you're a gullable idiot:
Did you even read my post?
Post... po.... s.....sssss.....ttttt???????

Guess not.

Because!!!!! If you had!!!!!

You would have realized that it was for comedic purposes, and not for logical arguments... Thank you for pointing out that the comment that I had made, which was intended to be stupid, was stupid...

You WIN the PRIZE!!!! - Your official title is now, "You the guy who burns the guy that you the guy thinks is stupid because you the guy take things too seriously..."

P.S. I love you. (great movie)....(actually, never saw it)....(but i do like you've got mail!!!)


Same thing here in Canada
By BigToque on 5/27/2009 10:08:22 AM , Rating: 2
I was told I couldn't smile when I renewed both my drivers licence and passport.




RE: Same thing here in Canada
By SpaceJumper on 5/27/2009 12:13:43 PM , Rating: 4
Nobody was complaining when I made a sad face for my drivers license photo.


By queuetrip on 5/27/2009 11:54:15 AM , Rating: 2
do not know if there is a law against smiling in the license office here in Toronto, but I was asked to not smile and not to wear my glasses while the picture is taken.




By kb9fcc on 5/27/2009 12:58:11 PM , Rating: 2
Without my glasses I'm not sure I could see the camera to look into/at it. I've worn glasses for so long that any picture of me without them would assumed to be faked.

And speaking of things that changes one's face, what about facial hair (for those of capable (or cursed with) that ability? Do I now, knowing that I'll be asked to make a deer caught in the headlights expression, take a few weeks/months before hand to grow a beard/mustache/etc., only to shave it off 10 minutes after walking out of the DMV with my newly minted mug shot?


By tmouse on 5/28/2009 8:10:00 AM , Rating: 2
Part of the glasses issue is the due to reflections, cheap straight on lighting. Thats what contributes to the mug shot look.


A little sunshine
By Danger D on 5/27/2009 11:08:40 AM , Rating: 5
They should just make everyone smile, including the DMV workers.




Shucks...
By Mortando on 5/27/2009 10:52:37 AM , Rating: 4
Sounds like the party's over:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owvO640ODwA




Good for me
By noirsoft on 5/27/2009 11:00:56 AM , Rating: 4
I hate smiling for photos. Hopefully the days of the DMV person badgering me to get me to smile are over...




y so serious?
By corduroygt on 5/27/2009 12:57:02 PM , Rating: 2
How will the Joker get his driving licence now?




RE: y so serious?
By kb9fcc on 5/27/2009 1:12:31 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, as witty as your comment is, it's not as dumb or meaningless at second thought. What about those few people who through muscle, tissue, or nerve damage cannot help but have a facial expression that might be deemed by your average DMV worker as not being neutral enough?

As for the Joker, I'm sure he makes his own licenses, which usually do something bad to the person requesting to see same.


For your safety
By GWD5318 on 5/27/2009 2:53:40 PM , Rating: 4
This just in:

In order to prevent smiling or other signs of joviality at the DMV, the staff will now institute the policy of kicking puppies and drowning kittens while your driver license picture is taken.

Policy is in place for national security purposes and your cooperation is appreciated.

That is all.




Smile?
By Brainonska511 on 5/27/2009 1:36:37 PM , Rating: 2
How were people smiling in the license photos in the first place? What's wrong with people that they can stand in line for 3 hours and then smile for the DMV person behind the counter taking their photo?




RE: Smile?
By mindless1 on 5/28/2009 9:50:25 AM , Rating: 1
It's quite simple, they are both happy it's almost over and remembering that everyone they ever had their license to for years will see a picture of someone either miserable looking or happy. Don't you normally smile for photos?


Same in Ontario
By gmyx on 5/27/2009 10:38:40 AM , Rating: 2
When I went to renew my license here in Ontario days after the new 'high-tech' licenses came out I was told 'no facial expressions'

It seems to be the norm now for ID pictures since we need to dumb down to the power of computers.




Shes cute
By Belard on 5/27/2009 10:39:57 PM , Rating: 2
Diana Kim... she's a cute. perhaps more so if she was smiling. ;)

A friend of mine, many years ago had a hilarious big smile on his Licence. You couldn't help but break out laughing. I told him it might get him out of a ticket.

He looked like nut.




It's the DMV ...
By pjs on 5/28/2009 1:03:45 AM , Rating: 2
It's the DMV, you should not be smiling. If you are, you are lost or clueless.




By raaja on 5/28/2009 5:00:12 PM , Rating: 2
Can I smile every time a (in)security official asks for my id? will they ask me to not to smile... how stupid this new law is...




"I modded down, down, down, and the flames went higher." -- Sven Olsen














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki