As the daughter of a mother who worked in computer science from the early 80's, I was constantly exposed to the new technology. I remember how excited she was when the first iPhone came out. She brought one home, so excited to get to try what she knew would be a revolutionary piece of technology. As time went on, and she found more technology, she grew more and more excited.
Unfortunately, as the digital revolution continued, I saw mom go from excited to worried. Insider videos of Facebook workers with their cameras taped over, non-disclosure agreements at google and Facebook, talk of information that the government had access too. All of these things led to concern for the general public. While all of these concerns were warranted, there was one concern that we could not be prepared for: facial recognition technology.
In the tech world, facial recognition technology is a hotly debated subject. IBM is now refusing to develop facial recognition technology, citing a fear of racial profiling and mass surveillance, while Amazon and Microsoft are both refusing to sell information to law enforcement as well. With the BLM movement of the valley, many social media users begged fellow protesters to turn off location services on their phones, turn off the bio-metric methods of unlocking their phones, and most importantly, paint their faces to avoid being recognized by facial recognition software. They warned that if others failed to cover their faces, police would track them down and watch for the chance to arrest them. However, when I moved to Hayward, I found out that many of my friends that had lived outside of the valley during the protests were unaware of the dangers of facial recognition. This forced me to rethink what I considered common knowledge.
Even before finding out that my friends were unaware of the fight in technology, I advocated for users rights. At the community college I attended at the beginning of COVID-19, my professors were all expected to include a pre-written clause about Proctorio, a recorded proctoring website, and their right to use it. Because every instructor was forced to include it, the school held our education hostage in the interest of using this software freely. When I asked how the information was being transmitted, stored, and handled, the university didn't have an answer. Just told me that it was up to the professors to keep information safe. Meanwhile, I could only find one informational presentation about zoom, and it was an MS Paint slideshow including where teachers could find the recorded information. Naturally, I didn't trust professors that didn't understand zoom to understand a much more detailed and risky technology like Proctorio, so I asked the school to show me what security measures they were using to protect student information and professors alike, or to take the software down. While I didn't receive a response, the school also didn't use Proctorio again, either.
While my fight for student protection may not have been very loud, or even something the other students understood, it was very close to my heart, and it followed what I hoped to do with my future: protect those that don't have the knowledge to protect themselves, and most importantly, encourage the informed consent of those around me.