Congrats John
Time Selects IPVM To TIME100 Most Influential People in AI
Published Sep 07, 2023 13:38 PM
PUBLIC - This article does not require an IPVM subscription. Feel free to share.
Time has selected IPVM Founder John Honovich to its TIME100 Most Influential People in AI alongside European, Taiwan, and US government officials, and executives from Google, Microsoft, OpenAI, and more.
Time called IPVM a "leading source of information on the harms of facial-recognition technology—and, in turn, influencing U.S. policy," citing our work with publications including the LA Times and Washington Post as well as being cited in official hearings of the U.S. State Department and Congressional-Executive Commission on China.
IPVM's Founder said this recognizes the great work that IPVM's team does:
Our reporters and researchers devotes immense time and effort to exposing problems and determining what really works and what does not. This is a great recognition for the entire team and a sign of the immense impact we have.
Below is an abridged selection of IPVM reporting that Time referenced or alluded to in its selection:
- Washington Post: Huawei tested AI software that could recognize Uighur minorities and alert police, report says
- Los Angeles Times: Major camera company can sort people by race, alert police when it spots Uighurs
- IPVM: Hikvision Uyghur Recognition, NVIDIA-Powered, Sold To PRC China Authorities
- NY Times: As China Tracked Muslims, Alibaba Showed Customers How They Could, Too
- The Atlantic: The Tech Site That Took On China’s Surveillance State
Time included a recent false facial recognition arrest case in the profile of IPVM citing facial recognition being "worse at accurately detecting people of certain ethnicities" but IPVM's Honovich emphasizes that the problem is even more fundamental:
Facial recognition, using video surveillance, is fundamentally flawed. First, virtually everyone has many people who look like them. Second, people look different over time (smiling, frowning, haircut, glasses, gain / lose weight, etc. Third, and this is often the biggest problem, people look different when the camera angle or lighting varies (which it does regularly with video surveillance). All three factors combined make mistakes using facial recognition highly likely. It requires training and processes to minimize false accusations and arrests.
This is why IPVM's independent research and rankings are so important to help determine how well AI products work, including our Facial Recognition Rankings 2023 - Avigilon, Briefcam, Hikvision, IronYun, Oosto, Rhombus, Turing, Verkada, and Camera Analytics Rankings 2023 - 21 Manufacturers, 40 Analytics.
IPVM is proud to expose wrongdoings, thereby helping the public and the industry to hold itself to high ethical standards, and looks forward to even greater investigative reporting and research in the future.
Comments (28)
UM
Undisclosed Manufacturer #1
Sep 07, 2023
Ari Erenthal
Sep 07, 2023Wow!
Congratulations to John and the entire IPVM team for this well-deserved honor.
UM
Undisclosed Manufacturer #2
Sep 07, 2023Well earned IPVM team. Congrats John.
Dallan Labrum
Sep 07, 2023Congratulation. This is a big deal.
Brian Karas
Sep 07, 2023Sorry but I'm going to play the IPVM side of this.
Influencer lists are garbage until you get on one?
There are several names on the list that seem legit, and definitely several that I would consider questionable as qualifying for a "Top 100" (eg: Musk, Andreesen, Hoffman, among others), and other names not on the list that seem like they should have been. It's also not like Time is broadly considered to be deeply tied to AI in some way that makes their selections particularly qualified or relevant.
I'm not saying it's an undeserved recognition, but touting it this way is a tad hypocritical, IMO.
U
Undisclosed #3
Sep 07, 2023RS
Robert Shih
Sep 07, 2023JH
John Honovich
Sep 07, 2023Influencer lists are garbage until you get on one?
I think influencer lists that are either paid for or picked by a small group of industry cronies like the IFSEC one (which I was selected once a number of years ago but never shared) are not respectable.
Time is on a completely different level than ASIS, IFSEC, SIA, etc. and we didn't know anyone at Time, pay anyone at Time, campaign to anyone at Time, etc. Time just reached out to us, having known the impact of our work.
several that I would consider questionable as qualifying for a "Top 100" (eg: Musk, Andreesen, Hoffman, among others)
Do you think the world's wealthiest person (Musk) and the world's most powerful VC (Andressen) are not influential enough or are bad influences?
This is one of the things our industry often struggles with - influence is not about popularity or who is friends with whom.
Brian Karas
Sep 07, 2023Time is on a completely different level than ASIS, IFSEC, SIA, etc.
Perhaps, but not in any way that matters for this purpose.
I don't ever recall hearing "Time" (magazine) and "AI" in the same sentence. I don't subscribe to Time or pay much attention to them, but I've not heard of them doing anything in AI. I've never seen links posted to Time in relation to AI. However AI is a broad and popular topic and I'd guess that they've published some non-zero number of things on AI, but that doesn't make them any kind of an authority.
Do you think the world's wealthiest person (Musk) and the world's most powerful VC (Andressen) are not influential enough or are bad influences?
Both? Neither? I think if we're making a list of Top 100 people in AI they don't qualify. I was pointing their names out more as examples, and in a way, examples of the fact that Time probably isn't knowledgeable enough in this domain to really know for sure if those two should or should not actually be included.
This is one of the things our industry often struggles with - influence is not about popularity or who is friends with whom.
I think this is debatable. Influence is definitely about popularity in some aspect. You can't "influence" if nobody knows who you are, certainly not to a degree that puts you in a top 100 position among a field of 10's of thousands.
I think influencer lists that are either paid for or picked by a small group of industry cronies like the IFSEC one (which I was selected once a number of years ago but never shared) are not respectable.
I don't generally disagree with you, but I would also say that "industry crony" picks are likely to be at least as accurate as "non-industry outsider" picks, as the insiders will typically have more nuanced information than an outsider. But in the end, I think Influencer lists are always going to be fundamentally flawed in terms of full inclusivity and depth of knowledge on the elected people on the list.
It is good to have the work IPVM has done be recognized, but in the end I see this post as more or less equivalent to any random person on LinkedIn posting about how they made the IFSEC influencer list, etc.
UM
Undisclosed Manufacturer #5
Sep 07, 2023I don't understand why Times skipped over people like Joseph Redmon, i also don't think the list is a good representation of individuals who actually develop AI and move the technology forward on a daily basis.
That being said, I do believe John deserves to be on the list, he's one of the few names that make sense.
He's definitely influenced us, and he's influenced other companies in the video surveillance industry who work on and deliver AI to the world.
So congrats John 👏
Brian Karas
Sep 07, 2023That being said, I do believe John deserves to be on the list, he's one of the few names that make sense.
I'm not saying he doesn't deserve to be on the list.
I am saying that these lists in general are rarely ever accurate or well researched enough to be anything more than participation trophies, a point that John has made on IPVM many times in the past.
I personally wouldn't turn down a spot on any relevant "influencers" list, but I also wouldn't blast it out to my network of contacts or make an overly big deal about it.
My two primary points are that Time isn't an organization qualified to make a list of AI influencers, and that John/IPVM have routinely dismissed these kinds of lists in the past, so it's a bit comical to see this being promoted with a public post.
JH
John Honovich
Sep 07, 2023"Do you think the world's wealthiest person (Musk)"
I think if we're making a list of Top 100 people in AI they don't qualify. I was pointing their names out more as examples, and in a way, examples of the fact that Time probably isn't knowledgeable enough in this domain to really know for sure if those two should or should not actually be included.
The CEO of Tesla, co-founder of OpenAI, Chairman of Twitter, and one of the world's most well-known and public critics of AI wouldn't make your top 100?
That's fine, you can pick your own list. However, choosing this as an example to criticize Time is bizarre, given all his power and influence. You'd be better off criticizing Time for picking me, no? ;)
To #5's point, perhaps you are setting your criteria based more on the tech development side, while Time is focusing more on social and political impact, which Time, as a major news organization, has great expertise in.
as the insiders will typically have more nuanced information than an outsider
That's certainly not how it plays out in this industry. Here's the most influential people in this industry according to IFSEC, the last 2 years:
You're campaigning against Elon Musk being in the top 100 in AI while IFSEC picks this list, the majority of which you and I probably have never even heard of before, despite being in this industry for 20 years.
DC
David Choi
Sep 07, 2023Congratulations!
RS
Robert Shih
Sep 07, 2023IPVM is awesome for making it to the list.
Side note: Am I just old or something because I would expect Ray Kurzweil to be a permanent top member on any list related to AI? Why didn't he make it onto the list at all?
And how did they not find a picture of John?! He's been out in public before.
JM
Jiri Myslin
Sep 07, 2023sure, he's been out in public, in the past, but changes his appearance regularly to stay ahead of the evil face recognizing algorithms. probably went to GSX with 5 or 6 disguises.
UM
Undisclosed Manufacturer #6
Sep 07, 2023Regarding no photo: Isn't John really the very first Knightscope robot that went rogue a couple decades ago? 🤪
UM
Undisclosed Manufacturer #4
Sep 07, 2023Congratulations to IPVM for this honor. Hard work pays off!
Brian Selltiz
Sep 07, 2023Nice
MB
Marc Bergeron
Sep 07, 2023Congrats John! This is HUGE! So honored to have had the opportunity to work with you in that "Silicon Valley Face Rec start-up" ....so many years ago :)
Keep doing what you're doing...
Marc
Brice Sloan
Sep 07, 2023Regardless - Congrats!!!
Blake Murphy
Sep 07, 2023WESTERN PRESS GLORIFIES VERY NASTY MAN!
Just trying to imagine the headlines elsewhere. Much congratulations John
JH
John Honovich
Sep 07, 2023RS
Robert Shih
Sep 14, 2023"I ask you to judge me by the enemies I have made." - Franklin Delano Roosevelt
CW
Charly Wang
Sep 08, 2023Nice, Congrats :)
Phil Dalencour
Sep 08, 2023Congrats! That is indeed, pretty cool. Kudos to the team.
Steve Beck
Sep 08, 2023Congrats!!
UM
Undisclosed Manufacturer #7
Sep 10, 2023Congrats!
Meghan Uhl
Sep 14, 2023Congratulations to the entire IPVM Team. You definitely earned it!