Superhero Secret Identities in the Era of Facial Recognition Technology

The world is fast changing for superheroes, and the comic book industry and Superhero motion picture plotlines have yet to acknowledge it properly.  It is simply this:

The concept of a “Secret Identity” is in grave danger of becoming obsolete.

In the real world, we are now in a time where almost every major street corner or storefront has some kind of video monitoring, as well as private individuals posting images of themselves and everyone around them on the internet.  Even if you don’t post photos of yourself, there is still an almost certain chance that there is a photo of you somewhere on the internet and/or in a government database.

Facial Recognition technology is being used not only by the government, but in the private sector by companies such as airports, stadiums, and even NASCAR.  Facebook has used it to “Tag” and match up images of people—even if the person in the photo does not have a Facebook account.  Also, while it is primarily used to compare facial features, similar technology that will recognize an unusual walking stride (such as a slight limp) or another body movement (e.g., facial twitch or another nervous habit) is expected to be commonplace in the near future.

Currently, Facial Recognition (FR) technology is able to recognize a person, whether or not they are wearing glasses, a false beard, a different hair color, or any number of classic Secret Identity tricks.  One article on FR tech makes it plainly clear that “Artificial mustaches, fake wigs or mustaches will not work, because they do not change the distances between points on the face.” [http://www.worldthinktank.net/pdfs/FacialRecognitionCountermeasures.pdf]   Any tricks that might be used to change these vital measurement points are detectable by the technology, which can use heat signatures and other methods to determine that a non-organic and unnatural object is on the face.  For example, fake eyebrows or a false nose would change the measurement points, BUT these alterations show a different heat signature than the person’s skin, so the technology knows to ignore them and go with the real measurements instead.

Even Batman’s cowl could prove ineffective defense against more advanced FR tech.  While it might fool the simpler FR software, in that the partial mask would negate their ability to recognize the presence of any face at all, many FR programs need only a portion of a person’s face before they can make a match.  At this point in the technology, many programs need just about half of a face, and some of the contemporary versions of Batman portray him showing the bottom half of his face.

What chance, then, does Superman have of keeping his real identity a secret from the U.S. government or some bad guy’s technological genius, if all he does is throw on a pair of glasses and change into blue jeans?  Realistically, ZERO.

By taking the public photos of Superman and trying to match them to others in a database, the government (or Lex Luthor) only has to run his face through Facial Recognition technology in order to find it matches the Driver’s License photo of Clark Kent— or the photo from his Daily Planet Press Pass, or the photos Jimmy Olsen takes of Clark Kent & others around the Planet’s offices that Jimmy uploads to "The Cloud," etc.

Expert hackers, like DC’s "Oracle" or Marvel's "Cypher", would be able to hack into one or two of the FR software programs that are being used and "convince" the programs to "ignore" Superhero-Secret Identity matches, but there are too many platforms out there and too many different programs being used.  Even some possible Superhero Helper, working 24/7 at hacking and keeping the computers from matching Secret Identities to Superhero Identities, would be unable to keep up with all of them, especially since there are so many in development and so many databases around the world to alter.

Batman (or someone equally tech-savvy) might have some anti-facial-recognition trick or technology of their own.  Currently, nose plugs can change the shape of the nose enough to confuse the FR tech.  The simple act of chewing tobacco or wearing “Dracula-Teeth” (the kind that children play with) can change the jaw line enough to confound the FR tech, since this will change the measurement points for the jaw area.  Certainly Batman would be careful to keep either his Bruce Wayne jaw line or his Batman jaw line distinct by some trick, just as Christian Bale’s Batman made his voice unrecognizable from Bruce Wayne’s by making it more growling and gravelly.  (Batman is, after all, known to be a master of theatrical performance, like his famous fictional predecessor, Sherlock Holmes, so we can expect some amazing FR-foiling theatrical trickery from him.)

It is important to note, however, that these kinds of tricks are not expected to work much farther into the future, as the technology improves.

There IS a product that has been developed to counter facial recognition.  It is a set of glasses that a person can wear, resembling workman's goggles, which create a sort of “white noise” for cameras.  They emit beams of LED light that are invisible to the human eye but bright to electronic camera sensors.  The glasses have 12 beams aimed in the directions from which any FR cameras might be trying to scan.  One drawback is that anyone looking at any electronic photos will know that the wearer had these glasses on.  Another is that the tech is currently bulky and the LED emitters are obvious, so wearing them discretely is not possible at this point – Clark Kent could not integrate these emitters into his current spectacles, for example, without everyone wondering what the heck he was wearing on his face. 

So what does all of this mean for Comic Books and the Superhero genre at large?

Well, considering the public’s love for and fascination with Superheroes and comic-book culture, it’s doubtful that they will be disappearing from our popular culture anytime soon.  As long as the general public is unaware of the prevalence of camera technology, or until such technology is not a part of the public’s cultural self-image, then Superheroes can carry on with their Secret Identities and double lives.

At some point in the future, Clark Kent will have to take off his glasses.  He might start using some Kryptonian technology to change his appearance (similar to the way he recently began using Kryptonian tech to explain his instantaneous costume changes), or he might have to give up having a Secret Identity altogether.  Until then, we will continue to believe that a man can fly, all the while spending his days fooling his Investigative Reporter girlfriend— and the rest of the world— by nothing more than putting on a pair of Ray-Bans.

RECOMMENDED LINKS:

http://www.worldthinktank.net/pdfs/FacialRecognitionCountermeasures.pdf

http://www.japantoday.com/category/technology/view/privacy-visor-glasses-jam-facial-recognition-systems-to-protect-your-privacy

www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/anti-glass-specs-developed-to-block-face-recognition-technology/#!3NW4e

www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/01/18/isao_echizen_and_seiichi_gohshi_s_privacy_visor_shields_you_from_facial.html

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/how-to/software/8-weird-ways-people-are-using-facial-recognition-software#slide-1

http://cons.wonderhowto.com/how-to/stop-facial-recognition-software-from-finding-out-who-you-are-camera-0138980/

So You Want to Be a Freelance Editor...

You've seen how overflowing the current marketplace is with self-publishing writers and would-be e-book authors, and you've recognized the potential profit to you as a possible freelance editor. Now what? Well, here's some things you should know... 

 

(1) In case you haven't watched enough People's Court episodes to know, you need to get EVERYthing in writing-- changes and amendments to contracts included. "Verbal contract" is a joke, and unenforceable by ANY judge or credit agency. Clients will know this and laugh at your repeated requests for payment, and ignore all your phone calls. Any possible changes that you need to make to your estimates of hours must also be in writing.  You're a professional, and professionals have contracts, written estimates, and invoices.  Amateurs and hobbyists have verbal agreements and undocumented phone conversations.  Text messages don't tend to last long enough to act as evidence-- phones get lost and phone companies sometimes delete old text messages.  ONLY get it in email or on paper.

(2) There are some really crappy writers out there, and some really good ones, but they ALL can use an editor--and not all of them realize how MUCH they need one. Unfortunately, they won't all have a positive and agreeable attitude towards your editorial input. You have to be careful to stroke egos, and be prepared for the one who will reject everything you said (no matter how well-stroked their ego), only to go back to the original version (this is often where your paper contract will save you a big loss of time & money).

When I say, "stroke egos", I don't intend for it to be demeaning.  What I mean is, that some writers are very good, but take every little correction to heart as evidence of how supposedly "terrible" they are.  Others shouldn’t even be writing greeting cards, but don’t want to hear that truth.  Yet others are very open to criticism and are too willing to make every change you suggest without question (an editor SHOULD be questioned, as an editor is not a “Book God”).  Most writers are somewhere along this spectrum, and can change their place on it from moment to moment.  Editorial work requires a LOT more people skills than many people think.  Expect to have a lot of long conversations and polite drawn-out disagreements about such trivial things as the placement and use of a comma.

Freelance editing is different from trade editing, in that the freelancer has less control or say in the final outcome of the work.  Instead of working for the entity who's paying for the publishing process, and therefore having more say on what is or isn't in the final print, you work for the writer.  The writer is paying for it all, and therefore has final say on his/her own work.  You have less authority than an editor at a trade publisher, and are less able to insist upon anything.

(3) Some clients will want an edit that's basically just a spell-check, while others will want to have a full "book doctor" job, rewrites and all. Clarify this with the client and put it in the contracts BEFORE you start your work. Restrain your editorial instincts (and grit your teeth to refrain from comments you think OUGHT to be made) when you are asked to only spell-check writing that really needs a major rewrite instead. You can tell them some things (like, "these scenes don't make sense in the order you wrote them in"), but don't let yourself start rewriting unless the client wants that. However, even when the client SAYS they want it, don't be shocked if they end up thinking they know better than you and ignore and/or undo your edits.

(4) Most writers have no idea how many hours it takes to properly edit a document (if you do more than just spell-checking for them, especially) and might object to the number of hours (read: unexpected high cost, if you charge them hourly) of a decent edit. Keep in touch with clients throughout the process, to give them an idea of how it's going, so your hours invested won't be so much of a shock to their pocketbook.

(5) Dedicate as many hours per day as you would be expected to dedicate to an office job somewhere. Don't treat clients as a hobby or part-time job (unless you clarify with them BEFOREHAND in emails that you have another client at the same time, or some other valid professional reason for minimizing your hours). Doing so is VERY unprofessional, and WILL hurt you in the long run. Bad business practices DO haunt you in these days of online reviews and LinkedIn networking, etc. First and foremost, behave and treat your work the same way would expect a true professional in an office to behave and treat their work. Your client is your boss AND your next reference for your "resume" (online reviews, etc), so don't mess around and/or screw him/her over.  Don't try padding your hours, either.  Your client already thinks you're taking too much time and costing too much.  (Besides, that's dishonest-- and honesty ALWAYS makes for good, professional business practices.)

(6) For your first few freelance gigs, you might want to have a more experienced editor look over your work before showing it to the client. This is not to negate your abilities, but an experienced eye DOES pick up on things a less-experienced one misses, and it's a great learning experience that will make you all the more desirable and better-paid in the workforce (freelance or otherwise). Even at my age, another pair of eyes double-checking me has NEVER hurt my work, and only helped it. A good mentor, whether free or paid, is invaluable to a beginning editor.

I think of editing like piano tuning. Some people have an ear for music, and some don't. Having an ear for music can help you get a career in music, but the ear alone won't make you a good piano tuner (just as having an eye for typos does not automatically make someone a good editor). To be a good piano tuner, you need professional training and mentorship (in this, I speak with some personal knowledge, as my brother is a piano tuner with an excellent musical ear). The same is true with editorial work: It's more than just finding typos, it's also knowing some OTHER things to look for/at, AND the people skills needed to deal with authors. There are things that someone of more experience can best teach you. Yes, there ARE those people who stumble into piano tuning/editing and somehow manage to master it alone, but they are doing it the hard way, and (no offense to anyone who might be doing well after stumbling into freelance editing, but...) the quality of their work is USUALLY not as high as the trained piano tuner/editor.

(7) You can never learn too much about copyrights. Really. Some things on the internet might SEEM public domain, or you might THINK you are safe using a certain quote as long as you credit it or get verbal approval, but every single thing MUST be checked and double-checked for legality and reproduction-- text, photos, artwork, quotes, music, etc. There are a LOT of weird copyright issues that have come up for me through the years, that I never expected to be an issue EVER. Nowadays, with the internet, things are actually worse for copyright infringement, but easier for checking out. Never hesitate to send a client to a copyright lawyer if you have ANY doubts or questions (drag them there kicking and screaming, if necessary).

A famous example of bad copyright checking: The "Barney the Dinosaur" show was cancelled because they used a common tune, "This Old Man" redone as "I love you, you love me". They assumed it was so old as to be public domain. It was not, and they were sued.

Another famous example: Weird Al Yankovic parodied a song after merely asking his agent to ask the other agent. Supposedly, everyone was okay with him doing the parody, but it turns out the band he was mimicking said they had never even heard the request to use the song.

Even the famous and successful can sometimes mess up a copyright issue, so a good editor should NEVER assume anything, no matter what verbal assurances their client gives them.

And, of course (which also goes back to my original point)-- Get it IN WRITING from the legal copyright holder.