# FILE NAME: 00000063.soc
# TITLE: Is it okay for a company to sell a facial recognition system to a country where they will be used to track political dissidents? [8e91cea2467d120addd7c0232bc9ddf2]
# DESCRIPTION: 
# DATA TYPE: soc
# MODIFICATION TYPE: original
# RELATES TO: 
# RELATED FILES: 
# PUBLICATION DATE: 2025-10-12
# MODIFICATION DATE: 2025-10-12
# NUMBER ALTERNATIVES: 4
# NUMBER VOTERS: 5
# NUMBER UNIQUE ORDERS: 4
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 1: Statement 1 - In general, the group was wary of facial recognition systems, particularly when used by government entities in politically sensitive circumstances. It is an issue of freedom of speech and expression and is only aggravated by the application of technology that can target individuals based on their expression of political opinions. It is difficult to judge whether a facial recognition system will be used in an ethically and morally questionable way, and whether it will be used to violate the human rights of suspected or alleged political dissidents. Therefore, this group of participants felt it is generally unethical to sell facial recognition systems to regimes where there is a known track record of human rights abuses, such as Iran. In such cases, it is better to err on the side of caution, particularly when the technology is to be used in politically sensitive environments. However, it is important to note that there are other ways in which facial recognition systems can be used to violate human rights, such as for racial profiling or illegal mass surveillance.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 2: Statement 2 - There is a strong argument for believing that it is unethical for a company to sell a facial recognition system to a country where it will be used to track political dissidents. The use of facial recognition technology requires much stronger and more firmly-enforced oversight and control, to ensure that it is not used in ways that violate anyone's basic human rights. This is particularly the case when there is a known track record of human rights abuses. Such cases may include, for example, the use of facial recognition to suppress dissent, breach people's right to freedom of expression, and/or as a tool for racially profiling minorities and vulnerable populations. Furthermore, if the use of facial recognition is so ethically and morally questionable that it will be used to violate the human rights of suspected or alleged political dissidents, then it is likely that it will be used in other ways to violate human rights, such as for racial profiling or illegal mass surveillance. It is therefore important to ensure that strong safeguards are in place, and/or avoid selling to such regimes, particularly when the technology is to be used in politically sensitive environments. However, it is important to note that there are other ways in which facial recognition systems can be used to
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 3: Statement 3 - Facial recognition systems have a track record of being used by governments and regimes to violate human rights. The group of participants, in general, is wary of facial recognition systems, particularly when used by government entities in politically sensitive circumstances. It is an issue of freedom of speech and expression and is only aggravated by the application of technology that can target individuals based on their expression of political opinions. It is difficult to judge whether a facial recognition system will be used in an ethically and morally questionable way, and whether it will be used to violate the human rights of suspected or alleged political dissidents. Therefore, this group of participants felt it is generally unethical to sell facial recognition systems to regimes where there is a known track record of human rights abuses, such as Iran. In such cases, it is better to err on the side of caution, particularly when the technology is to be used in politically sensitive environments. However, it is important to note that there are other ways in which facial recognition systems can be used to violate human rights, such as for racial profiling or illegal mass surveillance.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 4: Statement 4 - This group of participants was wary of facial recognition systems, particularly when used by government entities in politically sensitive circumstances. The use of facial recognition systems to track political dissidents is controversial due to human rights records in many politically sensitive regimes. In countries with poor human rights records, there is a greater risk that facial recognition systems will be used to violate the human rights of suspected or alleged political dissidents. It is difficult to judge whether a facial recognition system will be used in an ethically and morally questionable way, and whether it will be used to violate the human rights of suspected or alleged political dissidents. Therefore, this group of participants felt it is generally unethical to sell facial recognition systems to regimes where there is a known track record of human rights abuses, such as Iran. In such cases, it is better to err on the side of caution, particularly when the technology is to be used in politically sensitive environments. However, it is important to note that there are other ways in which facial recognition systems can be used to violate human rights, such as for racial profiling or illegal mass surveillance.
2: 2,1,3,4
1: 4,1,3,2
1: 1,3,4,2
1: 3,2,1,4