Wow! These "Scientists" must speak up and put their names and academic futures behind this troubling statement!
I have worked in the video analytics field and in particular traffic control and pedestrian detection for several years and although it requires a greater amount of false positives to cover the detection of children the standard is to error on the side of caution.
As far as the pigment of peoples skin, this is hogwash as the amount of skin exposed compared to clothing is minimal. Was this study conducted using nude pedestrians? I can assure everyone that the detection of a person wearing all black and a hoodie(Aka Antifa uniform) is the minimum requirement.
Many detection systems use dual cameras and infrared and thermal imaging, this seems to be either propaganda or "Scientists" finding data to support their own bias.
I have worked in the video analytics field and in particular traffic control and pedestrian detection for several years and although it requires a greater amount of false positives to cover the detection of children the standard is to error on the side of caution.
As far as the pigment of peoples skin, this is hogwash as the amount of skin exposed compared to clothing is minimal. Was this study conducted using nude pedestrians? I can assure everyone that the detection of a person wearing all black and a hoodie(Aka Antifa uniform) is the minimum requirement.
Many detection systems use dual cameras and infrared and thermal imaging, this seems to be either propaganda or "Scientists" finding data to support their own bias.