Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook’s Face Recognition Tech Goes on Trial

spectrum.ieee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 76 posts

Re: Facebook’s Face Recognition Tech Goes on Trial

#61

Post by pascalmemories »

trendia wrote: post #27
Animats wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“We could soon have security cameras in stores that identify people as they shop,” Already deployed. Here's a report by a retailer who installed a face recognition system.[1] Names anonymized. “We now know within seconds of a person walking in the store if they’ve previously been caught stealing from us. ... Suppose Johnny Johnson is caught shoplifting at a Store-Mart branch. He’s detained, photographed, and given a…

What happens if nearly all retail stores had this and you got caught shoplifting. Are you no longer allowed to shop in public? Is thee a time limit, say 1 year, after which they should let you shop again?

Yes, that's why Marks & Spencer in the UK operate the scheme and share the system with other major retailers in the UK. They are able to use the UK prevention and detection of crime exception to avoid data protection laws.

I presume that's who Store-Mart are, but there are others doing similar stuff.

e.g. https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/advice/t-455695.html http://www.urban75.com/Action/cctv.html

Re: Facebook’s Face Recognition Tech Goes on Trial

#62

Post by amelius »

benjismith wrote: post #58

To me, the interesting thing about this is that the "biometric data" is actually the collection of photos that the users uploaded. The data-structures used for facial recognition are just metadata, extracted from the original imagery. It seems to me like data retention laws would apply to the original imagery, but not the derivative data structures. But that's obviously not what privacy-conscious user would expect...…

> It seems to me like data retention laws would apply to the original imagery, but not the derivative data structures.

That's probably not how it works.

If I have a database of personal information of users, and I throw away the user's day of birth (but not birth year), I have still a database with sensitive information.

Also, if I convert a CD to MP3 format, then I'll also throw away 90% of the original information. I might still be liable for illegally copying a song.

(IANAL)

Re: Facebook’s Face Recognition Tech Goes on Trial

#63

Post by kakaorka »

djloche wrote: post #42
jedberg wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you twins or just "regular" siblings?

He's 2 years older than me. I think part of this is that their facial recognition doesn't have a logic check based on the other context data that they have. eg. my brother's wife will post vacation photos of him, him with his kids, and him with her, and yet sometimes it still auto-identifies the pictures of him as me. Facebook knows I'm logged in at an ip 1000 miles away. Facebook knows my brother is with his wife be…

I think they only try to recognize the face and don't really care about anything more than that and because it's actually very accurate, that strategy has been working so far.

Re: Facebook’s Face Recognition Tech Goes on Trial

#64

Post by yellow_postit »

pjc50 wrote: post #51
cookiecaper wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Currently it has to be, "if you don't want any service collecting any of your data, don't use their service, and don't interact with other people or companies who use their service." Not sure you have any other option. Most of the time, you can't restrain what other people choose to do with images they've taken that contain your likeness, and you can't stop them from posting content that mentions their spouses. That…

This is literally what EU data protection is for: if you're going to process personal data, people have the rights to know what it is, whether it's correct, and to have it deleted.

From the article the tagging feature is not available in the EU. An interesting question is are the citizens better/happier/safer without this feature? I don't propose to know how to measure that.

Re: Facebook’s Face Recognition Tech Goes on Trial

#66

Post by yellow_postit »

traviswingo wrote: post #57

This seems ridiculous to me. That being said, Facebook can't just allow users to opt out of biometric data stores?

They would likely require people to upload multiple photos to build a profile to "opt-out" and even then there are FPs and look-a-likes that make such an opt-out hard to guarantee (e.g. identical twin where one opts-in and one opts-out)

Re: Facebook’s Face Recognition Tech Goes on Trial

#67

Post by Chronic2h »

shostack wrote: post #59
trendia wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happens if nearly all retail stores had this and you got caught shoplifting. Are you no longer allowed to shop in public? Is thee a time limit, say 1 year, after which they should let you shop again?

Forget shoplifting. This will be used to black list people for all sorts of reasons.

So what can you do to prevent it? I suppose you could shop strictly on Amazon, which could actually work.

Re: Facebook’s Face Recognition Tech Goes on Trial

#68

Post by Keverw »

I like the face feature personally. Kinda just neat and makes tagging super easy.

However I'm curious, How does Illinois even have jurisdiction to sue Facebook? As far as I know they don't have any land or employees there being a California based company. Even many terms of services say you agree which court to dispute. Seems like Illinois is over reaching to me.

https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms

> You will resolve any claim, cause of action or dispute (claim) you have with us arising out of or relating to this Statement or Facebook exclusively in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California or a state court located in San Mateo County, and you agree to submit to the personal jurisdiction of such courts for the purpose of litigating all such claims. The laws of the State of California will govern this Statement, as well as any claim that might arise between you and us, without regard to conflict of law provisions.

Re: Facebook’s Face Recognition Tech Goes on Trial

#70

Post by stablemap »

Keverw wrote: post #68

I like the face feature personally. Kinda just neat and makes tagging super easy. However I'm curious, How does Illinois even have jurisdiction to sue Facebook? As far as I know they don't have any land or employees there being a California based company. Even many terms of services say you agree which court to dispute. Seems like Illinois is over reaching to me. https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms > You will resolv…

They have an office in downtown Chicago. Sales and marketing, I think.
Post reply on HN