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

A crashed advertisement reveals logs of a facial recognition system

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 550 posts

Re: A crashed advertisement reveals logs of a facial recognition system

#291

Post by i336_ »

hawski wrote: post #243
mixedbit wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was very unhappy to discover that shoes now often have RFIDs built into soles. This + anti-theft RFIDs readers that are already deployed by the entry of most stores can allow to easily assign unique ids to shoppers.

Would putting my newly bought shoes into a microwave be a good countermeasure?

I've heard that you can disable RFID readers (not tags, readers) with an appropriately-resonant coil and an EMP circuit.

I'm not sure if the same can be done to tags, but considering the size of the tiny electronics, and the fact that they are manufactured under the assumption they'll never need to be touched (aka, no CMOS spike tolerance), it might be trivially...

...wait. I just remembered about RFID alarm barriers in retail stores.

Well this is annoyingly difficult to discuss, then...

Re: A crashed advertisement reveals logs of a facial recognition system

#292

Post by arximboldi »

ffriend wrote: post #267
arximboldi wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only ethical possibility in my view is for it to not exist. I don't like having my emotions manipulated to make me buy more stuff, regardless of whether I am anonymized or not. But then again, I think similarly of a lot of the non-targeted advertising; the recognition just add whole new level of disgusting.

> I don't like having my emotions manipulated What about collecting statistics to make better decisions? Let's say, you go to your favorite jeans store, but find out that current collection is disgusting. Does it sound ok for you if some sort of system would analyze your attitude to the product to improve it in later versions?

Nope.

You can do controlled user-testing sessions with that system with specific people that have consented and are potentially compensated in some way. You will most probably also get more useful information out of that.

But being recorded "en masse" in a shop for that purpose I would think is invasive. I would totally avoid that shop if I knew that system was in place.

Also, I am not convinced that statistics lead to better design, so that would most probably be just wasteful, but that is another discussion :p

Re: A crashed advertisement reveals logs of a facial recognition system

#293

Post by Kliment »

And just today I got an ad (in the paper mail) from an electronics distributor notifying me of new parts they stock. Among them was an embedded face and expression recognition engine that would emit pretty much this data, in a convenient text output you can read into any little microcontroller and act on (omron B5T-007001-010 if anyone is interested). This is no longer exciting cutting edge technology, it's off the shelf. And terrifying.

Re: A crashed advertisement reveals logs of a facial recognition system

#294

Post by ionised »

azm1 wrote: post #153

Its absurd people are outraged about something like this, relatively harmless and at the same time use Facebook. The social network has your face, all your life, moods, expressions, interests,personal conversation etc. Now THAT is worrying and not some pizza shop which gathers stats to know what type of customer is their frequent visitor.

> Its absurd people are outraged about something like this, relatively harmless and at the same time use Facebook.

What is absurd is there is someone like you in every privacy-related thread claiming that everyone who is outraged is also a Facebook user, or somehow is fine with what Facebook does.

Re: A crashed advertisement reveals logs of a facial recognition system

#295

Post by chandler »

deadbunny wrote: post #265
mattcoles wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you feel it was ethical to work on that?

Not GP but I've worked in a similar industry. For me I knew how our data was anonymized. So while our system would be able to say "I have seen person 1234 at locations 4,7,9,11 on dates x,y,x" we had absolutely no way of knowing who 1234 was or anything about them, even the unique identifier was just a hash. Obviously it depends on how much data you collect/store, personally I don't think the things shown in OP are a…

> So while our system would be able to say "I have seen person 1234 at locations 4,7,9,11 on dates x,y,x" we had absolutely no way of knowing who 1234 was or anything about them...

Minor nitpick, but giving someone a nickname isn't the same as anonymization.

"Hey Bob, thanks for logging on. Did you know we've been calling you 1234 these past five years!"

When a passive recognition system _uniquely_ tracks & identifies a person, it just takes time before that gets cross-referenced.

(different story if the data gets aggregated, or you scrub the uid completely after some window)

Re: A crashed advertisement reveals logs of a facial recognition system

#296

Post by i336_ »

bigbugbag wrote: post #220
porker wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How? As far as I know a commercial company can't get your location or other personal information just by knowing your mobile phone number?

You are fooling yourself here. They probably have a whole data cake already, they want the mobile number as a cherry topping on this cake. You know about the anonymized and aggregated data that one can buy ? Well it can be easily anonymized and deaggregated. The good part is that you don't even have to do it yourself and go directly to data brokers that have done the hard work for you.

Coming from the standpoint of a very curious independent researcher, I'm curious what I might query/search for to learn more about these data brokers.

Not at all out of anything that might be categorized as malice, just to add this datapoint to my mental map.

Re: A crashed advertisement reveals logs of a facial recognition system

#297

Post by mschaef »

pfarnsworth wrote: post #166

The subsequent Twitter thread featuring @justkelly_ok et al. is probably the worst things about Twitter all bundled up in in one. It's a pure cringefest.

Agreed... I had a response written, realized life is too short, and just closed the window before posting.

Re: A crashed advertisement reveals logs of a facial recognition system

#298

Post by bballer »

mixedbit wrote: post #237
_kb wrote: post #15

You'd be surprised / scared / outraged if you knew how common this is. Any time you've been in a public place for the past few years, you've likely been watched, analysed and optimised for. Advertising in the physical world is just as scummy as it's online equivalent. Check out the video here http://sightcorp.com/ for an ultra creepy overview. You can even try their live demo: https://face-api.sightcorp.com/demo_basi…

I was very unhappy to discover that shoes now often have RFIDs built into soles. This + anti-theft RFIDs readers that are already deployed by the entry of most stores can allow to easily assign unique ids to shoppers.

Pretty sure they already are built into credit cards for this exact purpose.

Re: A crashed advertisement reveals logs of a facial recognition system

#299

Post by imgabe »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #290
glubGlub wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Next month: new shoe regulations require the use of materials that melt or burn when microwaved.

Nah, they won't need to push that hard. "Warranty void when microwaved" will most likely be enough.

I've never made a warranty claim for shoes, so that shouldn't be a problem.

Re: A crashed advertisement reveals logs of a facial recognition system

#300

Post by TeMPOraL »

imgabe wrote: post #299
TeMPOraL wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah, they won't need to push that hard. "Warranty void when microwaved" will most likely be enough.

I've never made a warranty claim for shoes, so that shouldn't be a problem.

Me neither (too lazy for that), but I know they are used and abused by people too. This leads to funny cases I heard of like a company specifying that some shoes are for "walking", not for "running", and refusing to refund them if you admit to running in them.
Post reply on HN