A crashed advertisement reveals logs of a facial recognition system

Post by fixermark » Thu, May 11, 2017, 3:38 PM UTC

fps wrote: post #367

rpeden wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. This isn't new. It's everywhere . The cameras retailers use with their surveillance systems are coming with facial recognition built in now. [1] And lots of retailers, banks, etc, are using systems that track people's visits across multiple locations. [2] You'll see a lot of these systems being sold as fraud/loss prevention solutions. The reason for this is that it's a relatively easy sell this way - customer…

Just yesterday I was hearing news of how most of the retail giants and lots of smaller retail stores are going out of business due to competition from ecommerce. If that means the end of practices like this, then good riddance.

Post by fixermark » Thu, May 11, 2017, 3:40 PM UTC

pyre wrote: post #324

ludjer wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are in public you are being looked at I do not understand your logic. When you go in a public place there are already public accessible web cams that people use to track this kind of thing i remember a thesis that used public accessible cams to try and track people and build up a database. I have always had the opinion you lose privacy when you leave your house since you are in public, and public like is oppos…

Just because there is no expectation of privacy does not mean that a reasonable person would assume that their every action is being recorded in precise detail to be stored away forever by a third party.

Post by redblacktree » Thu, May 11, 2017, 3:41 PM UTC

edanm wrote: post #378

bigbugbag wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd have a point if this was a general statement, but in the case of automated facial recognition it's almost universally despised across the world. If you're not sharing this position it could be that you are younger or have been subjected to the conditioning of population by industries to make intrusive surveillance technology acceptable to them which has been going on for at least 15+ years afaik.

"[...] in the case of automated facial recognition it's almost universally despised across the world." I don't think that's true. Most of us tech-geeks are worried about privacy way more than the average person. I personally don't see this particular use case as too problematic, depending on what is done with the data - as others in the thread have pointed out, you're in a public place, other people could be taking p…

Post by fixermark » Thu, May 11, 2017, 3:43 PM UTC

metal_guru wrote: post #159

_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…

"Emotion Recognition Understand how your customers feel. Detect and measure facial expressions like happiness, surprise, sadness, disgust, anger and fear." Creepy, indeed.

Post by bjl » Thu, May 11, 2017, 3:45 PM UTC

ffriend wrote: post #397

retube wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're going to have to accept that what you are doing is disliked and considered unethical by the majority.

I'm curious what's the boundary between ethical and unethical. People constantly analyze each other's mood and it's perceived positively. But doing the same thing massively using automated tools is often considered inappropriate. So is it because of using technology, massiveness, purposes? I hope there's a way to make such things both efficient and not unethical.