A crashed advertisement reveals logs of a facial recognition system

Post by baldfat » Fri, May 12, 2017, 12:03 AM UTC

794CD01 wrote: post #485

JauntTrooper wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think many people would disagree. It might be legal, but that doesn't mean it's not unethical. If a stranger on the street started following me, taking pictures without permission, and taking notes about my appearance of actions and storing it in their database, I would say he was behaving unethically. Ask street photographers - it's a delicate balance. Many people really dislike having their pictures taken without…

That is a lot of words to simply say that some people think it is unethical. Which is an essentially empty statement. Couldn't you at least say most people and make it an argumentum ad populum?

Post by orthecreedence » Fri, May 12, 2017, 12:16 AM UTC

Scea91 wrote: post #303

Nursie wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Utter crap. Just because I am not in my house does not mean I consent to being tracked everywhere I go. We make the rules in our society, and with enough political will we can restrict this stuff.

This is not used for tracking.

Post by gglitch » Fri, May 12, 2017, 12:30 AM UTC

794CD01 wrote: post #486

gglitch wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until relatively recently, unavailability of large stockpiles of consumer data (at least, stockpiles at the scale now possible) was a significant impediment to a large and probably mostly-undiscovered class of potentially unethical behavior. Do you not suppose the removal of that impediment, with no other equally powerful compensatory regulations or oversight, to at least potentially be a serious problem now or at an…

Until relatively recently, unavailability of large stockpiles of consumer data (at least, stockpiles at the scale now possible) was a significant impediment to a large and probably mostly-undiscovered class of potentially ethical behavior, as well as behavior that actively combats unethical behavior. Data itself is amoral and can be used for either good or bad.

Post by alasdair_ » Fri, May 12, 2017, 1:16 AM UTC

white-flame wrote: post #479

_kb wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Woah, so this got a bit of interest. To be honest I'm a little surprised this seems to be news to the HN crowd. I feel a little bad about calling out one API provider specifically, so here's a bunch more: https://www.kairos.com/ https://skybiometry.com/ https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/cognitive-service... http://www.affectiva.com/ http://www.crowdemotion.co.uk/ http://emovu.com/e/ https://www.faceplusplus.…

I've lost track of how many times I've said this on HN: We need HIPPA for all personal information, not just medical. We have an expectation of privacy in being "lost in the crowd" when we're out and about. Our physical & online whereabouts, who we're physically with, who we're communicating with, our personal contact information, and obviously payment information is private information that can be harmful if not kep…

Post by alanfalcon » Fri, May 12, 2017, 2:05 AM UTC

Kliment wrote: post #424

alanfalcon wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you visit my website and fail to complete a purchase, you may find a physical postcard in the mail from us in a few days with a surreptitious coupon code. No, you did not actually tell us your mailing address at any point; knowing your e-mail is sufficient.

That 100% guarantees I'll never complete a purchase with you, and I'll warn others to avoid you too.