81–90 of 111 posts
Please, no. This has to be a parody. > Banks don’t want private account details (like the user’s current balance and credit limits etc) being seen by anybody other than the account holder. This is exactly the kind of justification they'd use. And surprise surprise there won't be a box that says "I'd rather risk somebody seeing my account details than have a biometric model of my face stored in your database and given…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Decentralization is not essential to cryptocurrency as a technology. It's essential to a view of how it could be used for the betterment of many. The technology can just as easily be applied for other purposes, mandated by an authoritarian government to be the only legal way to conduct commerce. You'd use it not because you want to, but because you want to avoid their ire.
With a single trusted party, a blockchain is just a wildly inefficient database. There's literally no reason to use it at that point, just make a simple db of account numbers and balances.
Am I the only one who doesn't quite understand the point? I would assume you wouldn't only use this tech to secure information. But I don't see really how this adds any security when software cams exist. Plus you have other issues, like people like me who work in low light, or picture frames in the shot, etc. Cool hobby project though.
So what stops me from creating a device that registers itself as a webcam natively, but just puts a loop of a pre-recorded video that satisfies the face recognition software? Stop trying to find solutions to problems that aren't real.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With a single trusted party, a blockchain is just a wildly inefficient database. There's literally no reason to use it at that point, just make a simple db of account numbers and balances.
Actually there is. 21st century money. It would be actually possible to use a government's money in various new ways. Think of what could happen in the economy if the government provided flexible and free payment services. (Which is exactly why they'll never do it, but just pointing out that a government-controlled blockchain for normal people would have a LOT of applications)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As someone who has been careful about not doing that for a couple of decades, just fuck me, hm?
I'm reading a (sometimes hyperbolic) but interesting "book" on this: Digital Stockholm Syndrome in the Post-Ontological Age: https://www.upress.umn.edu/book-division/books/digital-stock... "Now, the modern person is determined by data exhaust—an invisible anthropocentric ether of ones and zeros that is a product of our digitally monitored age." I won't doubt that in 15-20 years, using the process of deduction of your…
Goes a bit like:
1) a place to start, 2) a way to follow, virtually, in time and space - augmented with total surveillance.
1) "In China, KFC tests out ‘smile to pay’" https://www.techinasia.com/kfc-china-tests-facial-recognitio...
2) "China’s facial-recognition systems crunch data from cameras to monitor citizens"
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14643433
Also:
https://www.theverge.com/2013/2/1/3940898/darpa-gigapixel-dr...
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/nzey3w/what-those...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do people really consider the ethics of introducing tech like this? I guess it just comes down to a consequentialism vs deontology whether someone thinks this is a good idea. And, obviously, if they don't do it, I guess someone else will?
> Do people really consider the ethics of introducing tech like this? But consider the fact that you are using terms out of the humanities, while most of my fellow CS students endlessly griped about how useless their humanities courses were and how they wished the school would get rid of that course requirement (six courses total over 4 years). Until we teach the tech-priests of the 21st century the great responsibil…
In the UK, for instance, we have no requirements for a university degree other than the courses relevant to that degree. I was there to study computer science, not get a rounded education at someone else's insistence.
And yet most of the really rapacious, conscienceless, anti-human stuff seems to me to come from the libertarian and 'bro' fringes of Silicon Valley, seemingly despite the requirements to study more 'humanities'.
There's something about software like this that really creeps me out, even though I realize it's not ridiculously advanced (i.e. it's way more common than I think) anymore. That might just be a personal aversion, though. I can imagine useful scenarios for this even if I get a bit of an icky feeling from it. My co-founder and I have talked about things like this as an "anti-cheating" measure (we developed a take-home…
Some more info about ProctorU (for others who haven't heard about it): https://www.chronicle.com/article/Behind-the-Webcams-Watchfu... > Rather than one proctor sitting at the head of a physical classroom and roaming the aisles every once in a while, remote proctors peer into a student's home, seize control of her computer, and stare at her face for the duration of a test, reading her body language for signs of impro…