Do facial recognition systems retrain themselves to compensate for change caused by growth or age?
Random side-fact: a co-worker who climbs a lot stopped using fingerprint sensors on his phones because his prints change frequently enough due to climbing, that it's basically useless.
I climb regularly and can say that I am a bit concerned that the finger print scanner on my Pixel 2 works as often as it does. It makes me wonder if the initial scan of an abused finger means that it will read false positives more often.
so if I understand this correctly, if it can pass through many materials then does that include clothing? so a passive the target system by which you can determine what they have hidden on their person? what is the range? set it recognize certain shapes, walk past a sensor laden wall, and have it high light in bright green images objects of interest like total recall?
That's how american TSA airport security scanners operate. They use a millimeter wave scanner to identify foreign objects on a person. The only lacking bit is the real-time hollywood-style visualizations.
> And unlike with object recognition that uses cameras, there are no privacy concerns, or need to maintain line-of-sight or good lighting conditions. Radar works through different materials and in the dark as well as the light. Wait, what? The ability to see through walls and not require line of sight leads to fewer privacy concerns? Seems to me the privacy concerns are significantly greater for radar than facial rec…
Yeah, I know I'm not super excited about google gaining the ability to continuously monitor the status of my erectile tissue.
They do ... That's how they know what each player have in his hands at poker tournament live feeds
Hmm are you sure? I thought they were just using hole cams still. Little cameras built into the rail or into the table that players just showed their hands to while playing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hole_cam
theyre both common.
rfid/nfc is popular at the moment simply because it's cheaper; no table to cut up or glass/cameras to put everywhere.
as a poker player i've always been queezy about the idea that my hand could be read remotely in theory -- but I don't play those kind of tables anyway.
> And unlike with object recognition that uses cameras, there are no privacy concerns, or need to maintain line-of-sight or good lighting conditions. Radar works through different materials and in the dark as well as the light. Wait, what? The ability to see through walls and not require line of sight leads to fewer privacy concerns? Seems to me the privacy concerns are significantly greater for radar than facial rec…
Firstly, I think (though I could be wrong) that when they talk about privacy concerns they mean the sort of concerns the average person would have about having a camera about... I.e. naked or compromising pictures of themselves getting leaked. I would guess this wouldn't be a problem with radar as it doesn't create images. Out of curiosity though, not having much knowledge on the subject myself, what would be your se…
Radar can create images just not true to life color photos. But, leak such a photo of a couple in their bedroom with the blinds closed and you have a problem.
> And unlike with object recognition that uses cameras, there are no privacy concerns, or need to maintain line-of-sight or good lighting conditions. Radar works through different materials and in the dark as well as the light. Wait, what? The ability to see through walls and not require line of sight leads to fewer privacy concerns? Seems to me the privacy concerns are significantly greater for radar than facial rec…
Firstly, I think (though I could be wrong) that when they talk about privacy concerns they mean the sort of concerns the average person would have about having a camera about... I.e. naked or compromising pictures of themselves getting leaked. I would guess this wouldn't be a problem with radar as it doesn't create images. Out of curiosity though, not having much knowledge on the subject myself, what would be your se…
> "I.e. naked or compromising pictures of themselves getting leaked. I would guess this wouldn't be a problem with radar as it doesn't create images."
Give 'the internet' access to this technology and it will probably only take a week for perverts to weaponize it and fetishize it.
Random side-fact: a co-worker who climbs a lot stopped using fingerprint sensors on his phones because his prints change frequently enough due to climbing, that it's basically useless.
I mostly stopped using mine because I have a bad case of hyperhydrosis (sp?), so my fingers are always sweaty / oily enough that none of the devices I use can reliably tell what my prints are. Even when I got printed for the feds (for work reasons), they had to redo most of the fingers.
Use a knuckle. I have a similar problem. Works ok.
Firstly, I think (though I could be wrong) that when they talk about privacy concerns they mean the sort of concerns the average person would have about having a camera about... I.e. naked or compromising pictures of themselves getting leaked. I would guess this wouldn't be a problem with radar as it doesn't create images. Out of curiosity though, not having much knowledge on the subject myself, what would be your se…
> "I.e. naked or compromising pictures of themselves getting leaked. I would guess this wouldn't be a problem with radar as it doesn't create images." Give 'the internet' access to this technology and it will probably only take a week for perverts to weaponize it and fetishize it.
If the technology were fetishised, the tech itself would acquire the status of fetish, which isn't the same as the tech being used to ends of fulfilling a fetish (e.g voyeurism). Some brands arguably promote technology fetishism, but fetishism isn't necessarily sexual, for instance the theory of commodity fetishism.
> "I.e. naked or compromising pictures of themselves getting leaked. I would guess this wouldn't be a problem with radar as it doesn't create images." Give 'the internet' access to this technology and it will probably only take a week for perverts to weaponize it and fetishize it.
If the technology were fetishised, the tech itself would acquire the status of fetish, which isn't the same as the tech being used to ends of fulfilling a fetish (e.g voyeurism). Some brands arguably promote technology fetishism, but fetishism isn't necessarily sexual, for instance the theory of commodity fetishism.
Just to be clear, I'm talking about weird dudes with prurient motivations scanning unconsenting people through the walls of their homes.