21–30 of 224 posts
I get where it’s coming from. I know a guy who’s been subleasing a rent-controlled studio in Nob Hill for years. It’s not a money grab, I think he’s just passing through his own cost. He’s just holding onto it as a backup.
I doubt he works.
As a computer engineer, I get excited to see latest technology being applied to our every day lives. I can't wait to see a facial recognition system in action somewhere. On the other hand, it is hard to disagree with this article. Getting photographed everyday or perhaps several times in a single day could quickly start feeling like a huge violation of privacy. All the security cameras in this building make things ev…
100% agree. Relatedly, does a landlord have the right to know when you are in your home? Because that's a side effect of this (which could already be possible by monitoring things like electrical usage). Asking in both legal and ethical senses (which I expect are different).
So the landlord likely already knows which fob's have entered the building at any given time. Presuming that most of the fobs are with their rightful owners, then the landlord knows mostly who is in the building at any given time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually, I would guess catching people that try to Airbnb their rent-stabilized apt (short-term guests). Honestly, I agree it is would be kind of messed up for someone to have the fortune of winning a below-market luxury apartment and turn that around and illegally rent it out for a massive markup on Airbnb.
What makes you so sure that it's not aiming to catch people who get a rent-stabilised apartment and then long-term sublet it at market rate?
The privacy concerns here are huge, but the much more direct issue is from this quote from the article: > the same programs failed to identify darker-skinned women up to one-third of the time. A one-third failure rate means that on average, for every three times you try to return home, you are likely to have the system fail to identify you at least once. Being locked out, as a resident, one-third of the number of tim…
As a computer engineer, I get excited to see latest technology being applied to our every day lives. I can't wait to see a facial recognition system in action somewhere. On the other hand, it is hard to disagree with this article. Getting photographed everyday or perhaps several times in a single day could quickly start feeling like a huge violation of privacy. All the security cameras in this building make things ev…
100% agree. Relatedly, does a landlord have the right to know when you are in your home? Because that's a side effect of this (which could already be possible by monitoring things like electrical usage). Asking in both legal and ethical senses (which I expect are different).
The end result of the landlord knowing when you are in your home does not change that.
[1] Same principle that allows you to photograph the police out in public or really anyone else.
As a computer engineer, I get excited to see latest technology being applied to our every day lives. I can't wait to see a facial recognition system in action somewhere. On the other hand, it is hard to disagree with this article. Getting photographed everyday or perhaps several times in a single day could quickly start feeling like a huge violation of privacy. All the security cameras in this building make things ev…
Who has this power? At the moment only lawless spy agencies and politicians who control them.
It may be better to legislate for all this data to be open to all rather than trying to legislate it out of existence. Laws likely won't work due to power imbalances meaning it is used by the state with impunity anyway, as is the case at least to a limited extent now - the limits on the likes of GCHQ are technical, not legal, as they have demonstrated recently.
Perhaps a truly private life is now impossible, but if it is we should make sure that is the case for those in power as well as the little people who scurry about beneath their gaze.
The privacy concerns here are huge, but the much more direct issue is from this quote from the article: > the same programs failed to identify darker-skinned women up to one-third of the time. A one-third failure rate means that on average, for every three times you try to return home, you are likely to have the system fail to identify you at least once. Being locked out, as a resident, one-third of the number of tim…
The privacy concerns here are huge, but the much more direct issue is from this quote from the article: > the same programs failed to identify darker-skinned women up to one-third of the time. A one-third failure rate means that on average, for every three times you try to return home, you are likely to have the system fail to identify you at least once. Being locked out, as a resident, one-third of the number of tim…
One in three is beyond ridiculous.
One result of doors being controlled by facial recognition -- or any other kind of biometric system -- is that you have to get permission from someone whenever you have a regular visitor. You can no longer give your girlfriend, boyfriend, dog sitter, relatives, or whoever you wish a key or access card to your home. You have to enroll that person in the facial database. And whoever is doing the enrolling can ask for l…
Why are you jumping to the conclusion that is has to go this way? Very possible that a landlord would be happy to simply have someone log a face and then go back to that person if there was a particular and legal reason to know who the face was. Now sure if they wanted maybe they could google image search the face and find out who it was. But per my other comment there is nothing to prevent a building owner (landlord or otherwise) from installing a camera and filming everyone that enters a building and actually even posting that face on the internet for everyone to see. (Would not go down very well of course but it would be legal as it's a public place). If you want to hang out in front of Shake Shack (arbitrary) with your camera all day and take pictures of everyone who enters and buys a burger or a shake you can do that.
One result of doors being controlled by facial recognition -- or any other kind of biometric system -- is that you have to get permission from someone whenever you have a regular visitor. You can no longer give your girlfriend, boyfriend, dog sitter, relatives, or whoever you wish a key or access card to your home. You have to enroll that person in the facial database. And whoever is doing the enrolling can ask for l…