All this door tech is just not in my MO. I don't need a camera in my doorbell, I don't need third parties keeping track of my visitors, I don't want my door to open for the package deliverer, and I don't want it to be my face that opens my door. "Hey Mom, here is my face, go right in, I'll be just a moment longer."
A Landlord Wants Facial Recognition in Its Rent-Stabilized Buildings
71–80 of 224 posts
Re: A Landlord Wants Facial Recognition in Its Rent-Stabilized Buildings
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is already accomplished by having difficult-to-duplicate keys or fobs for the building entrance, which is a pretty standard feature of apartment living. And yes, some management companies are very stingy with extra fobs, as a control against having extra people in the unit who are not on the lease, or Airbnb, or whatever. You can tell you are in a building with a lot of illegal extra tenants when the keyfob-cont…
If nothing else: there's a market for fighting back against this. KeyMe kiosks (usually found at US supermarkets, pharmacies, etc.) have had RFID fob/card cloning capabilities for a while now. You scan the fob/card at the kiosk, then they clone it to a sticker and send it to you via mail.
> clone it to a sticker and send it to you via mail.
So they have a database full of addresses together with their digital keys?
What could possibly go wrong...
Re: A Landlord Wants Facial Recognition in Its Rent-Stabilized Buildings
#73Makes sense for publicly subsidized housing (which is what rent control is, in essence). A lot of people sublet their price controlled housing under the table. It's not like the facial recognition is resulting in any privacy loss for those that legally live there. The government already knows their permanent address.
> It's not like the facial recognition is resulting in any privacy loss for those that legally live there. Except knowing exactly when they come and go. And depending on how the camera works, how they're dressed, what they're carrying, how they got there, who they said goodbye to on the sidewalk, etc., etc.
Doesn’t a key fob already achieve this?
Re: A Landlord Wants Facial Recognition in Its Rent-Stabilized Buildings
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
In every apartment I've lived in with such difficult-to-duplicate keys (such as magnetic locks and what not), I've been ask whether I want a second set; and/or the owner told me to ask them should that ever be the case. Not quite sure what's different with that situation from before, other than slightly cheaper keys.
In my experience, in San Francisco, the owner will only give you a key for every name on the lease.
Nevertheless, you can at least hand a person (e.g. your visiting parents) your key so they can open the door without you.
Re: A Landlord Wants Facial Recognition in Its Rent-Stabilized Buildings
#75As 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…
I now view this outcome as inevitable. Such systems are already being trialled on the streets of london. However our privacy is not just about face recog - we leave myriad digital traces thousands of times a day (payments, phone, search, maps, likes, car plates, emails, phone calls, store cameras) which can already be used to trace out our lives in excruciating detail. Just one of these factors gives a lot of colour;…
>Who has this power? At the moment only lawless spy agencies and politicians who control them.
And all of the people working in these institutions. We know that they are willing to blatantly abuse these surveillance systems for personal stuff and they get away with it.
Re: A Landlord Wants Facial Recognition in Its Rent-Stabilized Buildings
#76If I had to guess at what's really going on here...it's that the landlord suspects the residents of some of these units aren't the people they're supposed to be. Sometimes if someone has a rent-stabilized apartment, they might want to move somewhere else. Ordinarily this would cause the unit to lose rent control status, but if they simply let someone else (e.g. a family member) take their place without notifying the building, they can maintain that status. Just a guess, but maybe this is the underlying motivation for adding this technology.
The motivation suggested by the article doesn't really make sense to me. Why would high income individuals want this?
Re: A Landlord Wants Facial Recognition in Its Rent-Stabilized Buildings
#77As 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…
I now view this outcome as inevitable. Such systems are already being trialled on the streets of london. However our privacy is not just about face recog - we leave myriad digital traces thousands of times a day (payments, phone, search, maps, likes, car plates, emails, phone calls, store cameras) which can already be used to trace out our lives in excruciating detail. Just one of these factors gives a lot of colour;…
> It may be better to legislate for all this data to be open to all rather than trying to legislate it out of existence.
I can't imagine that it would be better for every person on the planet to have access to my face scans at my apartment than just my landlord.
Re: A Landlord Wants Facial Recognition in Its Rent-Stabilized Buildings
#78As 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…
I now view this outcome as inevitable. Such systems are already being trialled on the streets of london. However our privacy is not just about face recog - we leave myriad digital traces thousands of times a day (payments, phone, search, maps, likes, car plates, emails, phone calls, store cameras) which can already be used to trace out our lives in excruciating detail. Just one of these factors gives a lot of colour;…
Actually, this outcome is far from inevitable - it all depends on the society and the political will. The problem with loss of privacy is that it can influence the voting body, and thus political outcomes. In the arms of power-that-be, it is not difficult to imagine an outcome where this technology is used to protect the ruling party from losing their power. In other words: 1984.
I like to think that this is the reason behind EU's GDPR and other privacy initiatives. Ironically, I think people of continental EU remember better what the loss of privacy meant in WWII, much more so than the rest of the world. It is telling that England (while it certainly had lots of casualties) was not invaded, so maybe this is why they put up with all the cameras? It certainly is not a place I would want to live in, or near. It creeps me out.
Re: A Landlord Wants Facial Recognition in Its Rent-Stabilized Buildings
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know a guy who calls himself an "environmental consultant" subleasing three rooms in his rent-controlled four room Nob Hill apartment. Cycled through a second subtenant in one of the rooms while I was there and raised the rent $400. I doubt he works.
Maybe I'm misreading your tone, but you seem to find this distasteful. If this guy was stopped from doing this, and the landlord evicted him, the landlord would just capture that value. The distinction I don't understand is, why is it might be acceptable for the landlord to try to want market rate for the apartment, but not acceptable for the tenant to want market rate for a room when a new subtenant starts? Perhaps…
> why is it might be acceptable for the landlord to try to want market rate for the apartment, but not acceptable for the tenant to want market rate for a room when a new subtenant starts?
Huh?
kaycebasques does not give any opinion on the landlord either way. Unless their comment was substantially edited, you're making a lot of assumptions about kaycebasques' views.
Re: A Landlord Wants Facial Recognition in Its Rent-Stabilized Buildings
#80What we need is a lot more affordable housing and rent controlled apartments. Spend the money on that, not this.