Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FaceApp Now Owns Access to More Than 150M People's Faces and Names

forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 249 posts

Re: FaceApp Now Owns Access to More Than 150M People's Faces and Names

#61

Post by IloveHN84 »

Zmetta wrote: post #34
stunt wrote: post #16

The coverage on FaceApp and the way they talk about it is ridiculous. When it comes for instance to Snapchat's numbers, the coverage is about the success of the company. How is FaceApp different than all other apps and social networks that are storing all your photos with location and tags to your friends except that FaceApp is a Russian company? I'm not defending FaceApp. I don't use social networks either for the s…

One is owned and operated in a country of authoritarian-level data-collection and massive public propaganda and the other is owned and operated by a company in Russian which isn't any better but still determines the media narrative.

You forgot MSQRD owned by Facebook. It's a US company, therefore their data can be requested by FBI, NSA and others upon request without opposition.

Re: FaceApp Now Owns Access to More Than 150M People's Faces and Names

#64

Post by idop »

mikeash wrote: post #20

We keep harping on about privacy, and then shit like this happens. There are two possible conclusions to draw. One is that the general public actually doesn’t care about privacy at all. It’s a niche concern. The other is that the general public cares but is completely and utterly clueless about how to defend themselves, to the point that an app can literally say “give us your name and face and we can do whatever we w…

The general public doesn't have the knowledge or even imagination to understand that sharing your information with nameless/faceless organizations may have downsides re: privacy. The others have been brainwashed well enough to believe that only criminals need privacy, so they don't care. By now using the "I have nothing to hide" example is cliche but it's literally the response I _always_ get when I bring up privacy concerns. Takes me about 12 seconds to prove to them how wrong they are.

Re: FaceApp Now Owns Access to More Than 150M People's Faces and Names

#65

Post by throwawaymanbot »

mikeash wrote: post #20

We keep harping on about privacy, and then shit like this happens. There are two possible conclusions to draw. One is that the general public actually doesn’t care about privacy at all. It’s a niche concern. The other is that the general public cares but is completely and utterly clueless about how to defend themselves, to the point that an app can literally say “give us your name and face and we can do whatever we w…

In fairness, when you use an app like this, why would you (as the avg user) ever think they would be doing something nefarious with it? Especially digital products where the "magic" happens out of sight in the bg.

People DO want privacy and I bet there will be lawsuits about this.

Re: FaceApp Now Owns Access to More Than 150M People's Faces and Names

#67

Post by skizm »

idop wrote: post #64
mikeash wrote: post #20

We keep harping on about privacy, and then shit like this happens. There are two possible conclusions to draw. One is that the general public actually doesn’t care about privacy at all. It’s a niche concern. The other is that the general public cares but is completely and utterly clueless about how to defend themselves, to the point that an app can literally say “give us your name and face and we can do whatever we w…

The general public doesn't have the knowledge or even imagination to understand that sharing your information with nameless/faceless organizations may have downsides re: privacy. The others have been brainwashed well enough to believe that only criminals need privacy, so they don't care. By now using the "I have nothing to hide" example is cliche but it's literally the response I _always_ get when I bring up privacy…

What argument do you use to prove them wrong?

Re: FaceApp Now Owns Access to More Than 150M People's Faces and Names

#68

Post by djsumdog »

sergiotapia wrote: post #50

>To make FaceApp actually work, you have to give it permissions to access your photos - ALL of them. But it also gains access to Siri and Search .... Oh, and it has access to refreshing in the background - so even when you are not using it, it is using you. This is false, you can just take a pic and never give it access to your gallery. If the authors are lying about something so trivial, what else do journalists lie…

Is this true for both iOS and Android? It probably needs access to media to store images, and once you grant it that level of access, it can read media as well.

Re: FaceApp Now Owns Access to More Than 150M People's Faces and Names

#69

Post by nixpulvis »

mikeash wrote: post #20

We keep harping on about privacy, and then shit like this happens. There are two possible conclusions to draw. One is that the general public actually doesn’t care about privacy at all. It’s a niche concern. The other is that the general public cares but is completely and utterly clueless about how to defend themselves, to the point that an app can literally say “give us your name and face and we can do whatever we w…

I'd say it's a lot more like an addict that, while smoking a cigarette, says things like "yea I know these things are killing me".

No harm, no foul until the signs are visible, and it's probably too late.

Re: FaceApp Now Owns Access to More Than 150M People's Faces and Names

#70

Post by daenz »

imgabe wrote: post #41

Is "what your face looks like" private information? You publicly display your face everywhere you go all the time. It's not really practical to hide it. Likewise your name you pretty much freely give out to anyone who asks. Is that private information? So Faceapp knows "There's a person with this name who looks like this". Was that supposed to be a secret? I'm concerned about privacy too, but it seems like some peopl…

>Is "what your face looks like" private information?

I think it's the linkage of the name and the face. Either of those things alone don't seem like private information, but together, I would argue they are private. I can't provide a good reason as to why I think that yet though.

Post reply on HN