Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you think of a single technology that society has successfully rejected? Eugenics? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics
Genetic screening, and abortion of defective fetuses, is a thriving industry.
[deleted]
Clearview AI is struggling to address complaints as its legal issues mount
31–40 of 59 posts
Re: Clearview AI is struggling to address complaints as its legal issues mount
#32Hot take: fighting this is a losing battle, because you’re fighting against technology. Can you think of a single technology that society has successfully rejected? It’s pretty hard. In general, once the tech to do X exists, then X will find a way to exist. Instead of crucifying Clearview, it might be better to open a dialogue about regulation in this space. But even that has problems; bitcoin was eventually accepted…
There is no way facial rec is going away. Sensationalist outlets like Buzzfeed were, in their day, also against Caller ID. And "databases." Not going to happen. Turning faces into polygons exists/will never unexist.
How is this sensationalist?
Re: Clearview AI is struggling to address complaints as its legal issues mount
#33How many clearview AIs exist that we don't know about? This is something I could create as a hobby project in my free time so what would someone with real resources be able to do?
Probably several dark versions of this out there have access to this type of technology already. Its just too tempting for maleficent organizations around the world to ignore. Just think about the investigators around the world (FBI, DEA etc...) who are combating evil organizations but are not careful with the the information the post online; those people are screwed. Time for a new job. I'm glad that this one was do…
Okay, say they take the code and set it up on servers outside the US. Maybe incorporate as a new name in a non-US country as well. What implications would that have on US law enforcement agencies in particular, but any US based company in general from using this new foreign company?
Re: Clearview AI is struggling to address complaints as its legal issues mount
#34Companies like this are Evil. Plain and simple. If your business model involves distributing/processing personal information you had no consent to take and sharing it with 3rd parties, then that's evil.
Cynical take: I'm pretty sure we've all agreed to ToSes that has allowed our faces to end up online. Clearview AI is just doing what a detective with an eye for faces and unlimited time is doing. I agree that I'm really concerned about the way the surveillance state is creeping in. But it kind of feels like the cat is out of the bag, and moralizing like this is useless.
Clearview AI is just doing what a detective with an eye for faces and unlimited time is doing.
It pretends that scale doesn't matter, when the reality is that scale and network effects are the most important feature of many of these 'advances'.
Re: Clearview AI is struggling to address complaints as its legal issues mount
#35Re: Clearview AI is struggling to address complaints as its legal issues mount
#36Hot take: fighting this is a losing battle, because you’re fighting against technology. Can you think of a single technology that society has successfully rejected? It’s pretty hard. In general, once the tech to do X exists, then X will find a way to exist. Instead of crucifying Clearview, it might be better to open a dialogue about regulation in this space. But even that has problems; bitcoin was eventually accepted…
Indeed.
As always, the public debate (and witchhunt) is focused on the tool, the symptom, the observation, and never the underlying cause.
How are these technologies being abused, and why are the perpetrators allowed to do so?
The surveillance tech already exists, as a component of personalised advertising, because it makes lots of money. It's all any government needs as well. It's flown under the radar wrt. the masses, because most people have absolutely no comprehension of how that kind of thing can work and will ignore anyone talking about it because it's an SEP.
But facial recognition is something which the masses can recognise, if not understand, and therefore react to as a threat.
Personally I think that as long as we haven't solved the first problem then we should avoid piling more possible problems upon it, so roadblocking facial recog tech is not something I would object to. But it does miss the point by rather a large margin.
I don't believe that it'll be as 'awareness-raising' as some people seem to believe either, for the reason implied above: people only care about the comprehensible threat.
Re: Clearview AI is struggling to address complaints as its legal issues mount
#37> One of Clearview AI's investors defended the company, “We do not have to be hidden to be free.” Yikes.
Would it be a good idea to capture all the investors names, address, photos, etc. and put them online for all to see?
That seems illegal, which illustrates the point well enough already.
Re: Clearview AI is struggling to address complaints as its legal issues mount
#38Hot take: fighting this is a losing battle, because you’re fighting against technology. Can you think of a single technology that society has successfully rejected? It’s pretty hard. In general, once the tech to do X exists, then X will find a way to exist. Instead of crucifying Clearview, it might be better to open a dialogue about regulation in this space. But even that has problems; bitcoin was eventually accepted…
There are lots of examples. You are right that technology itself is usually value neutral, it's how it has been applied.
But as you suggest the usual answer to this is has always been regulation, which is only effective with teeth.
Nobody can stop you learning how to build a RF transmission devices, or conversely a blocker. But the FAA has very particular ideas (US specific) on what you are allowed to do and not in that space, and if you step too far out of bounds you will be shut down.
The trick is to make the penalties both likely and severe enough to outweigh any benefit you'll see. That will shut down most (ab)uses of the technology. Note regulation can include "you cannot do this as an individual or corporate entity, at all".
Re: Clearview AI is struggling to address complaints as its legal issues mount
#39Hot take: fighting this is a losing battle, because you’re fighting against technology. Can you think of a single technology that society has successfully rejected? It’s pretty hard. In general, once the tech to do X exists, then X will find a way to exist. Instead of crucifying Clearview, it might be better to open a dialogue about regulation in this space. But even that has problems; bitcoin was eventually accepted…
There are lots of examples. You are right that technology itself is usually value neutral, it's how it has been applied. But as you suggest the usual answer to this is has always been regulation, which is only effective with teeth. Nobody can stop you learning how to build a RF transmission devices, or conversely a blocker. But the FAA has very particular ideas (US specific) on what you are allowed to do and not in t…
What are some examples? (I'm genuinely interested.)
Re: Clearview AI is struggling to address complaints as its legal issues mount
#40Some ads now have links to sites where you can do mass opt-outs, like this one: https://optout.networkadvertising.org/?c=1 I have no clue if they're legit, but they certainly look useful.
Some companies like Sift Science got caught not having proper opt-out facilities that are now required by law https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/04/business/secret-consumer-...
Now that the CCPA is in full effect, can't somebody just build a mass opt-out service to get out of Sift, Clearview, etc? Sift etc already have to hire a 3rd party to handle ID verification (yeah it's weird you have to send them your ID to get your own data, which is supposed to define your identity...).. No idea if it would be profitable, but if you've got the ID verification bit solved, then launching an opt-out service might be the way to make your product go viral?