Live data from Hacker News

Instagram faces $500B in fines alleging it harvested biometric data

businessinsider.com

41–50 of 112 posts

Re: Instagram faces $500B in fines alleging it harvested biometric data

#43

> the tool automatically scans the faces of people pictured in other users' posts, even if they don't use Instagram and didn't agree to the terms of service. This suggests to me that the number of people affected is much more than the 100 million Instagram users, and the potential fine much higher.

Sort of related. I always wondered how people in my photos would react knowing Google Photo was essentially scanning their face without their approval. I am sure this is covered by Google Photos T&Cs somehow, nevertheless, it's a real problem. Should I disclose anyone I snap about this? Even someone walking in the background?

Re: Instagram faces $500B in fines alleging it harvested biometric data

#44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Corporate death penalty.

Not sure why this is downvoted as it brings up an interesting position. Why can't there be violations so severe that they force the corporation to be dissolved?

It happens, just less often than is probably healthy.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/06/us/ny-nra-lawsuit-letitia...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Andersen

Re: Instagram faces $500B in fines alleging it harvested biometric data

#45
post #41

It's about time. Facebook has been violating this law for years.

No FB user here. Is it possible to get myself labeled on FB-posted photos with my full name by some FB user?

I’m not a user and never have been. People have tagged me many tines.

Re: Instagram faces $500B in fines alleging it harvested biometric data

#46
The most depressing part about this is: to me, as an individual who probably has my biometric data harvested, I see nothing of this money and my data is still gone. It’s almost as if there was a hidden price tag: "Do crime X and pay Y to make money Z." As long as Y<Z and the business can continue to operate with a new crime, it’s just like there was no law. Just costs.

Re: Instagram faces $500B in fines alleging it harvested biometric data

#47
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People commit crimes, not companies. I thought corporations are people, my friend.

To use modern lingo: Corporations are people-fluid. They can chose to be people or not. Forcing people-ness onto them would be corporate-phobic.

I don’t find snide sub-commenting toward the queer community helpful in this discussion or appropriate for Hacker News.

Re: Instagram faces $500B in fines alleging it harvested biometric data

#48
post #41

It's about time. Facebook has been violating this law for years.

No FB user here. Is it possible to get myself labeled on FB-posted photos with my full name by some FB user?

Yes, though it would be equivalent to a label or sticker on an item in a store (note: not a barcode). It wouldn't carry meaning from a technological perspective (though I guess Facebook could try to mine that).

The problem with Facebook's facial recognition features is that it has to recognize all faces, even faces that don't want to be recognized, to know which faces to legally not recognize. It's an all-or-nothing feature across its entire user base. It can't even be geofenced because users travel and upload from all sorts of parts of the world and wind up in the background of several photos.

Facial recognition is a "logical feature" in that it mimics how people recognize people, but is problematic when applied at scale.

Re: Instagram faces $500B in fines alleging it harvested biometric data

#49
Arguably, merely storing a photo of someone is 'harvesting biometric data'.

Comparing photos to one another to see if they match is hardly nefarious.

Paradoxically, it's probably irrelevant: it doesn't help them make money in ads, it probably has no otherwise material effect on the service.

I'm glad someone is suing FB but I'm not sure this is the right angle.

Post reply on HN