Well in their defense, when they said that they didn't know they could make $70M on it
IBM promised to back off facial recognition, then signed a $70M contract for it
91–100 of 132 posts
Re: IBM promised to back off facial recognition, then signed a $70M contract for it
#92When will people learn that companies will almost always sell stuff as long as it’s legal and profitable. They have no morals. If we declined into a dictatorship they would sell equipment for total surveillance and oppression. If we don’t make it illegal to pollute they will pollute if they think it makes money.
They actually don’t even care if it’s illegal.
Businesses straight up killed a reporter with a car bomb a few years back. They don’t give a fuck.
How many companies blatantly break the law only to pull some accounting magic to entirely avoid consequences (Canada oil is legally required to clean up their mess, but never do. It always falls to the taxpayer with zero business consequence).
How many times to they break the law, only to get a small slap on the wrist while running away with billions in profit?
Companies don’t give a shit if something is illegal.
Re: IBM promised to back off facial recognition, then signed a $70M contract for it
#93Funny, some people in the Arab world are fighting required Hijab use. In the US and Europe, with this happening, I could see many people outside wearing Hijabs that cover your full face in the future.
[deleted]
Re: IBM promised to back off facial recognition, then signed a $70M contract for it
#94Re: IBM promised to back off facial recognition, then signed a $70M contract for it
#95Re: IBM promised to back off facial recognition, then signed a $70M contract for it
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
The general public won’t care until it impacts them personally. Time to buy that country estate surrounded by trees so the surveillance state can’t see the finer details of your eyes with their AI cameras
And never leave. No going to the store. No driving. No friends coming by. No servants. Every supply run is a clandestine operation. Individualist solutions don't work here. Only regulatory solutions can address the source of the problem and those require solidarity and collective action.
Yeah because that's totally worked out, right?
Where has technology as disruptive as 'AI' ever been defeated by regulations? That's just more rules that the rich can ignore with impunity.
Western society doesn't really have real solidarity. It's a performance we go into every election season but it's just that: a performance.
Society will do nothing about this until it affects the rich. As always.
Re: IBM promised to back off facial recognition, then signed a $70M contract for it
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
> spineless cowards It's hard to be brave when you have to support a family, pay for a mortgage, pay for the kids' college, etc. I remember feeling queasy, almost 20 years ago, when I got hired for a very good salary to do helpdesk, and realized the customers I had to support included some Bad Actors: big mining, big arm manufacturing, even big spying... but I could finally afford to buy a small house, marry my partn…
> It's hard to be brave when By definition, the only time it's possible to be brave is when it's hard.
But there is "putting your own at risk" and "putting your family at risk".
Re: IBM promised to back off facial recognition, then signed a $70M contract for it
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe people should take care to add "men and women at" before talking about companies. Companies and corporations are abstractions. There are real people taking these actions. - "Men and women at IBM promised to back off facial recognition, then signed a $70M contract for it" - "Men and women would sell equipment for total surveillance and oppression" etc. The reason I think this is important is that there's act…
Or to avoid using the gender binary we could just use "People/Humans at IBM" :) Agree otherwise.
Or to avoid using the anthropocentric language, we could just use "Consciousnesses at IBM" :)
Re: IBM promised to back off facial recognition, then signed a $70M contract for it
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cray was never selected. Either they didn't submit an offer, or their price was too high.
I've sat in on plenty of B2B sales pitches, and am fairly certain that no salesman ever believes that you will actually run those tests. And if even if you did, that you would actually throw away a full year of integration work to go with the backup plan. Plus, having seen/heard a lot about how salesman are employed - all too often their commission/compensation is locked in when the contract is signed. They get their…
Ugliest day in a salesman’s life: the day he learns about “clawback.”
Re: IBM promised to back off facial recognition, then signed a $70M contract for it
#100When will people learn that companies will almost always sell stuff as long as it’s legal and profitable. They have no morals. If we declined into a dictatorship they would sell equipment for total surveillance and oppression. If we don’t make it illegal to pollute they will pollute if they think it makes money.
I believe people should take care to add "men and women at" before talking about companies. Companies and corporations are abstractions. There are real people taking these actions. - "Men and women at IBM promised to back off facial recognition, then signed a $70M contract for it" - "Men and women would sell equipment for total surveillance and oppression" etc. The reason I think this is important is that there's act…
Point taken, but an important point here is exactly that companies are abstractions, and they exhibit emergent behavior -- cases where the the company as a whole, responding to "its" incentives, "does" things that no individual at the company would necessarily do or even condone if it were all up to them.