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

Eyechat

neal.fun

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 113 posts

Re: Eyechat

#41

Post by snorremd »

mandmandam wrote: post #29
archerx wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This site wants to share your cookies to at least 662 “venders” and they are being dishonest with the “legitimate interest” scam. The creator clearly does not care about nor respect their users/visitors.

It's so wild to me that people tolerate this. I just close the tab or 'reader' whenever I see that type of thing, but I know very few others who do the same.

I mean, if a website claims to have tens if not close to a hundred "legitimate interest" cookies I'm reasonably sure they are living of wildly invasive ad tracking. I immediately close these websites just as you do.

It would be swell if more of the web was made by passionate people to share knowledge for free. I know this is a privileged attitude as creating content takes time which is not free. But some of the best web sites are the ones without monetisation. We need a better monetisation system for the web that is based on people paying for content instead of people being sold as user data.

Re: Eyechat

#42

Post by boesboes »

thih9 wrote: post #26
xandrius wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as I enjoy neal's little games, I'm not going to be trying this one, unfortunately.

Perhaps that's an idea for a next game: match people by "how much info are you willing to provide". Present options to pick a username, email, social media, live text, live audio stream, live video, health data from a smart watch, teenage diary, ... It already works in some way; e.g. even if one person has both a HN account and a Snapchat account, they would use these to talk to different people.

Already exists, demo by some dutch(?) privacy expert on how much info he can get out of you and just from your picture.

I showed it to a colleague from marketing as a 'look how bad up this is!' They asked 'cool, can we do that too?' sigh

Re: Eyechat

#43

Post by fartsucker69 »

thih9 wrote: post #26
xandrius wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as I enjoy neal's little games, I'm not going to be trying this one, unfortunately.

Perhaps that's an idea for a next game: match people by "how much info are you willing to provide". Present options to pick a username, email, social media, live text, live audio stream, live video, health data from a smart watch, teenage diary, ... It already works in some way; e.g. even if one person has both a HN account and a Snapchat account, they would use these to talk to different people.

my match will get tmi

Re: Eyechat

#46

Post by BossingAround »

pcranaway wrote: post #32

To the people worried about their data being sent to google or whatever (I'm not sure what they're actually worried about) -- the extraction of your eyes is done client side, using a seemingly very well made ML model running on Tensorflow which fits in under 15mb. The feed of your camera is transmitted "directly" to the person you're looking at (well, no, not really directly, it uses WebRTC, so your data passes throu…

So even after this thought process, it comes down to "do you trust the author" (just like before it)... Not unreasonable to answer either way if you ask me.

Re: Eyechat

#48

Post by IncreasePosts »

What we really need for this is on-screen cameras, so you can actually look someone in the eye. Now, you only look them in the eye when you look away from them at the camera. And when you look them in the eye you're just looking at their mouth.

Re: Eyechat

#50

Post by jbullock35 »

IncreasePosts wrote: post #48

What we really need for this is on-screen cameras, so you can actually look someone in the eye. Now, you only look them in the eye when you look away from them at the camera. And when you look them in the eye you're just looking at their mouth.

We’ve needed this – easy, direct eye contact – for quite a long time. I keep waiting for someone to develop it. I think that Apple has a relevant patent, but I don’t know how much content is in the patent, and I’ve never heard that Apple has done anything with it.
Post reply on HN