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

Never Give Them Your Face

nevergivethemyourface.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 468 posts

Re: Never Give Them Your Face

#331

Post by fl4regun »

stephbook wrote: post #287
fl4regun wrote: post #31

This is a little bit of a tangent compared to the post, but can someone explain to me why it's NOW that we have multiple countries (USA, Canada, UK, Australia, and probably others that I am not aware of) all looking at age verification for a technology (the internet and all the things it lets you access) has existed for over 2 decades, and has been mature for at least 10 years? You could buy illicit drugs and watch p…

I don't think you have spent much time researching. TLDR: Social media bad for kids. Facebook was never allowed to let in kids under 13. It's now only being enforced.

FB IPO was over a decade ago, and was on the internet years before that. So only now we decide that we "must act!" and that this is the only way to do it, and all countries are doing it in the same way with no evidence if it even works or not? Why not ten years ago? Heck why not 20 years ago when MySpace was a thing? This whole thing seems extremely manufactured to me.

Re: Never Give Them Your Face

#332

Post by zahlman »

ForceBru wrote: post #128
radium3d wrote: post #111

They already have your face.

Yeah, "they" probably simply have our FaceID data that we're willingly collecting ourselves, supposedly for our own security.

Would be rather difficult for "them" to get it off my $80 CAD vertical flip phone, I dare say.

Re: Never Give Them Your Face

#333

Post by mannanj »

tejohnso wrote: post #48
jh00ker wrote: post #40

At Disneyland, there are separate park entrance lanes that don't use facial recognition software. I like that I can opt-out passively there. At TSA checkpoints at the airport, you have to actively ask to opt-out. I'm always worried that actively opting-out puts you on a government list and there could be later, much larger ramifications, so I passively opt-in to blend in with the masses.

Yup. Most people are going to say "I have nothing to hide" and go with the flow. The ones who don't are signalling that perhaps they do have something to hide.

Yes I do have something to hide. my face. I don't want you to own it in a data base of yours that you have a bad track record of knowing how to secure.

unless of course, you are willing to take ownership and accountability of my data and promise me minimum of $100k in compensation for data breaches and leaks indefinitely from your storage of my face. You can figure out how to pay for insurance to pay for this.

/oh you're not interested in even talking about this? Sounds like you have something to hide. (this fun conversation would not be well perceived when you that you ask for accountability for their actions and propose a solution. making a contract for this surely can't be super hard, but getting them to sign it and be accountable to it would be blocked hard)

Re: Never Give Them Your Face

#334

Post by maaarghk »

__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #194

I quit facebook over a decade ago. Then, a few months back, I was under some pressure to sell something, and the facebook marketplace appears to be the way to go locally. So I tried to create a facebook account. They wanted to scan my face, and in a moment of weakness, I performed the ritual. Thirty seconds later, they suspended my account due to violations of their terms of service: "this decision cannot be appealed…

I had the same thing, tried to set up an instagram account for a website I run. It locked me out instantly and asked for a face photo; after I uploaded it it went to review; after about 40 minutes that brand new instagram account was permanently suspended for posting content which breaches the terms of service, with no appeal possible. It did let me download the full account data which of course had nothing in it and no further info about why it got permabanned.

It is obvious something is broken but they are quite good at blocking you from accessing any possible avenue of support once the account is in this state.

On the off chance someone from Meta is reading: Please unban the account "rareboc" :-)

Re: Never Give Them Your Face

#335

Post by tokioyoyo »

ethagnawl wrote: post #176
wwweston wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And increasingly, everyone isn’t using them, even if they’re on them. I’m on Insta and WhatsApp and I use them a few times per year. I’m on Messenger and have seen a dramatic dropoff in messages. I’m on FB frequently and notice only a small fraction of my friends bother anymore and it’s become an interest platform to make up the lack, so I’m trending toward less time there. I’m on Twitter/X but check in maybe once a…

No, I don't think you're unique at all. I think this all tracks and applies to more and more of the general population. These mainstream services no longer provide what people signed up for: life updates, pictures of kids and dogs, etc. These value-add posts are becoming less frequent because of/and are being replaced by streams of posts from people _you should follow_ or content they're pretty sure will rile you up…

Well, kinda yes, but not really.

Concept of SNS changed from “audience of my friends and acquaintances” to “audience of potentially anyone in the world” around 2017ish, when every feed became algo-feed. And users like it, because it is akin to “endless Reddit scrolling”, but more tailored to things you might find interesting. And posters like it too, because of potential reach and attention.

Instagram Reels has 2B+ monthly users. Even if we say 50% are bots, not active and etc., that’s still roughly 1B users. It really tracks if you stand up on a busy subway train, almost in any city, and just look around. You’ll see full screens of TikTok, IG, YouTube shorts. The younger generation’s “private group chats” aren’t some sort of replacement to endless scrolling. A good chunk of messages are links to posts in one of those platforms.

Re: Never Give Them Your Face

#338

Post by Nevermark »

inigyou wrote: post #285
Nevermark wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume you mean more likely arrested? Since legal liability would be the same. Logs of identity vs. access history being useful for investigating sharing? What kind of logs does California State keep?

None, presumably, since age verification is illegal there.

> If it's not ZK you can get arrested for sharing it

What is the scenario where not using ZKP's gets you arrested. Who is collecting what information?

Re: Never Give Them Your Face

#339

Post by andrewla »

yolo3000 wrote: post #149
panny wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with that is, parents be like: >Here kid, take my key, go get me some beer. Everyone everywhere gets forced to deal with bullshit, then the people it is supposed to be protecting circumvent it directly.

The same can happen with any type of authentication, unless you are ok with someone pointing a webcam and authenticating you non stop.

This is underselling it -- an adult can sell these yubikeys untraceably, pocket the cash, and never think about it again in their life.

If we tie the person's identity to the token (THIS IS A BAD IDEA) then if underage use is detected, the adult who sold the token can be prosecuted for selling adult tokens to minors.

Re: Never Give Them Your Face

#340

Post by marcta »

SoftTalker wrote: post #180

Your face is already everwhere. Your supermarket records it as you check out. Every retailer records it as you enter the store. The state has it. The Federal government has it if you have a passport or other federal ID. Your mortgage company probably required it when you digitally "signed" your loan application. Socials have it from all the selfies you've posted. It's a lost cause.

I was going to say the same. Also, if you go to shops like Screwfix or Toolstation (in the UK), you have to give your postcode and name to them before they sell to you. I tried opting out once and they refused to sell to me. I give them fake postcodes and names instead now, but it's very invasive and completely unnecessary.
Post reply on HN