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

Opt out of Clearview.ai

clearview.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 112 posts

Re: Opt out of Clearview.ai

#101

Post by stiray »

kennywinker wrote: post #53
Nextgrid wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you make your profile available publicly then I'd argue it is indeed public. As far as I'm aware, Clearview doesn't have a relationship with Facebook to access non-public data and instead they just operate a web crawler storing anything that's being served without requiring auth.

An image at the top of a news article on cnn.com is "public" in the sense that anyone can access it. But the company and the photographer still retain rights to that image - you can't take it and use it for whatever you like.

What is confusing here is that everyone imagines that clearview (and google, and fb, ...) are really storing those pictures. In reallity they just train their ai. There is no trace of that picture on their servers once you delete it. But ai is capable of recognizing you, in case of clearview from picture. In case of google and fb from your picture, browsing habits, contacts, gps coordinates, your friends, semantics of your texts, ... The only difference is that google and fb are not so stupid to advertise this. But capability is there.

Re: Opt out of Clearview.ai

#102

Post by 6gvONxR4sf7o »

AlanYx wrote: post #52
bosie wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What part of fb is considered a 'public source'?

I imagine scraping Facebook might be similar to the result in the hiQ v. Linkedin case, involving scraping public LinkedIn information. At the time, the EFF and a lot of others celebrated the ruling. For example, the EFF characterized it as a victory for "...the wide variety of researchers, journalists, and companies who have had reason to fear cease and desist letters threatening liability simply for accessing publi…

I feel like there ought to be a line somewhere. Like, maybe you can access the data because it's public, but to (for example) profit off of it or even share it further, you need more than just the fact that it's public.

For some reason open source licenses come to mind. You can use this code (or image) under terms XYZ and this license has to go with it too. That way, me letting github to show my code publicly doesn't give you license to do whatever you want with it. Or me letting linkedin show my picture doesn't give you license to do whatever you want with it. Maybe we need something like that.

Re: Opt out of Clearview.ai

#103

Post by 6gvONxR4sf7o »

stiray wrote: post #21
6gvONxR4sf7o wrote: post #10

As a California or EU resident, shouldn't it be illegal for it to be opt-out? (edit: on further reading it looks like GDPR requires opt in, while CCPA seems to only require opt in for people younger than 16, and requires opt-out for people 16 or older, which is some bullshit) Regardless, I should be able to say "I'm opting out" and the onus should be on them to figure out how to do it, rather than me submitting enoug…

There is a slight problem (i am not sure if this is valid case, just thinking loud), if the data were gathered from public sources like fb, they might argue that those data are public.

I think that it can be like how github lets you have public repos that are covered under whatever license you like. Being public doesn't invalidate those licenses. Or if Disney made a movie free on youtube for a day, it doesn't lose legal protection over that movie.

Re: Opt out of Clearview.ai

#104

Post by carapace »

TomMarius wrote: post #81
carapace wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. Just as every obscenity filter has to have a list of obscenities to work, these creepy bastards will track you to not-track you. We need laws. (Or just let everybody know everything: "Privacy is dead".)

How will laws help against the same thing, but made by unlawful people? I think it's better to accept that privacy in the classic sense is dead and adjust.

I think then the issue becomes what you might call differential privacy. Do the rich and powerful get to opt out? That kind of thing.

Re: Opt out of Clearview.ai

#105

Post by TomMarius »

samoa42 wrote: post #92
TomMarius wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Luckily we already have such group - but they need tools like this to be efficient against the unlawful people wielding that technology. What now?

they dont need to be efficient, but effective. likewise the enforcers of law must not act unlawful.

In my native language, it's the same word. I meant it as both.

Re: Opt out of Clearview.ai

#106

Post by SebastianKra »

jchook wrote: post #19
newscracker wrote: post #9

Should every person start keeping a list of all privacy intrusions and then opt out? That’s never going to work out due to user fatigue, which is what all these opt out platforms depend on (that nobody will go through the trouble of doing it). (Not exactly the same) Just like Facebook announced a few years ago asking users to send it nude photos just so it could take down nude photos of that person, this also is ripe…

There are a couple services that opt-out for you. Often times your information will re-appear on the same site months later, too, so they provide monitoring. https://brandyourself.com/protect-your-privacy-online https://onerep.com/ Full disclosure: I helped develop the BrandYourself platform.

I tried out brandyourself.com.

Once with my real info (against all reason), the second time I entered some random name and adress that couldn't possibly be real.

In both cases, I was told that I was highly exposed and that I should pay hundreds of $ per year to protect my privacy.

Also, I recognized several dark/shady design patterns.

I can only conclude that this is a very elaborate way to scare people out of money.

Re: Opt out of Clearview.ai

#107

Post by samoa42 »

TomMarius wrote: post #105
samoa42 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

they dont need to be efficient, but effective. likewise the enforcers of law must not act unlawful.

In my native language, it's the same word. I meant it as both.

i highly doubt it's the same word because it's not the same thing. consulting a thesaurus might help your understanding of the world.

Re: Opt out of Clearview.ai

#108

Post by jchook »

SebastianKra wrote: post #106
jchook wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a couple services that opt-out for you. Often times your information will re-appear on the same site months later, too, so they provide monitoring. https://brandyourself.com/protect-your-privacy-online https://onerep.com/ Full disclosure: I helped develop the BrandYourself platform.

I tried out brandyourself.com. Once with my real info (against all reason), the second time I entered some random name and adress that couldn't possibly be real. In both cases, I was told that I was highly exposed and that I should pay hundreds of $ per year to protect my privacy. Also, I recognized several dark/shady design patterns. I can only conclude that this is a very elaborate way to scare people out of money.

Great feedback thank you.

You may have tried an early beta version. The product now does a free private info scan up-front and displays all records found.

The premium version systematically opts-out of every record found, and continues monitoring the data broker sites for your information.

The system actually verifies the removals too, and will display the status of each record in the UI.

Re: Opt out of Clearview.ai

#109

Post by TomMarius »

samoa42 wrote: post #107
TomMarius wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my native language, it's the same word. I meant it as both.

i highly doubt it's the same word because it's not the same thing. consulting a thesaurus might help your understanding of the world.

Well, you can doubt it, but it is what it is: "efektivní" in Czech means both effective ("successful in producing a desired or intended result") and efficient ("working or operating quickly and effectively in an organized way") combined. Also it seems like that "efficient" in English includes "effective" as well, so there probably was no actual problem with my original comment.

Maybe it is you who should check the thesaurus and get a little more understanding of the world before posting dismissive comments.

Re: Opt out of Clearview.ai

#110

Post by kennywinker »

stiray wrote: post #101
kennywinker wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An image at the top of a news article on cnn.com is "public" in the sense that anyone can access it. But the company and the photographer still retain rights to that image - you can't take it and use it for whatever you like.

What is confusing here is that everyone imagines that clearview (and google, and fb, ...) are really storing those pictures. In reallity they just train their ai. There is no trace of that picture on their servers once you delete it. But ai is capable of recognizing you, in case of clearview from picture. In case of google and fb from your picture, browsing habits, contacts, gps coordinates, your friends, semantics o…

from a copyright perspective, is it possible a trained ai is derivative work?
Post reply on HN