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

Sam Altman Wants Your Eyeball

privacyguides.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 165 posts

Re: Sam Altman Wants Your Eyeball

#151

Post by _Algernon_ »

nradov wrote: post #67
grumbel wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a blockchain, so you can keep permanent record of what a person is doing and when and where they got caught violating the rules. It won't stop the infractions from happening at first, but it will make it very easy to avoid them happening again. And if this gets widespread, people might think twice before risking their blockchain personhood certificate.

You're missing the point. How would they get caught violating the rules in the first place? You (and the HN admins) have no way of knowing whether I typed this comment in myself or an AI bot used my account to do it.

It will be trivial however to hold you liable for the content no matter its source, when it is tied to your irl identity instead of a pseudonym.

Re: Sam Altman Wants Your Eyeball

#152

Post by Jommi »

davedx wrote: post #110
josh2600 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can only assume that you don’t work in financial technology if you believe that KYC is a solved problem. Proving authenticity in an increasingly diasporic society is difficult. We should seek to either reduce or embrace entropy in the design of our systems. You either want systems which prove there are no Sybil attacks, or you manufacture halls of mirrors. This is a continuous battle, there’s no panacea here, even…

I’ve been working on KYC recently, curious to hear what the problems with it are in your opinion?

KYC and KYCd accounts are a high volume item on the grey / dark net

it appears to not really do much at all

Re: Sam Altman Wants Your Eyeball

#153

Post by Jommi »

andy_ppp wrote: post #55
ptero wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does a picture of your eye allow that fingerprints, face scans and other passport biometrics that have already been collected and linked do not? Honest question.

Yes the government and or private companies don’t have a copy of my fingerprints and I’d honestly rather they didn’t have pictures of my face on record either. Just because we’ve become accustomed to these breaches of our privacy doesn’t mean they are good.

umm.....

you should check on that. a lot of countries have pushed fingerprint databases for a while now.

Re: Sam Altman Wants Your Eyeball

#154

Post by Jommi »

qwertox wrote: post #78
tim333 wrote: post #70

I did the worldcoin scan thing a couple of years ago and it's all quite jolly. The article is a bit scaremongering. Re: >Simply put, the premise is this: scan your eyeball, get a biometric tag, verify yourself, buy our apps (and cryptocurrency). ... Minority Report style technology it's not really like that. They take a photo of your eye to check you are a new person and not someone who has an account already, then g…

> I recommend it to anyone who's curious / positive about new tech. What does this have to do with curiosity or new-tech positivity? Nothing. Give biometric data, get fluctuating ~$300. You did nothing else than sell something you have. I'm not judging.

how will we solve distinguishing real humans over bots online?

Re: Sam Altman Wants Your Eyeball

#155

Post by rsync »

caseyy wrote: post #69

Meanwhile, in reality, banks have solved proof of humanity, identity (KYC), and financial services for a long time. Any account in the world can be proven human by making a debit/credit card transaction from a card with a matching name. For the first time, you can now give your biometrics to OpenAI to do nothing more than you already can. This is just a pure cult of personality.

"Any account in the world can be proven human by making a debit/credit card transaction from a card with a matching name."

A reminder: neither the Visa nor Mastercard payment networks have any ability to match, or authenticate, cardholder name.

We pretend that they do and we're used to merchants and operators (and web forms) insisting on exact matches of cardholder name ... but it's all a fiction.

As long as you get the digits - and the supporting number/zip portions - correct, the transaction will run with "Mickey Mouse" ... or even "A B" (initials).

This is in contrast to AMEX whose network does have cardholder name verification.

Re: Sam Altman Wants Your Eyeball

#156

Post by hsuduebc2 »

__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #116
hsuduebc2 wrote: post #71

So this is the future-billionaires won't just sell us services, they'll trap us in entire ecosystems they control. I'd be more surprised if X doesn't eventually turn into one of them in recent future.

So where's the line? What as X not yet done to make you suggest that it is not already the kind of trap that you're describing?

They are not wanting to scan my retinas. For now. They are approaching it more from the bottom.

Re: Sam Altman Wants Your Eyeball

#157

Post by __MatrixMan__ »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #125
__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #108

Biometrics are not a viable solution to the sybil problem. The more biometric tech converges on the ability to get a cryptographic hash of one's body, the further it retreats from the kind of thing that a layperson will trust. You end up with a root of trust that It needs to be the kind of thing that lets Alice assert that this key goes with Bob just after she shook Bob's hand in meatspace. Something where, in order…

> PGP key signing parties were pretty much there, they just came too early (and not enough work was done to teach the masses about them). I won't dispute that PGP key signing parties coupled with government ID work very well for certain very specific usecases such as validating distro maintainers. However for more mainstream and widespread uses that never occurred, what about work on the tooling? I've yet to see a we…

I'd agree that they're both woefully lacking, but there's nothing fundamental preventing them from being successful, it just hasn't been done yet because our existing institutions are not yet degraded to the point where that juice is worth the squeeze.

Biometrics, on the other hand, are flawed for in a much more fundamental way.

Re: Sam Altman Wants Your Eyeball

#158

Post by GTP »

rsync wrote: post #155
caseyy wrote: post #69

Meanwhile, in reality, banks have solved proof of humanity, identity (KYC), and financial services for a long time. Any account in the world can be proven human by making a debit/credit card transaction from a card with a matching name. For the first time, you can now give your biometrics to OpenAI to do nothing more than you already can. This is just a pure cult of personality.

"Any account in the world can be proven human by making a debit/credit card transaction from a card with a matching name." A reminder: neither the Visa nor Mastercard payment networks have any ability to match, or authenticate, cardholder name. We pretend that they do and we're used to merchants and operators (and web forms) insisting on exact matches of cardholder name ... but it's all a fiction. As long as you get…

Interesting, I didn't know about this. Do you know why web forms require the name as well then? Is it just to give some additional sense of security to the user or try to scare scammers? Do you have some resources explaining the inner workings more in detail?

Re: Sam Altman Wants Your Eyeball

#159

Post by GTP »

Jommi wrote: post #152
davedx wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve been working on KYC recently, curious to hear what the problems with it are in your opinion?

KYC and KYCd accounts are a high volume item on the grey / dark net it appears to not really do much at all

I think thst the goal of KYC is to get information about the entity opening an account, to e.g. make sure it isn't used for money laundering. Whether this account gets stolen later is out of scope for KYC.

Re: Sam Altman Wants Your Eyeball

#160

Post by qwertox »

Jommi wrote: post #154
qwertox wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I recommend it to anyone who's curious / positive about new tech. What does this have to do with curiosity or new-tech positivity? Nothing. Give biometric data, get fluctuating ~$300. You did nothing else than sell something you have. I'm not judging.

how will we solve distinguishing real humans over bots online?

It it's our goal to solve this issue via authentication, then we might as well let the government authenticate us, instead of Sam Altman.
Post reply on HN