Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, "they" probably simply have our FaceID data that we're willingly collecting ourselves, supposedly for our own security.
Face ID is entirely on device and it is cryptographically difficult to extract the data even with a jailbroken device.
Never Give Them Your Face
151–160 of 468 posts
Re: Never Give Them Your Face
#152Im sure a lot of people know about tor on this site...but let me remind everyone. Tor is not for criminals. It's for you and me. And happens to be good enough that criminals use it too. This is the two sided nature of technology. Tor is a networks of peers across the globe volunteering their network bandwidth to support people under oppression by their government. The amount of privacy that can be gained from tor is…
Tor is not for criminals. It's for you and me. No. Tor is for the CIA. It won't work for them unless we use it as well. Criminals also find it useful. It's easy to verify this. Tor was originally written by Paul Syverson, Michael G. Reed, and David Goldschlag. While all three were working at the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory.
Re: Never Give Them Your Face
#153It seems that without legal obligation things will continue to go this route.
Re: Never Give Them Your Face
#154Re: Never Give Them Your Face
#155This 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'm maybe a bit of an outlier here in that I do think that this is a genuine grassroots good faith effort to "protect the children" that does not have sinister ulterior motives. I know plenty of parents who have expressed enthusiasm for the idea of age-restricting websites. "Why now" I think is pretty obvious -- the age limitations that exist currently are easily circumvented, but have given enough of a plausible den…
This would be fine if it was actually done perfectly - ie. Devices get a signed ticket from the government identity provider, device can provides a cryptographically verifiable ticket to the site that its a valid identity and their age is within the $x age range but not tied to the user’s actual identity / document, and the device doesn’t ask the government identity provider to mint a new ticket each time it needs to attest (maybe 500 tickets are minted at a time and you auto renew 500 more each month)
However the likelihood of this actually being done correctly is slim to none.
Re: Never Give Them Your Face
#156Can't we even write a short text like this without LLMs anymore, not even when it's really important, when it's about humans against the inhumane ?
I think it is great that people point out LLM generated articles here on HN. Sadly, it feels like I am slowly loosing my skill to identify LLM speak. Maybe I am getting worn out of all LLM content... So, please, list the indicators and telltale signs from the specific article or blog post (like others have done here already). At least I would appreciate it a lot.
Re: Never Give Them Your Face
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's because of Jonathan Haidt's book
By all means don't provide any additional information on what you mean, what book, what it's about, what it has to do with this, or anything else.
Re: Never Give Them Your Face
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this kind of comment where you share the sentiment that you will ultimately admit defeat emboldens the factions that are hoping for people to be like you. I also think these kinds of comments may also bring doubt to people considering resisting these kinds of concessions. In other words I think the people pushing these kinds of "identification" methods would love you for spreading their silent message of this…
I find it strange for these people to accept such a defeatist attitude because I'm the opposite. I mean I will just not use the service and I'll seek out alternatives that are open source or create my own. I'll do anything possible until I'm the last one standing if that's what it comes down too. I tried to sign up to Telnyx and they had the same crap from an unreliable data-breach and being-litigated persona identif…
We are currently ruled by the third generation of post-WW2 five eyes nepo kids, with all problems this entails. The feel-good narrative about US was spun by Hollywood, but the old money of British aristocracy never went away. All the "self-made billionaires" who receive a Lordship title from the King just so the commoners work even more because they think they have a fair shot.
If someone like Ghislaine Maxwell applies for a visa in their colony USA, she receives a vanity social security number "Leet Babe" (1337 84883).
Re: Never Give Them Your Face
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
If there is a substitute and I am not time constrained 100% i'm switching. But I've been in a situation already where a platform I'm using required me to face-up. I can't even remember which to be honest but I had no alternative or recourse to refuse. In addition, in the UK company directors are legaly required to face-up to Companies House and confirm their identity, so they have my face too. Ah, and so is every sin…
Move from London, you have all of Europe to... nevermind.
Re: Never Give Them Your Face
#160Can't we even write a short text like this without LLMs anymore, not even when it's really important, when it's about humans against the inhumane ?
I think it is great that people point out LLM generated articles here on HN. Sadly, it feels like I am slowly loosing my skill to identify LLM speak. Maybe I am getting worn out of all LLM content... So, please, list the indicators and telltale signs from the specific article or blog post (like others have done here already). At least I would appreciate it a lot.
> You can change a password. You cannot change your face.
> This is not a popularity contest, and refusal is not a vote you are trying to win
These were a couple sentences that were immediate flags to me. There've been countless articles written on this (I can dig them up if you want), but IMO there are pretty clear semantic rhythms you start to notice.
It is not foo, it is bar. You can zip, you cannot zap.