I got my file from Clearview AI

Post by lonelappde » Wed, Mar 25, 2020, 1:41 PM UTC

justaguyhere wrote: post #152

stiray wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Replacing pictures wont help (they already have them), GDPR request for deletion might work better but on the other side you also give them your confirmed identity. With companies as shady as this one, they might just set a flag in their database and add your documents data to them. As you have figured out on your own, public should listen to some people warning about this for more than decade instead of making fun f…

GDPR request for deletion might work better Dumb question - how can anyone be sure that companies actually delete the data? What about the backups, what happens to the data there? How do these govt enforcers verify this? Also, what about Clearview's employees abusing the data? what stops them from snooping on someone they are interested in?

Post by api » Wed, Mar 25, 2020, 2:02 PM UTC

40four wrote: post #9

I used to think some of my peers were being overly cautious by purposely trying to obfuscate their online profile. Back in the day, I couldn’t care less about putting in effort to try to protect my online privacy. I have slowly but surely come to see the light. Now it’s at the forefront of my mind at all times. Learning about this company (and I imagine other unknown entities are doing the same) has encouraged me to…

Post by riedel » Wed, Mar 25, 2020, 2:08 PM UTC

101404 wrote: post #150

mstolpm wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Investigations are on the way. Heise online writes (translated): "Hamburg data protection officer takes action against Clearview. Following a complaint, data protection officer Johannes Caspar is investigating the US company Clearview AI, which specialises in automated facial recognition. [...]" Source (in german): https://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Gesichtserkennung-Ha...

And it only took them 2 years to act on it. Wow.

Post by teddyh » Wed, Mar 25, 2020, 2:13 PM UTC

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #72

40four wrote: post #9

I used to think some of my peers were being overly cautious by purposely trying to obfuscate their online profile. Back in the day, I couldn’t care less about putting in effort to try to protect my online privacy. I have slowly but surely come to see the light. Now it’s at the forefront of my mind at all times. Learning about this company (and I imagine other unknown entities are doing the same) has encouraged me to…

I grew up with the "don't use your real name on the internet" in the back of my head, this was before kids got internet safety classes. 5-10 years later, Facebook came up with their real name policy and started asking people to snitch on their friends if they used a fake name. Google, and mainly Youtube, came with a real name policy as well, on the one hand for Google+, but on the other to try and fight comment abuse…

Post by LunaSea » Wed, Mar 25, 2020, 2:25 PM UTC

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #76

LockAndLol wrote: post #73

I'm not entirely sure what's so shocking about public data, shared willingly by the person to the public, being used to identify the person. If the data weren't/hadn't been shared willingly, I'd definitely see that as a problem. Same thing as if the data were to have been gleaned from non-public sources e.g the person's private belongings or secured digital realms like private forums, password encrypted backups, priv…

It's about trust and permission. If I give e.g. a local news website permission to use my portrait, I do NOT implicitly give permission to Clearview, Google, Facebook, etc to use it for their own purposes. I mean it's implicitly known that anything you post on the internet is public property, but legally that is not the case. Portrait law (at least in my country). You can't just take someone's portrait and use it for…