A crashed advertisement reveals logs of a facial recognition system

Post by genmon » Thu, May 11, 2017, 11:50 AM UTC

mixedbit wrote: post #237

_kb wrote: post #15

You'd be surprised / scared / outraged if you knew how common this is. Any time you've been in a public place for the past few years, you've likely been watched, analysed and optimised for. Advertising in the physical world is just as scummy as it's online equivalent. Check out the video here http://sightcorp.com/ for an ultra creepy overview. You can even try their live demo: https://face-api.sightcorp.com/demo_basi…

I was very unhappy to discover that shoes now often have RFIDs built into soles. This + anti-theft RFIDs readers that are already deployed by the entry of most stores can allow to easily assign unique ids to shoppers.

Post by ffriend » Thu, May 11, 2017, 11:51 AM UTC

arximboldi wrote: post #292

ffriend wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't like having my emotions manipulated What about collecting statistics to make better decisions? Let's say, you go to your favorite jeans store, but find out that current collection is disgusting. Does it sound ok for you if some sort of system would analyze your attitude to the product to improve it in later versions?

Nope. You can do controlled user-testing sessions with that system with specific people that have consented and are potentially compensated in some way. You will most probably also get more useful information out of that. But being recorded "en masse" in a shop for that purpose I would think is invasive. I would totally avoid that shop if I knew that system was in place. Also, I am not convinced that statistics lead…

Post by forgottenpass » Thu, May 11, 2017, 11:55 AM UTC

ffriend wrote: post #208

As someone working on a similar project (specifically, emotion recognition) I'm highly interested to hear how such a product should look like to be not considered unethical. So far from the comments I see that: - it should be made clear that you are being analyzed e.g. by big yellow sticker near the camera - no raw data should be stored - it should be used to collect statistics, not identify individuals (?) Is it suf…

Post by [deleted] » Thu, May 11, 2017, 11:58 AM UTC

_-_T_-_ wrote: post #251

(Supposedly) Lee Gambles comment on Reddit - "Hi. I am the original taker of the photo. There is a screen that normally shows peppes pizza advertisements in front of peppes pizza in Oslo S. The advertisements had crashed revealing what was running underneath the ads. As I approached the screen to take a picture, the screen began scrolling with my generic information - That I am young male (sorry my profile picture wa…

Post by consz » Thu, May 11, 2017, 12:00 PM UTC

ffriend wrote: post #254

bigbugbag wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a store has a warning at the door that this happens inside, it's good because now I can avoid getting inside the store and silently hate and boycott the brand. If a store has a warning label on the device engaging in this, it's bad because it's too late for not entering the store. I'm gonna complain right now at the store manager, maybe call the cops or sue. I'll be vocal about actively hating the store, the brand…

Thanks for the detailed comment. Couple clarifying questions if you don't mind: - do you know that loyalty cards are often used in stores to collect customer data (a kind of offline cookie)? do you consider it a bad/dangerous/unethical or does it sound ok for you? - if instead of a camera there was a person looking at customers and recording his observation, would you feel bad about it?