Teachable Machine: Teach a machine using your camera, live in the browser

Post by jamesmishra » Wed, Oct 04, 2017, 12:58 PM UTC

greggman wrote: post #11

be aware, at least in Chrome, once you give teachablemachine.withgoogle.com permission to use you camera, unless you revoke that permission is has permission to use your camera without further permission including from iframes. In other words every ad from and analytics from Google could start injecting camera access. I wish chrome would give the option to only give permission "this time" and I wish it didn't allow c…

Post by moduspol » Wed, Oct 04, 2017, 1:35 PM UTC

peepopeep wrote: post #16

Am I the only paranoid one who thinks this is just Google's way of capturing millions of faces in their database? Or did Apple beat them to it?

Post by melling » Wed, Oct 04, 2017, 1:58 PM UTC

colmvp wrote: post #43

xyrnoble wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook beat them to it... that's the whole reason for tagged images imo. Then they can relate identities with each other and with exif gps data to track their movements over time.

Yeah it's a little hilarious how people just keep giving Facebook more and more data to experiment with.

Post by tokenizerrr » Wed, Oct 04, 2017, 2:10 PM UTC

jamesmishra wrote: post #41

peepopeep wrote: post #16

Am I the only paranoid one who thinks this is just Google's way of capturing millions of faces in their database? Or did Apple beat them to it?

The faces are unlabeled, and I'm not sure what that data would be good for. If Google really wanted face data, they could look at: - Gmail / Google Plus / Google Apps profile pictures - Google Street View - Google Hangouts - implementing a primitive Face ID or Snapchat-style camera on Google Android - the large mass of face pictures that they index with Google Images

Post by urspx » Wed, Oct 04, 2017, 2:36 PM UTC

prophesi wrote: post #49

moduspol wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Claims like these make privacy-focused efforts less valuable, and I wish people wouldn't make them. What value is there in taking care to store biometric data only locally, in a separate chip inaccessible even to the OS, if people will simply claim it's equivalent to keeping a remote database of millions of faces?

People will be much less likely to make those claims if you clearly state where the data is being stored. This article + their project page doesn't mention anything about privacy. I don't know anything about Squeezenet, but it makes a lot of calls to storage.googleapis.com. I wouldn't be surprised if it's making some PUT requests. https://github.com/googlecreativelab/teachable-machine/blob/...