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

Clearview AI is struggling to address complaints as its legal issues mount

buzzfeednews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–59 of 59 posts

Re: Clearview AI is struggling to address complaints as its legal issues mount

#51

Post by craftinator »

civilian wrote: post #18
reaperducer wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you think of a single technology that society has successfully rejected? Eugenics? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics

I mean, I'm pretty interesting in doing embryo selection on my future children. Eugenics on my own family, if you will. I agree that it's wrong to apply eugenics to others without their consent!

> I agree that it's wrong to apply eugenics to others without their consent!

Others, like people who are not you? I think your future children fall into that category. How will you get their consent?

Re: Clearview AI is struggling to address complaints as its legal issues mount

#52

Post by chii »

henryfjordan wrote: post #29
reaperducer wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you think of a single technology that society has successfully rejected? Eugenics? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics

Is Eugenics a technology or just the targeted application thereof? We openly practice breeding programs with plants and animals, we just don't like doing it to humans.

It's still there, but only under the guise of various social "norms", like always marry up or across.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assortative_mating and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homogamy_(sociology)

Re: Clearview AI is struggling to address complaints as its legal issues mount

#53

Post by catalogia »

bathtub365 wrote: post #49
catalogia wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Legally? Maybe not. But ethically and morally? Hell yes! We need a Robin Hood of privacy. Extralegal justice for the common people, for whom official channels are contemptuous.

What if you were mistakenly or maliciously targeted?

If you wish to avoid vigilante justice, you need to provide something better. The government is meant to handle matters like this to protect anybody who might be wrongly accused, but the government is abdicating their duty to do so. When the government abdicates their duty to the common people, the common people have a moral and ethical right to take matters into their own hands.

Re: Clearview AI is struggling to address complaints as its legal issues mount

#54

Post by microdrum »

sschueller wrote: post #2

How many clearview AIs exist that we don't know about? This is something I could create as a hobby project in my free time so what would someone with real resources be able to do?

Not to insult you but... could you? If what the company claims is true, and the NYT says that it is, you can build a fast search over 3 billion distractors? Yourself? Without relying on some random outside service, which a national security or police actor would not allow you to use in order to maintain SEC/SCIF compliance?

Re: Clearview AI is struggling to address complaints as its legal issues mount

#55

Post by Jamwinner »

mattrp wrote: post #48
_bxg1 wrote: post #9

> One of Clearview AI's investors defended the company, “We do not have to be hidden to be free.” Yikes.

Scott Adams has a Clearview investor on his podcast (ep. 798). Tone deaf really doesn’t adequately describe this investors level of concern about critics. When I was a teenager I once asked a musician what he thought of a certain store for musical instruments, his response is that he supposed someone has to sell peavy gear but he certainly wouldn’t want to see the special room in hell reserved for such a person. That…

Your friend was not very smart. Peavy gear is phenominal made in USA stuff, just not pimped by any popular rock bands. Tone deaf indeed.

Re: Clearview AI is struggling to address complaints as its legal issues mount

#56

Post by chii »

> To process a request, however, Clearview is requesting more personal information: “Please submit name, a headshot and a photo of a government-issued ID to facilitate the processing of your request.“

ROFL - they will use your request to add and extract value out of your information. It also clearly, and uniquely identifies individuals who can be considered "trouble makers".

Re: Clearview AI is struggling to address complaints as its legal issues mount

#57

Post by chii »

kerkeslager wrote: post #6

Good. I hope they struggle their way into bankruptcy. Companies like this shouldn't exist.

but unfortunately that data is already out there. If clearview could collect/scrape, so can anyone else. If Clearview could hire people to create AI's to identify people/match people, so could anyone else.

And this kind of database, i imagine, would already exists for the NSA or whatever intelligence agency for China/russia.

Re: Clearview AI is struggling to address complaints as its legal issues mount

#58

Post by chii »

comex wrote: post #8
joering2 wrote: post #5

> Clearview AI, the facial recognition company that claims to have amassed a database of more than 3 billion photos scraped from Facebook, YouTube, and millions of other websites [...] Let me guess - neither FB nor YouTube will go after them legally, because its probably waste of money anyways, since their clients did not experience immediate/direct harm?

If you keep reading, Twitter, another of Clearview’s scrape targets, did send them a cease-and-desist letter, asking them to “cease scraping and delete all data collected from Twitter”. Not that that guarantees Twitter will actually follows through and file a lawsuit if Clearview doesn’t comply.

a cease and desist is worth about as much as the paper it's printed on.

Re: Clearview AI is struggling to address complaints as its legal issues mount

#59

Post by mattrp »

Jamwinner wrote: post #55
mattrp wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Scott Adams has a Clearview investor on his podcast (ep. 798). Tone deaf really doesn’t adequately describe this investors level of concern about critics. When I was a teenager I once asked a musician what he thought of a certain store for musical instruments, his response is that he supposed someone has to sell peavy gear but he certainly wouldn’t want to see the special room in hell reserved for such a person. That…

Your friend was not very smart. Peavy gear is phenominal made in USA stuff, just not pimped by any popular rock bands. Tone deaf indeed.

You’re right I shouldn’t pick on a company like that but the conversation would have been meaningless if I had just said he’d been referring to a USA musical company without musician endorsements.
Post reply on HN