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

Project Aria 'Digital Twin' Dataset by Meta

projectaria.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 94 posts

Re: Project Aria 'Digital Twin' Dataset by Meta

#61

Post by guy98238710 »

coldpie wrote: post #9
dustypotato wrote: post #2

First thing I notice while browsing from EU is that there's only one option regarding cookies. Accept all! Even if I click "Learn more" there's no "accept necessary cookies" or "Reject cookies". First time I encounter something like this.

I have to admit, for technical folks like ourselves, I don't understand why you care what options the dialog presents. Just use a "Kill Sticky" plugin to nuke the stupid dialog so you can read the page, or even Accept them, and then instruct your browser to do whatever you like with the cookies the site creates (i.e. delete them). It's all in your hands, the popup dialog doesn't do anything you can't do yourself.

Or just use private window in the browser and then close it.

Re: Project Aria 'Digital Twin' Dataset by Meta

#62

Post by AndrewKemendo »

dleeftink wrote: post #53
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a great point and why, I advocate so vociferously thatall of these systems and future organizations that are going this direction should be cooperatively owned, based on mutual voluntary Democratic principles, rather than owned by a small subset of wealthy individuals in your standard business construct.

That would be a welcome future, indeed. And hopefully, not just upheld in some regions of the world, but everywhere where AR-backed AGI gets off the ground. And this governing structure would need to work for some decades at least. Which would be quite a feat. That still leaves my first question regarding observer effects and how people would respond to such a technology on an individual level. It would have the capa…

TBH I don't know, and I think there's a real chance that there's going to be actual changes in how people behave as a result - which, if it's integrated like many other social changes will become another layer in the fabric of society, displacing another layer. For better or worse I think it's just an exposure thing.

You are persistently surveilled in London and Shanghai and New York City - yet people act just as unhinged in ways they did before cameras were installed.

I'm not sure what other data acquisition/technology arc is possible though, and open to ideas.

Re: Project Aria 'Digital Twin' Dataset by Meta

#63

Post by ethbr0 »

explaininjs wrote: post #58
ethbr0 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you just take a problem that free market tech created and blame it on the government? ;) User agent sovereignty would be nice... except the most used browser and 1/2 of smartphones are controlled by Google, the largest ad tracking company on the planet. We're way past the 90s.

Google, the same company that provides a litany of fine grained cookie retention options in its User Agent’s options page? Except thanks to the government’s antagonistic policies (read: big-media’s lobbying) those are useless as you need to keep on clicking the damn pop ups every time you visit a page “anew”. Also never forget we already had a perfectly good solution in the form of Do Not Track headers that a benevol…

DNT was ignored from the time it was implemented.

The only way it ever would have been respected if it was required to cryptographically sign an acceptance of cookies, then the server was required to retain that attestation as proof of acceptance, subject to legal liability if they were found in possession of tracking data without a valid attestation.

Absent enforceability, even when the server actively and maliciously decided to ignore it, it was a toothless solution.

Re: Project Aria 'Digital Twin' Dataset by Meta

#64

Post by guy98238710 »

js8 wrote: post #25
explaininjs wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Learned helplessness. Teach the citizens that the only thing protecting them from the Big Scary Internet is their benevolent government. Meanwhile the politicians collect millions from the mass media companies that lobbied for the god-awful implementation of the law we all ended up with, and as everyone gets worn down into Accepting All always, they simultaneously forget that their User Agent holds all the cards (or…

Aside from what ethbr0 said, which I agree, that you're blaming the victim, I want to address the "learned helplessness" idea. I heard recently that's actually wrong. We are born helpless, and learning to take control. The helplessness is innate, and we learn to overcome it. In democracy, the innate helplessness of citizens is overcome by learning to participate in governance - activism, elections, public functions a…

You are definitely not born helpless. Babies keep screaming until they get what they want. They also tirelessly try to master mobility. Learned helplessness would mean they wouldn't even try crying or moving.

Re: Project Aria 'Digital Twin' Dataset by Meta

#65

Post by sangnoir »

guy98238710 wrote: post #60
SkyPuncher wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s probably the default language for the company. Technical, t he at allows them to have tracking cookies even if they don’t have them now

Language is all that matters when it comes to law. It's a blatant violation of GDPR.

What if the banner language suggests they might break GDPR, but in reality they are not doing those things? If my SaaS forces you to select a checkbox that states you're agreeing to allow me to set fire to your house (which is illegal) - would the sign up itself be breaking the law? IANAL, but I don't think it would be; I wont be breaking any laws until I commit arson.

Re: Project Aria 'Digital Twin' Dataset by Meta

#66

Post by KaiserPro »

jayd16 wrote: post #59
KaiserPro wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and it scares the shit out of me. Now. Facebook, the company that nobody trusts to do this sort of thing, is going to have to really work hard to demonstrate that they are to be trusted with this data. Apple, and to a lesser extent google, don't. That cool startup could get away with lots of things, so long as people like the product. Fortunately for us, AR glasses are limited by power consumption, this means th…

I think you underestimate the power consumption of streaming video compared to what a VR headset already does. I mean, they already Chromecast the feed if you so choose. I will say that Meta is fairly aware of their reputation. The TOS is clear that they do not upload or share any video capture and they seem committed to it. As it is now, all the scene understanding is done on device.

> I think you underestimate the power consumption of streaming video compared to what a VR headset already does

Rayban stories have a 167mah battery[1] the quest2 has a 3640mah battery[2] even then, it only last 2 hours, more or less, rather than an entire day.

[1]https://beckystern.com/2023/04/30/ray-bans-stories-teardown/

[2]https://www.meta.com/gb/legal/quest/product-information-shee...

Re: Project Aria 'Digital Twin' Dataset by Meta

#68

Post by rglullis »

ohgodplsno wrote: post #54
rglullis wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it the time of the day where I make Brave advocacy again? Brave has shown that we can have an user agent that is aligned with the user, even if the browser engine is made by Google.

The same Brave that is selling data for AI companies, which may or may not include personal data ? I'd say it's probably not a good day for Brave advocacy. Neither is any other day.

That's a very good example of "argument-by-Google". You know what conclusion you want to achieve, so you just go around looking for statements that are either taken out of context or misunderstood and that can be backed by a (shallow) google search.

For the record: go back to the article that you are (wrongly) alluding to [0] and see how much the author has retracted. Also, see the response from Brave's Chief of Search.

I "have" to keep advocating them because all the opposition that is presented is always based on false information, biased and prejudiced and clearly made by people who never used the browser or tried to understand the value proposition.

There are tons of things to criticize about Brave (their "partnerships" with Binance and Solana, their complete lack of interest in making BAT an actual currency for payments online, them completely losing the train of decentralized social media) but none of that ever comes up from the detractors, only this kind of bullshit like the one you bring up.

[0]: https://stackdiary.com/brave-selling-copyrighted-data-for-ai...

Re: Project Aria 'Digital Twin' Dataset by Meta

#69

Post by PaulHoule »

ethbr0 wrote: post #63
explaininjs wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google, the same company that provides a litany of fine grained cookie retention options in its User Agent’s options page? Except thanks to the government’s antagonistic policies (read: big-media’s lobbying) those are useless as you need to keep on clicking the damn pop ups every time you visit a page “anew”. Also never forget we already had a perfectly good solution in the form of Do Not Track headers that a benevol…

DNT was ignored from the time it was implemented. The only way it ever would have been respected if it was required to cryptographically sign an acceptance of cookies, then the server was required to retain that attestation as proof of acceptance, subject to legal liability if they were found in possession of tracking data without a valid attestation. Absent enforceability, even when the server actively and malicious…

The EU just should have said "if you don't respect DNT, go directly to jail and don't pass Go".

Re: Project Aria 'Digital Twin' Dataset by Meta

#70

Post by ethbr0 »

PaulHoule wrote: post #69
ethbr0 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DNT was ignored from the time it was implemented. The only way it ever would have been respected if it was required to cryptographically sign an acceptance of cookies, then the server was required to retain that attestation as proof of acceptance, subject to legal liability if they were found in possession of tracking data without a valid attestation. Absent enforceability, even when the server actively and malicious…

The EU just should have said "if you don't respect DNT, go directly to jail and don't pass Go".

How would not respecting DNT have been proven?

The rub here is that everyone wanted to ignore DNT, because it made them lots and lots of money.

Post reply on HN