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

Facial recognition tech gets woman booted from Rockettes show due to employer

nbcnewyork.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 683 posts

Re: Facial recognition tech gets woman booted from Rockettes show due to employer

#611

Post by nullish_signal »

kergonath wrote: post #554
FredPret wrote: post #457

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I moved from outside into the West and I’m inclined to agree with you. It feels different here. There’s much more trust, even when Westerners mock their institutions, there is a higher baseline and more implied trust.

The thing is that it’s easy to voice an opinion. And you can be confident that the institutions will endure even if you weaken them, which provides a safety net for populists who have incentives to use corrosive language and attitudes for electoral reasons without fearing a complete breakdown of the state or society. We’ve seen this countless times. However upset people are about Medicare and public welfare, they sti…

I'd like to see a new Constitution with a Bill of Responsibilities, one of them being to know how to live without certain modern necessities for proscribed periods of time.

Jury Duty, but a couple Weeks a Year of Camping in the Wilderness with your Family.

Re: Facial recognition tech gets woman booted from Rockettes show due to employer

#612

Post by [deleted] »

xoa wrote: post #94
sneak wrote: post #59

Covid is still around. Always wear your mask in public. Don't show ID unless it's a cop demanding it (when it's legally required). Private parties can't demand ID. Don't give ID for routine transactions. Practice saying no to routine demands for your papers. It doesn't improve unless a lot of us start ending the transactions.

> Private parties can't demand ID. What? Can you cite any laws legally barring people for requiring ID for a business transaction or to access private property? I've honestly never heard of such a thing. Obviously if a private person says "I want to see your ID for access or before completing this transaction" you may legally refuse, and they cannot arrest you or anything. But they can then in turn refuse to complete…

[deleted]

Re: Facial recognition tech gets woman booted from Rockettes show due to employer

#613

Post by humanistbot »

beepbooptheory wrote: post #499
humanistbot wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I know this is just a rhetorical point of yours, but maybe we can start to accept that America and the west as whole is not actually significantly different from China with stuff like this. This is such black-and-white thinking. Most EU countries are kilometers ahead of the US, and the US is miles ahead of Russia. Putin would love for Russia to race to the bottom and get to China's level, but Russia is way behind C…

My thoughts about surveillance and such in the world at large may well be wrong or naive, but I'm pretty sure I am not the one being black and white here. I think, in order to tell me off like you want to do here, you should say I am too equivocating of things, that I am not black and white enough! You could be like "you see some particulars and generalize too quickly, countries do live and die by principles, not 'ef…

You're derailing this from a substantive discussion about surveillance to one about the meaning of a colloquial metaphor. I'm not going to debate the meaning of "black and white." If you want to make a substantive comment about whether there are national differences in the level of surveillance, I'll reply. But I won't take the semantics bait.

Re: Facial recognition tech gets woman booted from Rockettes show due to employer

#614

Post by beepbooptheory »

lambic2 wrote: post #595
beepbooptheory wrote: post #583

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, how does the U.S.A fare in this kind of thinking? There isn't such a vast history to pull from there, how can you justify an analogous nationalistic identity/moral character for it without such a big story? Also, what is the argument for being able to collapse culture and state together, such that the state can/will manifest this trans-historic character of a group of people? Or rather, if we grant that relation…

| There isn't such a vast history to pull from there, how can you justify an analogous nationalistic identity/moral character for it without such a big story? Well, exactly - that explains a lot of the current political/cultural fragmentation of the U.S. population. Although you can definitely argue that though it is a "short" story in comparison, the founding of the U.S. as a revolution to gain independence from the…

Isn't this such a sad and ultimately negative worldview though? Instead of an Earth of humans, you have an array of static types. Instead of a history where there is change, where people can overcome things and vie for better world, you seem to say there is only an illusion of change, and really its all just scaling an infrastructure set in stone a long time ago. You look at people far away, and first and foremost comprehend them as a kind different than yourself. Just an entire country of millions, thought at once as a particular!

It makes me sad just knowing people hold these beliefs. It's like internalizing the world as a bad fantasy novel.

Re: Facial recognition tech gets woman booted from Rockettes show due to employer

#615

Post by arunc »

Face recognition was used to identify a lawyer who works for a company involved in actively suing MSG group. She was booted due to her being a lawyer at that company. Her identify was flagged. She was visually identified and then her id was checked.

IMHO, it’s a bullshit story because the issue is whether a lawyer working for a company suing MSG should be booted from other MSG venues.

Companies/venues had blacklists (deny lists) before face recognition became ubiquitous.

Re: Facial recognition tech gets woman booted from Rockettes show due to employer

#616

Post by bmitc »

eternalban wrote: post #604
bmitc wrote: post #597

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calling not being able to be a consumer of the company their firm is suing punishment seems to be a bit of a stretch. And it's only during the duration of the lawsuit. And again, why are the lawyers so surprised when they knew ahead of time? If they had asked, it could have even been pre-approved, and thus a non-story. If anything, I'd almost consider this to have been an intentional act by the law firm because they…

> Calling not being able to be a consumer of the company their firm is suing punishment seems to be a bit of a stretch. And it's only during the duration of the lawsuit. What if the company was Google? What if it was a healthcare provider with a patented/proprietary treatment? As a matter of fact, didn't we recently have articles in hn where people were commenting they are reluctant to charge back to Google because t…

For whatever reason, I’m just not seeing it. Everyone keeps bringing up Google. Why? They are in a completely different industry and largely irrelevant from what I can see. And like I said, those companies will absolutely shut stuff down during IP litigations. When I was at a company being sued and vice versa for IP infringement, the entire company was told not to use the other company’s software products, and if you absolutely had to, then you needed to apply for specific one-off permission. That happens all the time, and it’s practically the same thing.

The law firm is a personal injury firm, which in my experience and understanding can be (not always) very shady. Why is it required that MSG let lawyers suing them come into their venues while being sued? One could argue that the policy should be targeted towards certain venues and lawyers, but that is a lot of overhead that is solved by a simple, blanket policy.

I honestly don’t see the outrage here. Sure, there are a lot of what ifs that make this seem worse, but those hypotheticals are not what seemed to happen here.

And it’s the law firm showcasing punitive action. They’re now suing MSG for the denial for something that basically seems like a stretch of a loophole. I almost would guarantee the law firm did this on purpose, and that’s why I can’t stand lawyers. They don’t play by the rules everyone else has to, and they get to make the rules.

Re: Facial recognition tech gets woman booted from Rockettes show due to employer

#617

Post by namaria »

Karunamon wrote: post #395
namaria wrote: post #305

The problem here is not facial recognition or AI. The problem is automatic and opaque enforcement of arbitrary rules with no recourse. It's a scary world where you can be approached by private security and forced to comply without recourse because "the system" flagged you. This dehumanizes us. We're creating a world where people are being treated like cattle, merely handled by systems beyond our capacity to fight bac…

This is a bit too Luddite for my taste. Humans were involved at quite literally every step of this process. The human decided that this other group of humans is not allowed on their property. The only thing interesting the computer did is tell security that someone not allowed to be there was there.

Jumping to accusing me of wanting to revert technological progress by violence because I am worried about alienation caused by automatic rule enforcement is a bit much don't you think?

Re: Facial recognition tech gets woman booted from Rockettes show due to employer

#618

Post by panda88888 »

esperent wrote: post #438
panda88888 wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also something similar. A motorcycle (scooter) company in Taiwan only allows their own brand motorcycle into the company parking lot. So if you commute with a non-company scooter, good luck finding parking.

Counterpoint to that: I've been shopping with my girlfriend for a new scooter for her over the past few days. We went to the Yamaha dealer which has limited space for parking in front so all the staff bikes are mixed up with the show bikes (it's Vietnam so 10 staff = 10 staff bikes). We got to see the Honda equivalent parked right next to the Yamaha we were considering (Honda Scoopy vs Yamaha Mio Classico) and decide…

I should clarify that this is at the R&D + manufacturing facility, not customer facing shop. :)

Re: Facial recognition tech gets woman booted from Rockettes show due to employer

#619

Post by bmitc »

azernik wrote: post #530
bmitc wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is the policy bad? They are preventing employees from a law firm in active litigation with them from attending their venues while the litigation takes place. It's not some draconian thing.

Retaliating against a law firm's employees for doing their jobs by representing their clients is absolutely draconian. Especially for a large company doing this with unrelated properties.

Is it retaliation, or is it protection?

Re: Facial recognition tech gets woman booted from Rockettes show due to employer

#620

Post by monksy »

spritefs wrote: post #610
monksy wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is happening already with PatronScan which is being pushed agressively into schools, and bars: https://scribe.nixnet.services/id-at-the-door-meet-the-secur... There have been references to the ban lists going from one venue to another.

> This is happening already with PatronScan which is being pushed agressively into schools, and bars The linked article mentions bars, where does the school bit come from?

Schools are using id scans to ban people and prevent sex offenders from entry (yes.. It's good.. But some of those people have kids enrolled). This has been rolled out heavily already. (I believe this is called rapidscan)
Post reply on HN