7 ms·
Facial recognition will soon end anonymity
- bredren 10y agoOne way to look at this is that people won't feel embarrassed by things they do in public. See Bob Gale's view on privacy here: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/10/21/how-back-to-the-future-predicted-trump.html http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/10/21/how-back-to... Facial obfuscation can and will be a thing. Choosing coverings that provide some anonymity but don't scare people will be interesting. Movement gait can also be analyzed but harder to collect and analyze so it will come later. Edit: You might enjoy The Private Eye, a graphic novel that has some facial recognition / obfuscation leanings: http://panelsyndicate.com/comics/tpeye http://panelsyndicate.com/comics/tpeye
- jsemrau 10y ago>feel embarrassed by things they do in public. That is a slippery slope that usually starts with "if you have nothing to hide".
- amag 10y agoExactly, even if you have nothing to hide you can be embarrassed by things out of your control (maybe you caught a bug and throw up on a stranger). Also there are things you may not be embarrassed about but unsure how it may affect your future career/love/etc (I'm thinking public demonstrations etc).
- Analemma_ 10y ago> One way to look at this is that people won't feel embarrassed by things they do in public. I've heard this theory before, that once there are no more secrets, we won't be embarrassed by our social missteps anymore, or able to use them to attack others because the attacking party will be equally guilty. I think it's a load of BS. Humans are nasty, shitty little hypocrites: if they have dirt on someone else they'll shout it from the rooftops without caring one whit if they're just as bad. Similarly, the people consuming the gossip won't care one bit if they have equally embarrassing stuff in public, before using that data to pass unalterable moral judgment. Have you ever seen an internet comment section filled with Screaming Moral Outrage at some faux pas, even though most of those commenters are probably worse people? That's what the future is going to be like. Picture a shame mob stamping on a human face, forever.
- jfoutz 10y agoMaybe. I dunno. I do know the "next" big problem is access asymmetry. You can see where i've been all day, but i don't have the same level of access to these specialized systems, so i'm kinda screwed. My favorite local example is red light cameras racking up 100k in fines against police cars without their lights on. They were all forgiven. On the flip side, that stuff will only work for a little while. President Bush came just shy of admitting use of cocaine. Obama flat out admitted it, and it was no big deal. Clinton more or less ended the pot stigma. Drug use (in the past) has been more or less eliminated as a shaming tactic. I'm not saying some people won't scream moral outrage, it's just that no one else will really care. So maybe i get caught picking my nose. Me and 300 million other people. shrug.
- amag 10y agoSure it's easy to think that you basically anonymous when 300 million others are doing it, but when a potential date looks you up and sees a lot of vids of you picking your nose, maybe you're not so attractive anymore.
- elliotec 10y agoWhy would that matter if there are lots of vids of the potential date picking their nose too, along with 300 million other people?
- amag 10y agoBecause however looks you up online, does not look at the other 300 million people doing the same thing. (S)he looks at you.
- TeMPOraL 10y agoThat they don't consider 300 million other people (themselves quite likely included) doing the same thing before passing a moral judgement only show how immature they are. You're better off without that person.
- alexhoduski 10y ago"Facial obfuscation can and will be a thing" Princess Bride called it.
- TrevorJ 10y agoEh, everyone knows with certainty that everyone else defecates. Almost everyone would be embarrassed to do it in public.
- personjerry 10y agoI have this funny vision in my head where people start practicing strange contortions of their faces in photos designed to counter current facial recognition algorithms. Then the software writers adjust their algorithms to compensate. Then new silly faces are invented. Rinse and repeat. Although I suppose in the end the algorithms win because they can easily just try each past variation and choose the best one.
- tdy721 10y agoThis assumes you are only photographed willingly or knowingly. I think that case is an exception, and not a rule. I'm not afraid of Facebook, Mastercard probably has a more intimate database on more people. Think CCTV.
- PebblesHD 10y agoOn a less serious note, maybe mask culture will re-emerge, in response to constant identification. Personally I would love to break out my decorative gas mask, I'd love to see a computer ID me wearing that!
- ap22213 10y agoExcept that in some places (like some US states), wearing a mask in public is a felony.
- toomuchtodo 10y agoFacial temporary tattoo that throws off machine learning?
- mtgx 10y agoThen the tattoos would have to be generated in a truly random way as well. Otherwise, an AI like AlphaGo would quickly "learn" which are the tattoos on people's faces, especially if there's a limited selection of designs of say a few hundred or thousand.
- StavrosK 10y ago...or, you know... Tattoo detection software. Since you, you know, just permanently put some uniquely identifying paint on your face.
- strictnein 10y ago> "Facial temporary tattoo"
- TeMPOraL 10y agoE-ink tattoo.
- ortusdux 10y ago
- ridiculous_fish 10y agoRelevant article on what it's like to wear anti-surveillance camouflage makeup, aka "the dazzle": http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/07/makeup/374929/ http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/07/makeup...
- 11thEarlOfMar 10y agoReminds me of the somewhat heated debates in the halls of Sun Microsystems back in the 90s when Caller ID was just being introduced. It was seen largely as an erosion of privacy since you'd not want the person you are calling to be able to screen your call so easily. Of course, over time, it became standard to the point that I am no longer surprised when services I am calling have my records up without asking who I am. Those arguments seem quaint today, scarcely 20 years later. So it makes me think that 20 years from now, facial recognition in public places will be similarly integrated and we'll just stop noticing.
- Bromskloss 10y ago> So it makes me think that 20 years from now, facial recognition in public places will be similarly integrated and we'll just stop noticing. That still leaves open the question of whether it's good or not.
- algorias 10y agoThe difference with caller ID is, of course, that you need to deliberately initiate an action (calling someone you don't trust) for it to "erode" your privacy. Facial recognition can be done to you on the street by anybody, without you being able to opt out or even know it's happening. It's not even remotely the same thing.
- anfedorov 10y agoI think sunglasses will become the standard opt-out, and perhaps the legal one at some point.
- AceJohnny2 10y agoClearly it will lead to new fashion trends, as society adapts to the widespread use of "computer vision dazzle" makeup. http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/07/makeup/374929/ http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/07/makeup... /s (I think)
- BlytheSchuma 10y agoInB4 Southern redneck preppers starts wearing niqabs.
- FroshKiller 10y agoAs a Southerner, I can tell you they would wear balaclavas.
- DenisM 10y agoI am nearsighted, but for a long time I did not wear glasses. I could recognize a lot of my friends by gait and posture from a huge(for me) distance, long before I could see their faces. My cat knows who's coming before the door opens - she can tell the steps. I don't think privacy will last, given how data collection improve. I suggest a compromise: all data can be collected, but it has to be locked up until a court order is issued to unlock it. A real court, not one of those courts. A fourth branch of the government will be in charge of safekeeping, to avoid the pressure from executive. Kind of like BBC in the UK.
- davydka 10y agoBut once data collection tools become easily abstracted and implemented anyone can create their own surveillance network to do as they please.
- tdy721 10y agoSo the algorithms for this kind of recognition already exist in your head (and your cat's). How do you propose we lock that kind of information down? Do you really believe we can lock that kind of information down? How would a Fourth branch of government fall into the checks and balances of the current system? Also, your system assumes some kind of World Government? I would really love to be wrong here...
- jsemrau 10y agoI am actually quite worried about this development (http://buff.ly/1ZhvE9c http://buff.ly/1ZhvE9c). With facial recognition, the ultimate people database, and location-patterns we are well on the way end-to-end surveillance. *not too serious : Maybe conservative Muslims are way ahead of their time?
- CapitalistCartr 10y agoMaybe you should be serious. But, like cryptography, it only works if many people (majority?) use it.
- miguelrochefort 10y agoAnyone that doesn't recognize the imminent death of privacy is mentally challenged. Not a single rational person can honestly believe that privacy is either sustainable or desirable. I can't wait for privacy to die for good. I'm a bit concerned about the transition to total transparency, but there's no way around it. How some people attribute so much value to privacy is truly baffling.
- macawfish 10y agoCan't tell if you're being facetious?
- miguelrochefort 10y agoI can't since I'm not.
- ionised 10y agototal transparency is at odds with human psychology There are things we like to keep to ourselves. It will always be that way.
- FroshKiller 10y agoVint Cerf said a few years ago that our modern notion of privacy might be a historical anomaly: http://techcrunch.com/2013/11/20/googles-cerf-says-privacy-may-be-an-anomaly-historically-hes-right/ http://techcrunch.com/2013/11/20/googles-cerf-says-privacy-m...
- tdy721 10y agoIMHO: Facial recognition, along with other software and analysis techniques, have already ended anonymity. We're just waiting for the world to catch up. Anonymity may still exist in this world, but those are outliers, no longer the rule.
- LeoPanthera 10y agoCV Dazzle becomes more and more relevant. https://cvdazzle.com https://cvdazzle.com Edit: Changed link to one that doesn't hate HN.
- Hilyin 10y agoClassy site, redirects to a pic of balls when referer is HN.
- LeoPanthera 10y agoUgh. Fixed it.
- beachstartup 10y agocut and paste, or right click and open incognito.
- pdkl95 10y agoAnother practical example of why the referer header needs to be removed entirely.
- AceJohnny2 10y agoJWZ redirects HN referer. You'll want to copy-paste that link manually :) Edit: link was https://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/03/cv-dazzle/ https://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/03/cv-dazzle/
- TimJRobinson 10y agoIn the article it mentions Microsoft patented advertising based on facial recognition here: https://www.google.com/patents/US20080004951?dq=facial+recognition+advertising&hl=en&sa=X&ei=WcJoVamnOsmTsQTDtYOQDQ&ved=0CFwQ6AEwCQ https://www.google.com/patents/US20080004951?dq=facial+recog... I don't understand how they could patent this when it's basically what's in Minority report which was released in 2002.
- Analemma_ 10y agoPatent invalidation is executed lazily. If somebody ever challenges Microsoft on this patent, then the prior art from Minority Report could be brought up, but until then it stays on the books.
- chroma 10y agoFYI, the targeted advertising in Minority Report used retinal scanning, not face recognition. Automated face recognition would have totally changed the movie, as fooling such tech requires more than swapping eyeballs.
- the8472 10y agoThose apps rely on data harvested from social networks. Or outright exported through their APIs. A solution is to not make that kind of data publicly available. Either by not using a social network account at all or by using one that respects your privacy settings, e.g. by not tagging your face on other people's image uploads.
- Aelinsaar 10y agoI can't be the only person here who's never uploaded a photo of themselves to social media, or frankly anywhere else. People always seem to be so shocked when an antisocial teenager doxxes them, but there is a reason that happened. For years I just shrugged when people called me paranoid about sharing pictures, and now, not so much. The problem is, I can only speak for photos I took, and that I uploaded. That's what I can reasonably control, and beyond that, I'm not going to smack a camera out of a friend's hand on a vacation. If that happens, it happens. The other issue is that with the UK leading the way in CCTV usage, it's possible (although not necessarily inevitable) that our own social media usage will not be the major factor in the near future. At that point, I suppose it's either adapt as a society, or attack the infrastructure.
- elliotec 10y agoIf all my social media pics are me with a shaved head, face, and glasses, will I be safe if I grow long hair and facial hair and start wearing contacts?
- the8472 10y agoI guess that the uncovered parts of your face would still be unique enough for the algorithms to work. The mouth-nose-browridge structure for example.
- gozur88 10y agoProbably not. From what I understand facial recognition software relies heavily on things you can't change, like the distance between your pupils and the ratio of your facial features to each other. You can certainly obscure your face, but if you were forced to remove sunglasses and such, say, at a security checkpoint you'd probably get ID'd.
- sandworm101 10y ago>> Soon anybody with a high-resolution camera and the right software will be able to determine your identity. No. Software cannot do that. You need software PLUS access to some data set. >> Tracking people in the real world might start to look more like it does online, causing changes to our behavior. Ok. Stopped reading there. There is no comparison to online. I've got my VPN on atm and my user-agent spoofer just notified me that it was changing to some other random fib. I'll believe such statements when someone explains to me how Tor can be implemented in meatspace. Online and realworld are not the same. (When we all have google glass nailed to our faces, will adblockers be a thing? I hate billboards.)
- TeMPOraL 10y ago> No. Software cannot do that. You need software PLUS access to some data set. Exactly. Sadly, as an individual, I don't have access to such dataset. > (When we all have google glass nailed to our faces, will adblockers be a thing? I hate billboards.) Real-life adblock would IMO be the killer feature for AR :). Though much harder to implement than its web counterpart.
- fold 10y agoBrand Killer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDPn7MGxPjs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDPn7MGxPjs
- sandworm101 10y agoIt's cool in VR goggles, but logo-detection has been a thing in the film/tv industry for a long time. For instance, up until a couple years ago US shows had to edit out corporate logos when broadcast into the UK due to advertising rules.
- Aelinsaar 10y agoThat data set is going to have to be networked to tons of devices all over the place, it's going to be hacked, intercepted, and generally compromised, just like everything else.
- Kristine1975 10y agoTime to buy a Niqāb. Or better: Lobby for laws that make it illegal to store the data necessary for facial recognition unless absolutely required e.g. for security.
- hackney 10y agoGreat. A lesson in individuality and it's importance to self, and the whole.