3 ms·
Reminds 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 e
by 11thEarlOfMar 10y ago
Reminds 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)
- zipwitch 10y agoOr we'll all wear goggles, steampunk or otherwise.