3 ms·
Yep, that's in the article. They say they'll hash it and delete it (the photo). They don't claim they'll delete the hash. Having the hash is enough to check
by rdiddly 9y ago
Yep, that's in the article. They say they'll hash it and delete it (the photo). They don't claim they'll delete the hash. Having the hash is enough to check for uniqueness. Although it's sort of an over-strict definition of uniqueness. Example: I change one pixel → That produces a drastically different hash → That makes the almost-identical photo seem unique.
I'd be surprised if they weren't extracting other info from the photo or training ML models on it as others suggest here.
- jstanley 9y ago> I change one pixel → That produces a drastically different hash If they're hashing the raw bytes, sure. If they're hashing a representation of the face that encodes meaning (like the relative locations of facial features), then changing one pixel is unlikely to affect that.
- rdiddly 9y agoIndeed - lots of things could be concealed in that phrase "the photos are hashed!"