3 ms·

I'm not sure I understand your comment. How would you _not_ retain data/metadata information about recognition and still provide any utility? Wouldn't the anal

• ajmurmann 8y ago
  It depends on the use case. Example: I walk through the airport and an application scans my face and either calls security because I was recognized as a known terrorist or let's me pass because I'm awesome. The parent's point matters for what happens after. In the not a terrorist case the problematic system would retain that (it thinks) you walked through the airport. In a even more problematic system you now get ads because you were there.
  • s3r3nity 8y ago
    Wait - wouldn't you _want_ the system to retain that information in your first case if you were mis-identified as a terrorist? I.e. you were recognized, but you were confirmed not a terrorist - so you won't be flagged later. Or maybe I misunderstood. Otherwise, you run the risk of not updating the model to fix the false positive, and you might be flagged multiple times in the future.
    • ajmurmann 8y ago
      I wouldn't want the system to keep information about me having been anywhere unless I'm a criminal. How would that information be helpful in updating the model. It already worked correctly.
• emiliobumachar 8y ago
  Interacting with a system can take years. That's okay for privacy if the person is informed and has control, e.g. can request full deletion anytime.