4 ms·
>well that's not good! The whole concept is a nightmare for our civil freedoms even if the tech was perfect -- precisely because of realistically being able to
by drasticmeasures 8y ago
>well that's not good!
The whole concept is a nightmare for our civil freedoms even if the tech was perfect -- precisely because of realistically being able to scale -- and must be protested until the whole idea is let go of.
>infinite super-recognizers vs. infinitely available facial recognition is what I'm wondering about here.
You keep editing your comments to remove contentious remarks. I can only reply to the one I've read.
- drusepth 8y agoWhy doesn't such a system scale? What about it makes it undesirable even if the tech was perfect?
- tribby 8y agoapologies for the edits; in attempting better clarity I am achieving the opposite. > The whole concept isn't good even if the tech was perfect -- precisely because of scale -- and must be protested until the whole idea is let go of. I don't disagree with this. my questions are not political in nature, I was simply curious if the tech had approached or surpassed the accuracy of super-recognizers.