6 ms·
That maybe, possibly, there is a non 0 percent chance that maybe Amazon are using the data to help their facial recognition system (doesn’t the AWS Contract for
by Crosseye_Jack 8y ago
That maybe, possibly, there is a non 0 percent chance that maybe Amazon are using the data to help their facial recognition system (doesn’t the AWS Contract forbid Amazon using customers data this way with out explicit permission? It’s been a while since I’ve read the whole terms for AWS. Just to clear what I mean is Amazon automatically just processing everything ever uploaded to anything on AWS for their own benefit without the permission of the AWS Customer or the permission of the person who is “in the data”).
But then again their is an non 0 chance that Amazon are not recording everything we say via their echos so they can simulate our voices and ring up all the local shops and tell the owners to go fuck themselves so we have to use amazon for everything...
Either that or the implication is that because the police are using S3 to store bodycam footage, they MUST be using their facial recognition system too.
Edit: Jesus fucking Christ HN, it’s a bloody joke, I thought the part where Amazon are calling owners of local shops would of given that away. Guess I’ll have to be more explicit :-P I’m mocking the article because they state that their is privacy implications because they use AWS. Well their are privacy implications if you use any vendor or even if you self host.
- floatingatoll 8y agoBeing more explicit won’t help; being less sarcastic will. “That maybe, possibly, ...” is one example of where your otherwise interesting argument is weakened unnecessarily.