4 ms·

Makes sense for publicly subsidized housing (which is what rent control is, in essence). A lot of people sublet their price controlled housing under the table.

Makes sense for publicly subsidized housing (which is what rent control is, in essence). A lot of people sublet their price controlled housing under the table. It's not like the facial recognition is resulting in any privacy loss for those that legally live there. The government already knows their permanent address.

lazyasciiart 8y ago
It doesn't know all their visitors names though.
pavel_lishin 8y ago
> It's not like the facial recognition is resulting in any privacy loss for those that legally live there. Except knowing exactly when they come and go. And depending on how the camera works, how they're dressed, what they're carrying, how they got there, who they said goodbye to on the sidewalk, etc., etc.
- chaostheory 8y ago
  Doesn’t a key fob already achieve this?
  - patch_collector 8y ago
    A key fob only tells you that someone authorized to a certain apartment entered. It doesn't tell you if it's the husband, wife, kid, mother in law who watches the kids on Thursdays, or friend who's taking care of the plants while you're on vacation, etc.
  - codedokode 8y ago
    Key fob doesn't record the faces of visitors and for how long they have stayed.
  - pavel_lishin 8y ago
    Yes, except for the part about how they're dressed, what they're carrying, how they got there, who they said goodbye to on the sidewalk, etc., etc.
- manfredo 8y ago
  > Except knowing exactly when they come and go. And depending on how the camera works, how they're dressed, what they're carrying, how they got there, who they said goodbye to on the sidewalk, etc., etc. Where in the article did it state that people's activities were being tracked? Let alone inferring what they are carrying, how they are dressed. The latter things are the stuff of science fiction. I talked with a guy working on posture recognition for the military. It's hard for cameras to figure out when a guy is holding a rifle, let alone make highly subjective judgements like "how did this person travel to the building?" and "is this person well-dressed?".
  - pavel_lishin 8y ago
    > Where in the article did it state that people's activities were being tracked? How about this part, that verbatim says that's what the landlord used the currently-installed cameras for? > In order to let neighbors who might not have seen the letter know what was potentially coming, five tenants convened in the lobby of one of the two buildings on a late October morning to spread the word. A few days later, those five tenants — like most of the residents at Atlantic, black women — received a notice from property management with pictures of the gathering taken from a security camera; they were told that the lobby was not “a place to solicit, electioneer, hang out or loiter.”
    - manfredo 8y ago
      None of that says that the facial recognition system was used to identify the tenants. From what it looks like this happened without any use of the facial recognition system. It looks like a security guard staring at cameras all day saw something that looked suspicious. Here's a thought: maybe if facial recognition was used, all of the people in the halls would be recognized as tenants and wouldn't have been bothered by management? Is that supposed to be a bad thing?
      - pavel_lishin 8y ago
        > maybe Why are we bending over so hard to take management's side? This is the management that acted counter to the law and counter to what the security camera was showing: > New York State law, in fact, grants tenants the right to meet peacefully in nearly any location in a building as long as they are not obstructing passageways. Management maintains that tenants were getting in the way even if the pictures did not clearly indicate that.
mgleason_3 8y ago
Hmm, there’s a lot to take exception with in this comment. “Makes sense for publicly subsidized housing (which is what rent control is, in essence). In the US, rent control is when the government controls the amounts charged for rented housing - it’s not “publicly subsidized”. “It’s not like the facial recognition is resulting in any privacy loss...” Ouy, where to even start. Of course it is. Every time you’re tracked is a loss of privacy.
- Karunamon 8y ago
  Except the people doing the tracking already know where you live, and in this case, own the land you live on, so I'm not at convinced that this amounts to any kind of loss.
  - sdenton4 8y ago
    And who comes over, how often they stay over, etc etc.... Lots and lots of stuff that is in no way the business of the landlord.
    - manfredo 8y ago
      Guests are tracked in plenty of apartment buildings. Sure, many might not bother with strictly policing guests but effectively every apartment building I lived in reserved the right to manage who comes in and out of the building.
- manfredo 8y ago
  > “It’s not like the facial recognition is resulting in any privacy loss...” Ouy, where to even start. Of course it is. Every time you’re tracked is a loss of privacy. This statement is true, every time you're tracked it's a loss of privacy. That said, you're making an unsubstantiated leap to go from facial recognition to tracking people. Where in the article does it say that people's entry and exit is logged? Where does it say that people's clothing, whether or not they are carrying objects, etc. are being tracked? Unless you can substantiate the claim that facial recognition is being used as a means of tracking people, your comment is not relevant. From what the article writes, it looks keyed entry systems is being replaced by facial recognition. Unless we have evidence to the contrary, it looks to me that facial recognition is being used exclusively as a key for authentication. This doesn't seem any more tyrannical to me than Apple pushing facial recognition as the default mode of unlocking its latest iPhones.

lazyasciiart 8y ago

It doesn't know all their visitors names though.

pavel_lishin 8y ago

> It's not like the facial recognition is resulting in any privacy loss for those that legally live there. Except knowing exactly when they come and go. And depending on how the camera works, how they're dressed, what they're carrying, how they got there, who they said goodbye to on the sidewalk, etc., etc.

chaostheory 8y ago
Doesn’t a key fob already achieve this?
- patch_collector 8y ago
  A key fob only tells you that someone authorized to a certain apartment entered. It doesn't tell you if it's the husband, wife, kid, mother in law who watches the kids on Thursdays, or friend who's taking care of the plants while you're on vacation, etc.
- codedokode 8y ago
  Key fob doesn't record the faces of visitors and for how long they have stayed.
- pavel_lishin 8y ago
  Yes, except for the part about how they're dressed, what they're carrying, how they got there, who they said goodbye to on the sidewalk, etc., etc.
manfredo 8y ago
> Except knowing exactly when they come and go. And depending on how the camera works, how they're dressed, what they're carrying, how they got there, who they said goodbye to on the sidewalk, etc., etc. Where in the article did it state that people's activities were being tracked? Let alone inferring what they are carrying, how they are dressed. The latter things are the stuff of science fiction. I talked with a guy working on posture recognition for the military. It's hard for cameras to figure out when a guy is holding a rifle, let alone make highly subjective judgements like "how did this person travel to the building?" and "is this person well-dressed?".
- pavel_lishin 8y ago
  > Where in the article did it state that people's activities were being tracked? How about this part, that verbatim says that's what the landlord used the currently-installed cameras for? > In order to let neighbors who might not have seen the letter know what was potentially coming, five tenants convened in the lobby of one of the two buildings on a late October morning to spread the word. A few days later, those five tenants — like most of the residents at Atlantic, black women — received a notice from property management with pictures of the gathering taken from a security camera; they were told that the lobby was not “a place to solicit, electioneer, hang out or loiter.”
  - manfredo 8y ago
    None of that says that the facial recognition system was used to identify the tenants. From what it looks like this happened without any use of the facial recognition system. It looks like a security guard staring at cameras all day saw something that looked suspicious. Here's a thought: maybe if facial recognition was used, all of the people in the halls would be recognized as tenants and wouldn't have been bothered by management? Is that supposed to be a bad thing?
    - pavel_lishin 8y ago
      > maybe Why are we bending over so hard to take management's side? This is the management that acted counter to the law and counter to what the security camera was showing: > New York State law, in fact, grants tenants the right to meet peacefully in nearly any location in a building as long as they are not obstructing passageways. Management maintains that tenants were getting in the way even if the pictures did not clearly indicate that.

mgleason_3 8y ago

Hmm, there’s a lot to take exception with in this comment. “Makes sense for publicly subsidized housing (which is what rent control is, in essence). In the US, rent control is when the government controls the amounts charged for rented housing - it’s not “publicly subsidized”. “It’s not like the facial recognition is resulting in any privacy loss...” Ouy, where to even start. Of course it is. Every time you’re tracked is a loss of privacy.

Karunamon 8y ago
Except the people doing the tracking already know where you live, and in this case, own the land you live on, so I'm not at convinced that this amounts to any kind of loss.
- sdenton4 8y ago
  And who comes over, how often they stay over, etc etc.... Lots and lots of stuff that is in no way the business of the landlord.
  - manfredo 8y ago
    Guests are tracked in plenty of apartment buildings. Sure, many might not bother with strictly policing guests but effectively every apartment building I lived in reserved the right to manage who comes in and out of the building.
manfredo 8y ago
> “It’s not like the facial recognition is resulting in any privacy loss...” Ouy, where to even start. Of course it is. Every time you’re tracked is a loss of privacy. This statement is true, every time you're tracked it's a loss of privacy. That said, you're making an unsubstantiated leap to go from facial recognition to tracking people. Where in the article does it say that people's entry and exit is logged? Where does it say that people's clothing, whether or not they are carrying objects, etc. are being tracked? Unless you can substantiate the claim that facial recognition is being used as a means of tracking people, your comment is not relevant. From what the article writes, it looks keyed entry systems is being replaced by facial recognition. Unless we have evidence to the contrary, it looks to me that facial recognition is being used exclusively as a key for authentication. This doesn't seem any more tyrannical to me than Apple pushing facial recognition as the default mode of unlocking its latest iPhones.