3 ms·

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,

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.

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.