3 ms·

Microsoft is actually lobbying pretty hard in Washington to ban private use of facial recognition. The cynic will say that it’s because they realize that Google

by anbop 8y ago

Microsoft is actually lobbying pretty hard in Washington to ban private use of facial recognition. The cynic will say that it’s because they realize that Google and Facebook will outdo them here, but I couldn’t care less about their motives.

StefanKarpinski 8y ago
I think it’s not so much that Google and Facebook will outdo them in this area, but about why they are so much more vested in and therefore better at technologies that are opposed to privacy. Google and Facebook as businesses are all about collecting information about their users and monetizing it, which is inherently anti-privacy. Apple and Microsoft actually sell something (hardware and software, respectively), so the smart move for them is to position themselves as firmly pro-privacy—because they can whereas Google and Facebook cannot (without finding new business models). We will increasingly see Apple and Microsoft using privacy features as a competitive advantage against Google and Facebook. We’ve already been seeing this with Apple quite a lot recently, now Microsoft is following suit.
- vturner 8y ago
  They have a long road to walk on privacy with Windows. Isn't 10 a privacy minefield?
Shivetya 8y ago
So one day we will wake up in a world where government skunk works developed the technology under our noses deploying it without proper oversight. all under lock and key of courts and laws similar to those that established FISA courts. No thank you. The tech world needs to acknowledge that the real danger is facial recognition will be developed outside the public eye, without the input and oversight of the technical community that keep the Orwellian nature many suspect in check. Which means, lead from within. Push companies that want to work on this technology to engage with law makers to insure that privacy rights are respected. to insure the technology does not false incriminate and when unsure it is enshrined in law that it cannot be used to do so. Lead within to establish limits of the use of the data, how it is stored, and how it is guaranteed to deleted within a set period. Limit how law enforcement or other government agencies gain access or use the data. There are no whistle blowers when we are not involved tl;dr we either lead in making sure it works and respects our rights or watch as its done in a back room deal with intelligence agencies and the hawks in Congress.

by anbop 8y ago

StefanKarpinski 8y ago

I think it’s not so much that Google and Facebook will outdo them in this area, but about why they are so much more vested in and therefore better at technologies that are opposed to privacy. Google and Facebook as businesses are all about collecting information about their users and monetizing it, which is inherently anti-privacy. Apple and Microsoft actually sell something (hardware and software, respectively), so the smart move for them is to position themselves as firmly pro-privacy—because they can whereas Google and Facebook cannot (without finding new business models). We will increasingly see Apple and Microsoft using privacy features as a competitive advantage against Google and Facebook. We’ve already been seeing this with Apple quite a lot recently, now Microsoft is following suit.

vturner 8y ago
They have a long road to walk on privacy with Windows. Isn't 10 a privacy minefield?

Shivetya 8y ago

So one day we will wake up in a world where government skunk works developed the technology under our noses deploying it without proper oversight. all under lock and key of courts and laws similar to those that established FISA courts. No thank you. The tech world needs to acknowledge that the real danger is facial recognition will be developed outside the public eye, without the input and oversight of the technical community that keep the Orwellian nature many suspect in check. Which means, lead from within. Push companies that want to work on this technology to engage with law makers to insure that privacy rights are respected. to insure the technology does not false incriminate and when unsure it is enshrined in law that it cannot be used to do so. Lead within to establish limits of the use of the data, how it is stored, and how it is guaranteed to deleted within a set period. Limit how law enforcement or other government agencies gain access or use the data. There are no whistle blowers when we are not involved tl;dr we either lead in making sure it works and respects our rights or watch as its done in a back room deal with intelligence agencies and the hawks in Congress.