5 ms·

True. The apple's false accusation resulted wrong arrest. Apple is responsible for it.

by ezoe 8y ago

zimpenfish 8y ago
> The apple's false accusation resulted wrong arrest. But it was only false in hindsight - someone came in, used his ID, and their face was associated with it - that's perfectly sensible and normal behaviour from their systems. > The arrest warrant included a photo that didn’t resemble Bah That part is definitely on the police, not Apple.
- logfromblammo 8y ago
  It is not perfectly sensible and normal behavior to demand ID from customers and then set up a secret tracking profile, based on facial recognition and linked to that ID, that is apparently linked across all the stores for your company. The buried lede is that everyone who has ever walked into any Apple store is being tracked by Apple in all Apple stores, and possibly also anywhere else in public. The false arrest allowed that info to leak to the public.
  - zimpenfish 8y ago
    > everyone who has ever walked into any Apple store is being tracked by Apple in all Apple stores That hasn't been confirmed yet, has it? I might have missed some extra info but the original story only mentioned they were tracking that ID because of the thefts. > based on facial recognition Has that been confirmed yet? I may also have missed that but again the original articles only had that as a claim from the man suing them, nothing concrete (and I believe Apple also denied it?)
    - logfromblammo 8y ago
      Apple can keep all the surveillance footage from all their stores. Apple can run FaceID on any image they have. In this instance, Apple must have run FaceID from images from the recordings that show the thefts. It is not necessary that they did this on-site or in real time. A statement by Apple claims that they do not run facial recognition software in their stores. But the wording was very specific; they did not deny uploading the in-store video to an offsite server to detect faces and identify them. They certainly did it for one person. They could do it for more, limited only by their computing power. And they are a computing hardware company.
      - zimpenfish 8y ago
        > In this instance, Apple must have run FaceID from images from the recordings that show the thefts. But again - we have zero proof of that. > They certainly did it for one person. They might well have done but nothing in the reporting of this story has any kind of evidence that this happened!
- ezoe 8y ago
  If you read the article. The real thief use his stolen ID which doesn't have face photo. The police claimed Apple use face recognition to identify the thief. So what Apple face-recognize it for? Or Police is lying.
lotsofpulp 8y ago
Apple is not tasked with arresting people, the police are the ones with the power and the police should be the ones liable for not doing proper due diligence (if they didn’t).

True. The apple's false accusation resulted wrong arrest. Apple is responsible for it.

by ezoe 8y ago

True. The apple's false accusation resulted wrong arrest. Apple is responsible for it.

> The apple's false accusation resulted wrong arrest. But it was only false in hindsight - someone came in, used his ID, and their face was associated with it - that's perfectly sensible and normal behaviour from their systems. > The arrest warrant included a photo that didn’t resemble Bah That part is definitely on the police, not Apple.

logfromblammo 8y ago
It is not perfectly sensible and normal behavior to demand ID from customers and then set up a secret tracking profile, based on facial recognition and linked to that ID, that is apparently linked across all the stores for your company. The buried lede is that everyone who has ever walked into any Apple store is being tracked by Apple in all Apple stores, and possibly also anywhere else in public. The false arrest allowed that info to leak to the public.
- zimpenfish 8y ago
  > everyone who has ever walked into any Apple store is being tracked by Apple in all Apple stores That hasn't been confirmed yet, has it? I might have missed some extra info but the original story only mentioned they were tracking that ID because of the thefts. > based on facial recognition Has that been confirmed yet? I may also have missed that but again the original articles only had that as a claim from the man suing them, nothing concrete (and I believe Apple also denied it?)
  - logfromblammo 8y ago
    Apple can keep all the surveillance footage from all their stores. Apple can run FaceID on any image they have. In this instance, Apple must have run FaceID from images from the recordings that show the thefts. It is not necessary that they did this on-site or in real time. A statement by Apple claims that they do not run facial recognition software in their stores. But the wording was very specific; they did not deny uploading the in-store video to an offsite server to detect faces and identify them. They certainly did it for one person. They could do it for more, limited only by their computing power. And they are a computing hardware company.
    - zimpenfish 8y ago
      > In this instance, Apple must have run FaceID from images from the recordings that show the thefts. But again - we have zero proof of that. > They certainly did it for one person. They might well have done but nothing in the reporting of this story has any kind of evidence that this happened!
ezoe 8y ago
If you read the article. The real thief use his stolen ID which doesn't have face photo. The police claimed Apple use face recognition to identify the thief. So what Apple face-recognize it for? Or Police is lying.

lotsofpulp 8y ago

Apple is not tasked with arresting people, the police are the ones with the power and the police should be the ones liable for not doing proper due diligence (if they didn’t).