5 ms·
In that case, I don't see the role facial recognition played then. The thief walked in the Apple store with an ID stating he was Ousmane Bah. Apple contacted au
by bko 8y ago
In that case, I don't see the role facial recognition played then. The thief walked in the Apple store with an ID stating he was Ousmane Bah. Apple contacted authorities that someone with an ID of Ousmane Bah robbed a series of Apple stores. Police made arrest and discovered that the man who robbed the stores used a false ID.
- mirimir 8y agoTFA talks about thefts from four stores. And I doubt that he provided ID at all four.
- pso 8y agoThe reason you don't see the role that facial recognition played is because you still have not read the article. I'm genuinely curious, as this is happening more and more on hacker news. Why do you come on a thread about specific article to discuss it? When I read your 1st comment, it was clear you hadn't read the article. Then, someone makes a comment to correct some of your mistakes, and you still reply without reading the article. It just puzzles me.
- majewsky 8y agoNot the person you're asking, but FWIW, I regularly read the comments before deciding whether to read the article. In many cases, the top comment is some expert in the field in question who explains why the article is a waste of time.
- pso 8y agoI can understand that. But, do you debate specific points in the article based on the views you formed by NOT reading it? I get that some comments can be interesting without reading the article. But someone discussing and finding fault with an article they haven't read (properly?) ... that's the bit that just baffles me. Reading the article seems like a reasonable minimal entry requirement, IF someone wants to discuss the content itself.
- free652 8y agoI have read the article and I have no clue how the facial recognition is responsible. Instead of giving snarky comments you could at least acknowledge that the article is utter garbage. The only link between the thief and the person who was arrested is the NAME. Edit: and here is better article: https://googleness.com/unitedstates/student-sues-apple-for-1-billion-blames-face-detection-technology-for-fake-arrest/ https://googleness.com/unitedstates/student-sues-apple-for-1... Apple identified (using facial recognition) the same person who stole multiple items across different states and since the thief used a fake name - they associated all crimes with that name. So in the end the only link was NAME due to the stolen id.
- pso 8y agoApple took the stolen ID used by the criminal. Then Apple incorrectly linked the details of that ID (with no photo), with images of the thief. Following further thefts associated with that ID, the innocent man was accused of all the thefts based on the ID and an INCORRECT photo match to the stolen ID which Apple had created in its facial recognition system, and used as the basis to inform the police of the suspect. I tried my best not to be snarky. I thought the article was a normal average article. Edit: I'm not sure the article says facial recognition was responsible, I think that's what the courts will decide. But to me, its clear that facial recognition was involved, based on the article's title and content
- inflagranti 8y agoI think the point of disagreement regarding the "link" is not that there is none, but that it seemed to be nothing peculiar about facial recognition. If Apple sent a security camera picture of the robber together with information from the stolen ID to police, and police the same would have happened. So the core issue here is that the validity of the ID was never questioned, not the use of facial recognition. That might just have amplified / accelerated the identification of the wrong person.
- pso 8y agoThe multiple thefts are linked together via facial recognition in the Apple Stores and tied back to the stolen ID. If, it was just a single theft and the stolen ID was used on that occasion, then I would agree facial recognition would not be relevant.
- tzakrajs 8y agoThis sounds like some grade A projection. His interpretation is sensible and follows from the article. Stop gas lighting.