5 ms·
> One of Clearview AI's investors defended the company, “We do not have to be hidden to be free.” Yikes.
by _bxg1 7y ago
> One of Clearview AI's investors defended the company, “We do not have to be hidden to be free.”
Yikes.
- donclark 7y agoWould it be a good idea to capture all the investors names, address, photos, etc. and put them online for all to see?
- uoaei 7y agoThat seems illegal, which illustrates the point well enough already.
- catalogia 7y agoLegally? Maybe not. But ethically and morally? Hell yes! We need a Robin Hood of privacy. Extralegal justice for the common people, for whom official channels are contemptuous.
- bathtub365 7y agoWhat if you were mistakenly or maliciously targeted?
- catalogia 7y agoIf you wish to avoid vigilante justice, you need to provide something better. The government is meant to handle matters like this to protect anybody who might be wrongly accused, but the government is abdicating their duty to do so. When the government abdicates their duty to the common people, the common people have a moral and ethical right to take matters into their own hands.
- mattrp 7y agoScott Adams has a Clearview investor on his podcast (ep. 798). Tone deaf really doesn’t adequately describe this investors level of concern about critics. When I was a teenager I once asked a musician what he thought of a certain store for musical instruments, his response is that he supposed someone has to sell peavy gear but he certainly wouldn’t want to see the special room in hell reserved for such a person. That’s kind of how I feel about involuntary biometrics.
- Jamwinner 7y agoYour friend was not very smart. Peavy gear is phenominal made in USA stuff, just not pimped by any popular rock bands. Tone deaf indeed.
- mattrp 7y agoYou’re right I shouldn’t pick on a company like that but the conversation would have been meaningless if I had just said he’d been referring to a USA musical company without musician endorsements.