4 ms·

This is really amazing. With so much feedback data, they could really fine-tune this. Imagine all the other practical applications...

artmageddon 15y ago
Part of me thinks it's indeed very cool, but part of me can't help but wonder when I'll walk into a store at the mall and hear "Welcome back, Artmageddon!" as some unseen Kinect-style camera looks up my face in some database shared by a whole network of advertisers.
- pavel_lishin 15y ago
  I suppose that's about the time that this will come into fashion: http://ahprojects.com/c/itp/thesis http://ahprojects.com/c/itp/thesis
- fossuser 15y ago
  Google was doing work on facial recognition software, but stopped because they feared its potential negative use for surveillance in dictatorships and other oppressive countries.
d0ne 15y ago
Imagine all the other political applications...
- artmageddon 15y ago
  As I alluded to in my other post, I could only imagine the TSA getting a hold of this and integrating it into the scanners. I mean, that would be a great use for catching fleeing criminals, but of course, it's all too easy to use against normal people too as they've shown with less-advanced technologies.
  - Yrlec 15y ago
    If they do I will tatoo a SQL-injection attack on my forehead.
  - Shenglong 15y ago
    If we have nothing to hide, I think it'll work in our favor. I used to fly a lot, and at one point, I was held at US customs for 3.5 hours. In the end, apparently the reason was because I had too many different kinds of stamps in my passport. I've also been searched numerous times (although I guess it's small, considering how much I fly). If facial recognition could help in identifying criminals (starting to sound like Lie to Me), I'd be for it.
    - afterburner 15y ago
      "If we have nothing to hide," Right to privacy. Even people with nothing to hide don't like being monitored. I don't see how it would help in your situation either. "Lots of stamps" is annoying to passport control regardless of any other factors (just because you're not a listed criminal doesn't mean you aren't up to something), and I don't feel like the detainment time is going away anytimes soon for these kinds of things. Even if the information is easily accessed, you have to wait for the decision-maker to spare some time to consider the info and give you the OK.
    - artmageddon 15y ago
      Sorry, but "nothing to hide" is not a valid reason to enact this sort of measurement. Even if a person has a clean record, someone will find a way to indict that person of a crime, and that usually happens when laws change over time. The notion of a "terrorist" and "enemy combatant" have changed over time since 9/11. A person such as yourself traveling a lot is already going to be suspect - imagine if one day you had a label like these attached to you simply because you fly a lot? In a similar vein, one example is Megan's law, named after a young girl who was murdered by a convicted sex offender. The law was enacted to create a registry of such offenders to let people know when a sex offender would move into new neighborhoods - a modern day Scarlet Letter. The idea was "fine" in theory when it came to child molesters, but since then the definition of "sex offender" changed, which now encompasses near-age-consenting kids who would send each other risque pictures or an 18 year old having sex with a 17 year old. There are just examples, but that's why "nothing to hide" doesn't work in our favor.

artmageddon 15y ago

Part of me thinks it's indeed very cool, but part of me can't help but wonder when I'll walk into a store at the mall and hear "Welcome back, Artmageddon!" as some unseen Kinect-style camera looks up my face in some database shared by a whole network of advertisers.

pavel_lishin 15y ago
I suppose that's about the time that this will come into fashion: http://ahprojects.com/c/itp/thesis http://ahprojects.com/c/itp/thesis
fossuser 15y ago
Google was doing work on facial recognition software, but stopped because they feared its potential negative use for surveillance in dictatorships and other oppressive countries.

d0ne 15y ago

Imagine all the other political applications...

artmageddon 15y ago
As I alluded to in my other post, I could only imagine the TSA getting a hold of this and integrating it into the scanners. I mean, that would be a great use for catching fleeing criminals, but of course, it's all too easy to use against normal people too as they've shown with less-advanced technologies.
- Yrlec 15y ago
  If they do I will tatoo a SQL-injection attack on my forehead.
- Shenglong 15y ago
  If we have nothing to hide, I think it'll work in our favor. I used to fly a lot, and at one point, I was held at US customs for 3.5 hours. In the end, apparently the reason was because I had too many different kinds of stamps in my passport. I've also been searched numerous times (although I guess it's small, considering how much I fly). If facial recognition could help in identifying criminals (starting to sound like Lie to Me), I'd be for it.
  - afterburner 15y ago
    "If we have nothing to hide," Right to privacy. Even people with nothing to hide don't like being monitored. I don't see how it would help in your situation either. "Lots of stamps" is annoying to passport control regardless of any other factors (just because you're not a listed criminal doesn't mean you aren't up to something), and I don't feel like the detainment time is going away anytimes soon for these kinds of things. Even if the information is easily accessed, you have to wait for the decision-maker to spare some time to consider the info and give you the OK.
  - artmageddon 15y ago
    Sorry, but "nothing to hide" is not a valid reason to enact this sort of measurement. Even if a person has a clean record, someone will find a way to indict that person of a crime, and that usually happens when laws change over time. The notion of a "terrorist" and "enemy combatant" have changed over time since 9/11. A person such as yourself traveling a lot is already going to be suspect - imagine if one day you had a label like these attached to you simply because you fly a lot? In a similar vein, one example is Megan's law, named after a young girl who was murdered by a convicted sex offender. The law was enacted to create a registry of such offenders to let people know when a sex offender would move into new neighborhoods - a modern day Scarlet Letter. The idea was "fine" in theory when it came to child molesters, but since then the definition of "sex offender" changed, which now encompasses near-age-consenting kids who would send each other risque pictures or an 18 year old having sex with a 17 year old. There are just examples, but that's why "nothing to hide" doesn't work in our favor.