3 ms·

I suspect this is an engineered situation/story/post. I suspect it is designed to drum up conflict and destabilize a society. Who really benefits from this is

by blunte 5y ago

I suspect this is an engineered situation/story/post. I suspect it is designed to drum up conflict and destabilize a society. Who really benefits from this is up for debate, and I won't speculate. That out of the way, fingerprints and faces are essentially public. Unless you wear a mask and gloves in public, you are visible. And even so, you'll shed some DNA material here and there. If you're so concerned about that, you should wear a clean room suit. Since I think this is a social conflict bait situation, I won't bite. But we here at HN are hopefully of a higher level rational mind that we recognize that interacting in the current world means allowing quite a lot of observation of who goes where. I'm not talking about Facebook, but I am talking about facial recognition and people folling you with evidence bags (if some organization believes there is value in doing so).

chime 5y ago
Thank you for pointing this out. I wish more people thought like this instead of instantly reacting. It turns out the Internet in the real-world is opposite of Monsters Inc. The crux of the movie was that children's laughter had more power than their frightful screams. Publishers have discovered that rage-inducing click-bait is more profitable than in-depth stories that help us resolve issues. It doesn't matter if I wholeheartedly agree with an article that causes me to have negative emotions. Yes, the climate is getting worse. Yes, a few power plants and containers ships are responsible for a significant fraction of the pollutants. Yes, humans are not working to fix it fast enough. Yes, politician X supports horrible thing Y. Nevertheless, I don't recall giving a push notification the right to trigger my emotions.
kome 5y ago
facial recognition technologies and fingerprinting are not normal and please, don't try to normalize them. biometric surveillance technologies (such as facial recognition) in public places should be limited, but also other form of biometric data — such as of faces but also of gait, fingerprints, DNA, voice, keystrokes and other biometric or behavioural signals. When monitored, we change behaviour and self-censor. When categorised, we are judged and discriminated against. It's a vicious circle of power imbalances. This is NOT normal.
- blunte 5y ago
  It is normal because it can be captured easily and silently. This is not like some device which you walk by which scratches you and steals your DNA. This is you being who you are, open for all to see, and being seen by people and cameras. Here on HN we already know that when shopping in the US (and probably other countries) we are being monitored and facially tracked. The only power imbalance is the power we give to people to use this information. You can theoretically vote against people who would use this information. Stop shopping in those places, stop walking in areas with known cameras, or wear an AI defeating mask. But this is the world we live in. You already leave far more information in your internet use than you probably do by walking around town unless you are hyper vigilant.
  - kome 5y ago
    surveillance capitalism is a political decision, not a random development. let's not normalize mass data collection. because it opens door to totalitarianism.
  - dwaltrip 5y ago
    Something being easy to do doesn’t mean it is “normal”.
Dylan16807 5y ago
> I'm not talking about Facebook, but I am talking about facial recognition and people folling you with evidence bags (if some organization believes there is value in doing so). I wouldn't put those in the same category. Automatic facial recognition is a huge and invasive change to the level of tracking that's possible. Being followed 1:1 is not. Going near public areas should not be consent for everyone in the world to be tracked as if a squad of paparazzi is following them.

by blunte 5y ago

chime 5y ago

Thank you for pointing this out. I wish more people thought like this instead of instantly reacting. It turns out the Internet in the real-world is opposite of Monsters Inc. The crux of the movie was that children's laughter had more power than their frightful screams. Publishers have discovered that rage-inducing click-bait is more profitable than in-depth stories that help us resolve issues. It doesn't matter if I wholeheartedly agree with an article that causes me to have negative emotions. Yes, the climate is getting worse. Yes, a few power plants and containers ships are responsible for a significant fraction of the pollutants. Yes, humans are not working to fix it fast enough. Yes, politician X supports horrible thing Y. Nevertheless, I don't recall giving a push notification the right to trigger my emotions.

kome 5y ago

facial recognition technologies and fingerprinting are not normal and please, don't try to normalize them. biometric surveillance technologies (such as facial recognition) in public places should be limited, but also other form of biometric data — such as of faces but also of gait, fingerprints, DNA, voice, keystrokes and other biometric or behavioural signals. When monitored, we change behaviour and self-censor. When categorised, we are judged and discriminated against. It's a vicious circle of power imbalances. This is NOT normal.

blunte 5y ago
It is normal because it can be captured easily and silently. This is not like some device which you walk by which scratches you and steals your DNA. This is you being who you are, open for all to see, and being seen by people and cameras. Here on HN we already know that when shopping in the US (and probably other countries) we are being monitored and facially tracked. The only power imbalance is the power we give to people to use this information. You can theoretically vote against people who would use this information. Stop shopping in those places, stop walking in areas with known cameras, or wear an AI defeating mask. But this is the world we live in. You already leave far more information in your internet use than you probably do by walking around town unless you are hyper vigilant.
- kome 5y ago
  surveillance capitalism is a political decision, not a random development. let's not normalize mass data collection. because it opens door to totalitarianism.
- dwaltrip 5y ago
  Something being easy to do doesn’t mean it is “normal”.

Dylan16807 5y ago

> I'm not talking about Facebook, but I am talking about facial recognition and people folling you with evidence bags (if some organization believes there is value in doing so). I wouldn't put those in the same category. Automatic facial recognition is a huge and invasive change to the level of tracking that's possible. Being followed 1:1 is not. Going near public areas should not be consent for everyone in the world to be tracked as if a squad of paparazzi is following them.