8 ms·
“…erasure of undesired objects” This is not going to turn out well. Do we really want to edit reality in this way? This is like the printer that automatically
by siculars 4y ago
“…erasure of undesired objects”
This is not going to turn out well. Do we really want to edit reality in this way? This is like the printer that automatically watermarks your prints - for your security and protection! Coming to a child protection law near you real soon.
Want to take a picture of that Ferrari? That’ll be an extra $5.
No, you really can’t take photos in airports.
Thats a police officer(s). (Literally) Nothing to see here, move along.
Vampires/Ghosts. A class of people who’s faces are in a master redact database. You know, like some real CIA Jason Borne stuff.
Military installation? What military installation? Replace with slave labor camp or, a more economically favorable rendition - “sweatshop.”
- undersuit 4y ago> Do we really want to edit reality in this way? Do you have a solution to stop this hypothetical future you've envisioned that isn't also just as bad? "Hey you can't code that feature!"
- edgyquant 4y agoNot to mention that there is nothing wrong with allowing people to see different things lmao. What even is this conversation ?
- stavros 4y agoIf you don't want a camera that can't take photos of undesired objects, don't buy one.
- WaitWaitWha 4y agoWhat when there are laws preventing the manufacturing of such desired cameras? I am all for great ideas and tools and implementations. I am just very leery of humans. ;)
- stavros 4y agoRegimes don't generally bother to mandate the use of a specific technology, they just mandate the act illegal.
- autoexec 4y agoThe example of yellow tracking dots in printers has already been mentioned. Our governments had zero problems mandating the use of that specific technology. Same with kill switches in cars so that police can remotely disable your vehicle.
- siculars 4y agoWait till some new laws show up. Wait till it is economically incentivized to buy redactocams.
- stavros 4y agoYou can already make cameras do this in software, why aren't we buying redactocams now?
- olyjohn 4y agoIf it's already in software, then your phone is just one irreversible update away from getting that feature for free! People love free stuff!
- undersuit 4y agoMaybe we could have laws that protect us from these kind of cameras instead of enforcing them. I'm against saying "No you can't do this" but I'm all for "You must show us how you do this" or "This thing must be optional".
- selfhoster11 4y agoIf you don't want a TV that doesn't track your viewing habits, force automatic software updates, show ads, and do other objectionable things while claiming it's "smart", don't buy one.
- WaitWaitWha 4y ago"artisanal mining" for cobalt.
- JofArnold 4y agoIt's already happening with AR; there was a demo on Twitter showing how using Apple's new AR SDK you can just plaster over things you don't want to see. This for me puts AR right up there with AI as a huge risk to society, for precisely the reasons you point out. "Pay $9.99 a month not to see homeless people" "Pay $2.99 a month to see enhanced street signs so only you can find your way quickly" etc
- edgyquant 4y agoWhat exactly is this problem with this?
- bee_rider 4y agoI mean, maybe some people are homeless by choice, but some are due to misfortune and poverty. Using technology to turn a blind eye to poverty in our communities seems bad. Also you may trip over a homeless person.
- 6510 4y agoIt would defeat the entire point of having them: As an example why to obey. It is not like you cant scale a tax with housing requirements. Could give them jobs too. It would take a bit of getting used to but if the only thing a person wants is drugs their potential productivity could be 10x that of ours combined.
- bee_rider 4y agoYou don't have to have a point, to have a point.
- edgyquant 4y agoAppeals to emotion are dumb. Try again
- bee_rider 4y ago
- bmitc 4y agoI was just told by Amazon that I can't sell a used book there because the publisher, Morgan Kaufmann, is currently not accepting applications to sell and denied my request to sell. I was pretty stupefied. Amazon and the publisher have colluded, for whatever reason, to police how used books are sold.
- Gh0stRAT 4y agoPerhaps Amazon is FINALLY starting to do something about their rampant book piracy problem? [0]https://mobile.twitter.com/martinkl/status/1551149159402668034 https://mobile.twitter.com/martinkl/status/15511491594026680... [1]https://nypost.com/2022/07/31/pirated-books-thrive-on-amazon-authors-say-web-giant-ignores-fraud/ https://nypost.com/2022/07/31/pirated-books-thrive-on-amazon...
- bmitc 4y agoWho knows? Although, I actually bought this particular book off of Amazon. In this case, after some research, I actually think this is related to the book sometimes being used as a textbook. I wouldn't really call it a textbook, as in the normal 30 editions type of textbooks, as it's just a really good book on its topic (and only the second edition, which is the latest). Apparently publishers want to funnel the used sale of such books through certain approved sellers? I imagine it's to keep the price artificially high and for the publisher to recover some of the money back themselves. Seems ridiculous, and it would be surprising if it's legal. It's basically a racket.
- ddalex 4y agoWhat do you mean, it's your book. Why would even ask Amazon if you can sell it?
- bmitc 4y agoYou have to to sell in their platform. When I tried to add it to my Amazon Seller inventory, it required approval. Selling on Abebooks (owned by Amazon) requires a subscription now.
- jollyllama 4y agoIt's bad, but it's just moving reality editing a few levels down the stack.
- autoexec 4y agoIt's moving it away from your control. Right now we have the option to edit the images and videos we capture. This kind of technology allows those same choices to be made by someone else without any regard for your wishes. Your options can be limited to editing only what they allow to be captured in the first place.
- jollyllama 4y agoIt changes nothing about images you consume, but yes, it changes things for images you produce.
- cerol 4y ago> Vampires/Ghosts. A class of people who’s faces are in a master redact database. You know, like some real CIA Jason Borne stuff. Doesn't make much sense. If a person is a risk, you would want to surveil them more, and not erase them from every camera feed.
- arcticfox 4y agoI think it's more like the CCP would load their secret police database in.
- omgwtfbyobbq 4y agoA government could do both.
- btbuildem 4y agoThink "Scanner Darkly"
- cerol 4y agoWould a government even want that? Not even from the moral stance, just the strategic point of view. We know from the social media experiment how bad things can go if you hook an entire population to some "product". Sure, you can make (even though incentives) everyone wear AR glasses (because they're so cool), and they'll censor out undesired things. That's as much a form of control as it is a form of being controlled. Hooking your entire population's vision to the internet means it could possibly be maliciously used by bad actors.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- pishpash 4y agoI've got news for you. "Reality" is already edited. Actually is a model made up by the brain.
- _the_inflator 4y agoWe should really consider conserving analog versions of taking pictures.
- wongarsu 4y ago> This is like the printer that automatically watermarks your prints - for your security and protection! Coming to a child protection law near you real soon. You mean like most (or maybe all) color laser printers sold in the last couple decades? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_Identification_Code https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_Identification_Code https://www.eff.org/pages/list-printers-which-do-or-do-not-display-tracking-dots https://www.eff.org/pages/list-printers-which-do-or-do-not-d...
- thatjoeoverthr 4y agoIt’s not that sophisticated and is a physical artifact that had to be forged for some purpose. Effectively it’s like having a zero power neural network. You could make something like a motion sensor that only spots human faces, but very low power.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- outworlder 4y ago> This is like the printer that automatically watermarks your prints That ship has sailed. Most (all?) printers already do that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_Identification_Code https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_Identification_Code