4 ms·
Why would it need to be performing facial analysis and have over 120 tables of information in the first place?
by callamdelaney 1y ago
Why would it need to be performing facial analysis and have over 120 tables of information in the first place?
- madeofpalk 1y agoAutomatic albums of people is table stakes for a photo management app. Everyone has it - Apple Photos, Google Photos, Immich, etc. That requires facial detection.
- callamdelaney 1y agoI disagree. I don’t want that feature. None of the photo apps I use by choice have it, and I’ve never once used it on iOS. It creates multiple albums for the same person anyway so it’s useless.
- afavour 1y agoYou not wanting it != table stakes for a photo app. I use it, my family uses it, my friends use it. Anecdotal data to be sure. But I think if barely anyone used it you wouldn’t see it as a base feature in almost every photo sharing app.
- callamdelaney 1y agoThat’s like saying an AI co-pilot is table stakes for an operating system. It isn’t.
- Spivak 1y agoIt is how the default photos app for ios and android work and have worked for years. If you can't search by person or by the content of the photo you're falling behind.
- amlib 1y agoI would argue such feature only exists on big tech photo apps as an excuse to do facial recognition and eventually extricate such data trough whatever means. The benefit to the user is just a minor side effect.
- afavour 1y agoI would argue that’s another example of FUD. It’s a useful feature a lot of people like. Similarly I find geotagging of photos tremendously useful. I don’t believe that feature was added to phones to extend the surveillance state, I believe it was added because a camera was combined with a GPS and it made logical sense.
- mixmastamyk 1y agoLots of things aren’t done on purpose, but they are sure taken advantage of by other parties.
- afavour 1y agoSure. But that’s the opposite of OP’s assertion.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- brettermeier 1y ago[flagged]
- afavour 1y agoNo, this actually provides utility