Facial recognition

[astuffedshirt_perv]

A recent thread (Perfect Girl project) highlighted an ethical dilemma that technology is bringing us. Another disturbing/disruptive technology is facial recognition. From the Guardian: findface-face-recognition-app-end-public-anonymity

Facial recognition software has been around for awhile, but mostly with massive, corporate/government infrastructure.

The Guardian article is about a smartphone app in Russia, currently linked to the Russian version of facebook, that will match faces from your phone camera with their facebook profile. That's kinda creepy, but it is just the start.

How hard would it be to adapt this software to match not just to facebook, but also to embarrassing photos that are posted online en masse? The thrill of posting an anonymous selfie half a world away that you thought no one would ever find? Maybe not so much. Worse, the app will also find close matches, so you might have to deal with a doppelganger's photo.

With that app, a new pickup line: "Hey babe, is that you in this picture?"

 

[Zeb_Carter]

A recent thread (Perfect Girl project) highlighted an ethical dilemma that technology is bringing us. Another disturbing/disruptive technology is facial recognition. From the Guardian: findface-face-recognition-app-end-public-anonymity

Facial recognition software has been around for awhile, but mostly with massive, corporate/government infrastructure.

The Guardian article is about a smartphone app in Russia, currently linked to the Russian version of facebook, that will match faces from your phone camera with their facebook profile. That's kinda creepy, but it is just the start.

How hard would it be to adapt this software to match not just to facebook, but also to embarrassing photos that are posted online en masse? The thrill of posting an anonymous selfie half a world away that you thought no one would ever find? Maybe not so much. Worse, the app will also find close matches, so you might have to deal with a doppelganger's photo.

With that app, a new pickup line: "Hey babe, is that you in this picture?"

Goggle already kinda does that with - Search Google for Image - option.

 

[lovecraft68]

I think even more disturbing is something I saw on a porn site. An ad for "cumshot editor."

Long story short this software takes any picture you have and paints it with a realistic cumshot.

Think of what this could do. Any asshole can use this on any woman he has a pic of.

next thing you know any woman he knows, his teacher, his boss, hell his sister or mom if he is mad at them, is now all over the net looking like a freshly painted porn star.

And how many people will believe "Hey, I never took that picture!" Sure you didn't, now guess what? You've just been fired as a teacher for producing amateur porn.

This thing could ruin lives -and that is not an exaggeration as the point revenge porn now being a federal crime proves-I think anyone who would by this is pretty much announcing they're a piece of shit and a candidate for an early death.

I'd like to think things like the link in the OP's post would make women(mostly, but men too) smarten up about how putting stuff on the net will alwasy come back to haunt you, but this is a lemming society.

And sites like lit will always freely allow the illegal use of pics here. I am willing to bet 50% or more of the am pic threads is revenge porn or guys posting pics of their wife or GF as a voyeuristic thrill. Sure the site suspects it and of course doesn't care.

Some day soon it may have to.

 

[HandsInTheDark]

A recent thread (Perfect Girl project) highlighted an ethical dilemma that technology is bringing us. Another disturbing/disruptive technology is facial recognition. From the Guardian: findface-face-recognition-app-end-public-anonymity

Facial recognition software has been around for awhile, but mostly with massive, corporate/government infrastructure.

The Guardian article is about a smartphone app in Russia, currently linked to the Russian version of facebook, that will match faces from your phone camera with their facebook profile. That's kinda creepy, but it is just the start.

How hard would it be to adapt this software to match not just to facebook, but also to embarrassing photos that are posted online en masse? The thrill of posting an anonymous selfie half a world away that you thought no one would ever find? Maybe not so much. Worse, the app will also find close matches, so you might have to deal with a doppelganger's photo.

With that app, a new pickup line: "Hey babe, is that you in this picture?"

All that pickup line does is announce "I'm a creep" and there are enough lines that do that.

But yes, this is all coming. Your face, your voice, your mannerisms of movement and speech, your fingerprints, your smell... you leave information by the terabyte behind you wherever you go, and over time more and more of it is being collected. We've come a long way from training dogs to follow someone's scent - some cities have cameras everywhere and we're on the edge of software that can pick out your path by finding you in each of them. (Google could probably do it now, if they wanted.) And it's public information - for a few million anyone could flood a city with wireless cameras and do the same thing. (In the US anyway, Europe probably not so much.)

If you carry a cell phone you lost privacy of movement years ago.

When fans send me photos of themselves, I routinely drop it into google images to see where it really came from. I get less pictures these days because it's become common knowledge that the ruse doesn't work anymore.

What bothers me is that it's not something that can be controlled. Pass all the laws you want - the data is still out there, collecting it in bulk is no longer hard, and software has a tendency to get stolen and become free. Things that used to require the resources of a government... are now within the reach of the ordinary rich or extremely dedicated.

It will get quite hopeless as microdrones get more viable. Flying cameras the size of insects have practicality problem now because flying takes energy and small mechanical objects can't store a lot of energy. But nature solved the problem millennia ago; we will too. Imagine a future in which thieves prefer windy days because the police spybugs get grounded by wind.

Not science fiction, folk. This stuff is maybe ten years out.

 

[oggbashan]

I think even more disturbing is something I saw on a porn site. An ad for "cumshot editor."

Long story short this software takes any picture you have and paints it with a realistic cumshot.

Think of what this could do. Any asshole can use this on any woman he has a pic of.

next thing you know any woman he knows, his teacher, his boss, hell his sister or mom if he is mad at them, is now all over the net looking like a freshly painted porn star.

...

There is a notorious case currently being re-examined in Sussex, UK. A man took pictures of about a dozen women from Facebook, used Photoshop to add their heads to porn pictures and reposted the results.

Initially, because he wasn't using real pictures of the women, the local police decided that a Police Caution would be a sufficient punishment. A Caution means that he has a criminal record, but no punishment beyond a warning not to repeat the offence. Revenge porn is now in criminal offence in England and Wales, but because the pictures were NOT the real naked women, the Police thought it wasn't revenge porn.

The women featured have complained that he wasn't punished sufficiently for the damage done to their reputations, and the case has been raised by their Member of Parliament. The man has been re-arrested after it was discovered he had done the same thing to a couple of dozen more women.

 

[sr71plt]

The burgeoning plastic surgery industry must look dimly on these developments.

 

[stickygirl]

You think this is new? Hmmm... not what the UK police told me a few years back
It's simple: if you don't want to be found by Google, FB or any other search engine, then never post your photo - that way there is no back story to attach

 

[oggbashan]

You think this is new? Hmmm... not what the UK police told me a few years back
It's simple: if you don't want to be found by Google, FB or any other search engine, then never post your photo - that way there is no back story to attach

Some local public houses have face recognition software on their CCTV so that they know when a banned person comes into the pub.

 

[karaline]

I don't know what the latest is on facial recognition tech, but i know the MET (the London police force) are always happy to recruit 'super recognisers' so it can't be that good.

 

[oggbashan]

I don't know what the latest is on facial recognition tech, but i know the MET (the London police force) are always happy to recruit 'super recognisers' so it can't be that good.

The super recognisers are needed for poor CCTV images or people with partly hidden faces.

The software works with high quality equipment and a small database of targets. A public house or an office building that has a limited number of people entering is possible. Randomly scanning CCTV images from a whole city requires more processing power than the software can use.

There is a new tool for the Police - logo recognition software that can take a partial clothing logo and identify the whole logo e.g. Superdry on a sweatshirt from a blurred picture of a couple of letters. Simple answer for criminals - don't wear clothing with logos!

 

[jomar]

I really don't mind law enforcement to have such technology, but not so much everyone and their brother. I don't really like apps and my iPhone tracking me. Hard to tech and stay under the radar.

 

[sr71plt]

I really don't mind law enforcement to have such technology, but not so much everyone and their brother. I don't really like apps and my iPhone tracking me. Hard to tech and stay under the radar.

I have no problem there. I have no iPhone and wouldn't know an app from a pap. Sort of the barn door issue, though, My photo is on the Net from another life.

 

[jomar]

I have no problem there. I have no iPhone and wouldn't know an app from a pap. Sort of the barn door issue, though, My photo is on the Net from another life.

You don't have a smart phone?

 

[sr71plt]

You don't have a smart phone?

Nope. I have a dumb cell phone that I only keep (in the trunk of the car) when we travel in case I have to call AAA. I haven't made a call on it in years and I've never received a call on it. And I'm just happy as a clam about that.

 

[JKendallDane]

After watching "Enemy of the State" the other day, I'm not too sure we aren't screwed beyond belief already as far as Big Brother is concerned.

Phones and computers are bad enough, but to get the full effect of how open your life actually is, take a good look at that cable box sitting by your television and realize it has two-way capabilities.

.

 

[Handley_Page]

I got a new mobile phone last week.
I said to the saleswoman: I don't do 'apps' I'm not interesting in being one of the "head down generation" ; I just want to make and receive a phone call.
She looked at me, smiled and said
"Have you seen this Nokia? It also has an FM radio"

So that's what I got. If microsoft have a way of getting information out of it, I'd be interested to know what and how.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

Big Brother cant get you onto your airplane on time. Big Brother gave my IRS file to Mexicans at Los Angeles, who used it to open cell phone accounts and buy lotsa shit from WalMart stores around town. The IRS told me Vlad Putin did it, but the LAPD said a clerk sorted records for excellent credit scores, and found 25.

Big Brother is a corrupt moron.

 

[oggbashan]

Nope. I have a dumb cell phone that I only keep (in the trunk of the car) when we travel in case I have to call AAA. I haven't made a call on it in years and I've never received a call on it. And I'm just happy as a clam about that.

Mine is the same with large buttons and a loudspeaker for deaf old coots to use. It is rarely switched on so no one can trace me - unless I'm driving my car when even car parks register my arrival and departure.

 

[jomar]

Nope. I have a dumb cell phone that I only keep (in the trunk of the car) when we travel in case I have to call AAA. I haven't made a call on it in years and I've never received a call on it. And I'm just happy as a clam about that.

Hope you have a dumb car too, then.

After watching "Enemy of the State" the other day, I'm not too sure we aren't screwed beyond belief already as far as Big Brother is concerned.

Phones and computers are bad enough, but to get the full effect of how open your life actually is, take a good look at that cable box sitting by your television and realize it has two-way capabilities.

.

Yeah, cable boxes recording/sending conversations. Lots of folk are cutting the cable and moving to on demand devices like Roku, but whose to say they're safer. Then there's your internet of things appliances.

 

[astuffedshirt_perv]

I really don't mind law enforcement to have such technology, but not so much everyone and their brother.

Exactly. Putting this in the cell phone over everyone is vast more disturbing. The data is out there, but soon it will be searchable.

 

[sr71plt]

Hope you have a dumb car too, then.

Dumber than my wife's, but not particularly dumb, no. A Subaru Forester. My wife just got a Toyota with all of the bells and whistles and, like her last car, I don't plan on using many of them. We've gotten cruise control for some forty years, for instance, but I've never used it. I don't want to give over total control of forward thrust.

My thing with telephones goes back to my profession, though. I was told never to use one without the thought that someone else was listening in--even the nice red ones that supposedly had encryption. So, I don't even answer the phone in our house. We have and use caller ID and let everyone talk to the recorder the first time around unless we recognize and want to talk to the caller.

 

[HandsInTheDark]

My thing with telephones goes back to my profession, though. I was told never to use one without the thought that someone else was listening in--even the nice red ones that supposedly had encryption. So, I don't even answer the phone in our house. We have and use caller ID and let everyone talk to the recorder the first time around unless we recognize and want to talk to the caller.

If you're worried about people listening in on government-issue encrypted telephones, you're in a bad situation. Not even your friends are your friends.

I've gone you one better, though, at home. My computer gets the caller id. Before the second ring it's checked my blacklist, and on a match it hangs up on them. Then it checks my whitelist, and on a match announces who's calling. If it's on neither, it goes and hits one of the free online databases of annoying callers, and reports the results of that.

 

[sr71plt]

If you're worried about people listening in on government-issue encrypted telephones, you're in a bad situation. Not even your friends are your friends.

If you know it's happening (which I did), it's not really a worry issue.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I really don't mind law enforcement to have such technology, but not so much everyone and their brother.

Once law enforcement have it, it's already opened up to "everyone and their brother". Police abuse their access to private info a lot, for themselves or for their buddies, and the penalties are pretty minimal. Denver alone had 25 cases in ten years, and those are just the ones that got caught:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/18/us/denver-police-criminal-databases-personal-use.html?_r=0

 

[HandsInTheDark]

Sign of the times

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASINB014CCVRD0/wdbgs-20

Not an endorsement and I have no idea if it works. But the fact that it's a product says a lot about the concerns people have. RFID tags in cards can be read from 30 feet away under the right conditions; it can be higher if someone builds a custom scanner.