No mention of what they're going to do with the data after the event is over? Can they just sell it to the highest bidding advertiser? How can you have an article about this kind of tech and not mention anything about privacy?
I am certainly not excited about private interests possessing data linking bio-metrics to individuals (I'm sure companies such as Facebook already possess this data).
Currently users control whether or not identification occurs (tickets/ids shown, login credentials provided), with bio-metrics organizations have full autonomy to identify individuals. That dynamic shift seems very dangerous to me.
One would think those styles could easily be accounted for, just look how unique they are. A treasure trove of features just waiting.
The problem with disguises of this nature is once you know what you’re looking for you can easily adjust the algorithm and retrograde until you find the origin of your subject, assuming you have all the raw source data.
In addition anyone who has worked in this area knows the state of the art is in motion tracking and extracting the signals from an individual’s movements, which can be far more unique and works a lot better with lower resolution data and from farther away without the need to do expensive 3D reconstruction.
Contrary to what most people assume, these systems are more about localization than they are trying to recognize faces against some pre-known database, so just establishing cardinality is usually sufficient.
In an active shooter situation, having data on where the person has been, where they are now, and where they are likely to go next is the problem they are often times trying to solve. These systems can be used for evil like all tech but can’t we at least recognize the utility in keeping crowds of people safe and trying to mitigate death where time is of the essence?
6 comments
[ 5.5 ms ] story [ 24.3 ms ] threadCurrently users control whether or not identification occurs (tickets/ids shown, login credentials provided), with bio-metrics organizations have full autonomy to identify individuals. That dynamic shift seems very dangerous to me.
The problem with disguises of this nature is once you know what you’re looking for you can easily adjust the algorithm and retrograde until you find the origin of your subject, assuming you have all the raw source data.
In addition anyone who has worked in this area knows the state of the art is in motion tracking and extracting the signals from an individual’s movements, which can be far more unique and works a lot better with lower resolution data and from farther away without the need to do expensive 3D reconstruction.
Contrary to what most people assume, these systems are more about localization than they are trying to recognize faces against some pre-known database, so just establishing cardinality is usually sufficient.
In an active shooter situation, having data on where the person has been, where they are now, and where they are likely to go next is the problem they are often times trying to solve. These systems can be used for evil like all tech but can’t we at least recognize the utility in keeping crowds of people safe and trying to mitigate death where time is of the essence?
Unlike your real face, it seems very easy to change your "disguise" daily.
what deals will they close with this demonstration?