• Grimy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    What’s actually making this possible is the PimEyes database. It’s insane that there is a facial recognition database that can be accessed like this. I doubt this is anywhere near legal in the EU.

    The media keeps concentrating on Meta and the researchers but you can do the same with phone cameras, doorbell cameras, etc.

    • brownmustardminion@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yeah pimeyes absolutely needs to be shut down and laws need to be in place to protect private citizens from having their information sharable and searchable without their explicit consent. “Publicly available information” is always the line people use to defend these services. I’m arguing that our modern capabilities needs to be adjusted for. Things shouldn’t be so publicly accessable in the first place and personal data aggregation should be a much more vetted and potentially licensed business. Can we talk about what other purpose these facial recognition databases serve other than to stalk, expose, or extort people? If they required proof of identity and only allowed searches of your own face then I could understand the value.

  • neuracnu@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 months ago

    I listened to the 404 Media podcast about this yesterday and the author argues that the subject of the article’s ire is intended to be the researchers themselves. Specifically, the bad ethics of testing this integration on non-consenting individuals (even though it was seemingly done with good intent).

    Luckily the researchers realized what the fuck they had just made and pivoted the project to being about how to break the integration (ie: opt out of facial recognition systems and freeze your credit score).

  • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    2 months ago

    As much as i hate meta and the rest, this is really a personal failure. Everyone knew that this would happen and everyone kept uploading all their unsecured biometric info to the public internet. This would be feasable, no matter how cool and open social media platforms are.

    Its not solveable by any other means than not publishing the data in the first place. Getting existing biometric scramblers for image and audio data into the hands of the public is the big first step that would be necessary to solve this.

    • masterspace@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      No, you can address this through laws and legislation. You literally just ban people from amassing personal information on other people like Europe is doing.

      • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Banning things doesnt stop people from doing those things. You dont stop locking your bike/car just because theft is illegal. Other countries governments could still use it, criminals could use it, your own countries agencies could use it because they might be exempt from certain laws.

        Yes it should be outlawed but thqts only half the solution.

        • XTL@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          2 months ago

          True, but corporations are the most clear and immediate threat and making it sufficiently (!) expensive for them does discourage bad behaviour.

    • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Only to an extent. Facial recognition photo scrubbing across the internet is a little tough to defend against, even for those who are privacy and security minded. Good software will find you in the background of photos. It’ll have your location and the time taken if the photos are geotagged too.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        2 months ago

        We also don’t have control over automatic number plate recognition, surveillance cameras, etc.

        I, for one, have consistently avoided publishing photos of myself on the Internet my entire life (and I’ve been online since the '90s, so I was really ahead of the curve on that), and even shy away from being in other people’s photos as much as possible (sometimes you can’t avoid it without consequences, such as if it’s a driver’s license photo, or imposed by your employer, or the news covering an event you’re participating in, or that sort of thing). Even then, I still have very little confidence that I’ve managed to stay out of these sorts of facial recognition databases.

        • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 months ago

          Exactly. I’m in the same boat as you. The bulk of my exposure was in bands on MySpace. I was practically anonymous by the time Facebook became popular.

          I’m still certain I’m in hundreds of other people’s pictures.

      • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Im talking about apps (optimally your main camera app too) needing to have built in biometric fuzzing. Phones (by default) just shouldnt be capable of creating pictures that can be used for biometrics. Camera apps for this already exist but nobody uses them.

        Ofcourse the existing pictures are already on the internet but thats not a reason to not change course. The sooner we stop supplying them data, the worse their detection system will be.

        Simply not uploading pictures of yourself at all is the best but maybe thats too hard for some people.