I find it hard to overestimate the impact facial recognition will have (and soon)

[StageLeft]

When I first heard about google goggles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Goggles) and that Google was self-restricting its technology (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...ition-debate-goggles-privacy-controversy.html), though perhaps Apple won't (http://gigaom.com/2010/09/20/apple-may-go-where-google-wont-facial-recognition/) here is how it will play out, whether next year or in a few more:

All of us will be searchable, publicly. I can take a picture of you and it will not only tell me your name and then an awful lot about you (think spokeo...), but a history of your life will be instantly accessible, depending on how much of that you've posted online. Pictures from 2006? 1999? What about pics you don't even know are online; say you are on vacation in the background shot of a couple who posted their images to their blog? Now I know that you went on vacation to a particular area on a given day. Once enough pics are up I'll know who your friends are, your ok friends, your great friends.

Law enforcement will ultimately see the great benefit of this in solving crimes. If there is a report of violence in an area and a video camera can snap a pic it will be able to identify each person in the shot and come up with a history of them. Maybe this guy had a B&E but this guy has two rape convictions, so let's keep an eye on him. As he passes along other cameras his location can be relayed to cops.

What I guarantee will happen in some cases is people who said they were or weren't in a certain place at a given time will be screwed. And this could happen years after the fact. That business trip you took in 1998 but was in fact to Vegas with your mistress, well some one else taking a pic of their hotel and you're in the pic has now decided to put it online in some photo album, so years after the fact when your wife plugs in your name she's wondering what you were doing in vegas in 1998 with this woman she doesn't recognize?

With effectively infinite storage of video and images a picture of most people's movement will be stored and accessible by not only law enforcement but in many cases anybody with a web browser.

Here's another one: A dating app for your phone. Scan a room of people in a bar and it will ID each person and come up with dating-specific info, like whether they tend to gain/lose weight over time, whether they are often with a given individual (i.e. few boyfriends) or lots of different ones (promiscuous). Possibly even other things like how often they are at bars, how much they drink while in a bar (are they a drunk)? Does their name show up in marathon race results (e.g how fit are they?).

 

[nonlnear]

People who cling to eighteenth century notions of privacy and privacy rights are in for a rude awakening, that's for sure. One can only hope that government transparency is forced to keep pace with the inevitable loss of individual privacy.

 

[drebo]

Public records are public records. It's no different than if you had my name and birthdate and then went and searched through the newspapers and county records to see that stuff. If something like this makes it easier to profile people, I'm all for that.

What I do not agree with are invasions of privacy to which the information is NOT a matter of public record. Such as man-in-the-middle information sifting applications or wiretapping or xray machines that stop at the skin.

 

[Cogman]

Public records are public records. It's no different than if you had my name and birthdate and then went and searched through the newspapers and county records to see that stuff. If something like this makes it easier to profile people, I'm all for that.

What I do not agree with are invasions of privacy to which the information is NOT a matter of public record. Such as man-in-the-middle information sifting applications or wiretapping or xray machines that stop at the skin.

Why is an xray machine that stops at the skin any worse than an xray machine that stops at the bone?

 

[drebo]

Why is an xray machine that stops at the skin any worse than an xray machine that stops at the bone?

Nobody wanks off to pictures of a skeleton.

Kidding aside, a person cannot be immediately identified and recognized by their skeleton.

 

[Cogman]

not many people wank off to this either.

 

[drebo]

And why do you need the skin outline? A skeleton-deep xray would show the same features (remember, it's not a there-or-not type deal, the type of substance identified has to do with how long the xray takes to reach the other side).

The only possible reason for going skin deep is "because they can." They're showing off technology that is invasive and unnecessary.

 

[Infohawk]

Being untraceable in society was only possible for a very small portion of human history. In most of human history, one had very little privacy from others. If for some reason you left your small settlement where everybody knew you and knew what you were doing, you would be treated as an outsider in your new community.

This changed in the 20th century where it became possible to "disappear" in a country without being considered an outsider. For example, a guy from Cleveland could probably move to California and restart his life.

Well guess what that's changing again. We're going back to being part of what is equivalent to a small village where everyone who wants to keep tabs on you can. Instead of freaking out about it just accept that it's the the way it's been for most of humanity.

And some positive could come of it. I believe we may likely revert to a more civil time where people's were more considerate of others not out of altruism but because they're entire life depends on being trustworthy and respectable.

 

[cubby1223]

And some positive could come of it. I believe we may likely revert to a more civil time where people's were more considerate of others not out of altruism but because they're entire life depends on being trustworthy and respectable.

Especially stalkers, they'll for sure embrace the considerations of others!

 

[StageLeft]

Being untraceable in society was only possible for a very small portion of human history. In most of human history, one had very little privacy from others. If for some reason you left your small settlement where everybody knew you and knew what you were doing, you would be treated as an outsider in your new community.

This changed in the 20th century where it became possible to "disappear" in a country without being considered an outsider. For example, a guy from Cleveland could probably move to California and restart his life.

Well guess what that's changing again. We're going back to being part of what is equivalent to a small village where everyone who wants to keep tabs on you can. Instead of freaking out about it just accept that it's the the way it's been for most of humanity.

And some positive could come of it. I believe we may likely revert to a more civil time where people's were more considerate of others not out of altruism but because they're entire life depends on being trustworthy and respectable.

Interesting perspective.