this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2024
3 points (100.0% liked)

Privacy

37039 readers
1 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
top 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] whotookkarl@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

400-700 for a single article of clothing with no mention of what facial recognition software this affects, how effective it is and what is the failure rate, error bounds, etc. Sounds like a scam.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I wouldn't call it a "scam" just manipulative marketing. This stuff doesn't seem like it'd work for any of the modern facial recognition options, but that's just a guess. If it did work well and they were proud of it, you can be sure that'd be part of the marketing, so it at best is mediocre if not useless.

[–] JokeDeity@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

So I don't know if you guys actually read the article or not but they absolutely DO claim that it works against YOLO which they claim to be the most popular recognition software. I don't know about how factual any of that is, but they do make the statement.

[–] ruplicant@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

I wouldn't call it a "scam" just manipulative marketing

the difference?

[–] Blaster_M@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] dRLY@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago

A friend of mine's dad worked in some capacity of pigs. Which lead to my friend finding out that some people had either by really random luck in attempting something like the comic or also finding out from interacting with pigs. That in the city I lived in, there is like a "panic" signal that auto calls for lots of help that involved hitting a specific letter or number multiple times. For some reason I want to say it was maybe either zero or O, but I don't remember off hand.

So when they would be quickly inputting a plate with enough taps and not thinking, shit would cause resources to be pulled and wasted. Not great for attracting attention to the driver since it is basically pulling aggro. But could be great for moving attention from somewhere else.

[–] z00s@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

The method that Cap_able has patented allows the wearer to incorporate the algorithm into the fabric of the clothing and still look stylish.

I was with you up until the stylish bit

[–] CaptainSpaceman@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This will work for about 10 minutes. Better off wearing a facemask, bandana, juggalo face paint, etc

[–] lessthanluigi@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I'll take the juggalo face paint even though I am not a juggalo

Wrong answer.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's only a matter of time before a cop charges someone with obstruction for trying to disrupt a camera system (during the commission of a crime, I mean).

[–] DetachablePianist@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

🎶"Because I'm tacky..." 🎵

[–] muntedcrocodile@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Unfortunatly its a cat and mouse game. Except the cat is a easily deployable software problem and the mouse is buy new clothing hardware problem.

[–] notfromhere@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] muntedcrocodile@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

If its radioactive then it will disrupt the image sensor. It mist also disrupt your dna but u dont need that do ya.

Similar tech has been around for a while, and it almost always gets beaten.

[–] DemBoSain@midwest.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This would be a good article if the pictures actually showed people wearing the clothes.

[–] 01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Literally the header image...

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

What's with the floating heads?

[–] DemBoSain@midwest.social 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I see a couple people, and some oddly colored blobs.

[–] 01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Oh! HHahhahhhHah! That's a good joke! Wooshed right over my head hahahahahahahah!

Edit: correct autocorrect

[–] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 1 points 1 year ago

Those people are just dressed like regular Australians.

[–] CableMonster@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

AI probably was already patched 5 minutes after the article came out.

[–] ssm@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You can't really "patch" LLMs like most software; you'd have to retrain them, no?

[–] OhNoMoreLemmy@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yeah but they don't use LLMs for this, they'll use some other kind of machine learning mixed in a big pipeline of data processing. It makes it really hard to guess how much work it would take to fix. It might require retraining, might just require an easy patch of the rest of the pipeline.

My guess is that they're just shitty jumpers and there's nothing to fix anyway.

[–] CableMonster@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oh I dont know, I would just assume they could update (or retrain) to adapt pretty quickly.

[–] ssm@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I don't know either, I wasn't trying to be condescending or anything.

[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So I guess we're wearing broken JPEGs now huh?

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 year ago

I want this to be a thing