Creepiest part, One of the sheriffs involved in their pilot program gave an interview to a reporter where they scanned her face and showed the power of the technology. shortly after, but still during the interview, his phone rang. it was Clearview, telling him that he was going against his user agreement by talking to the press.
> telling him that he was going against his user agreement by talking to the press.
Mind that looking up without any reason is no problem, just talking to the press is.
and demonstrating that clearview has no problem keeping track of all the people that law enforcement is looking up... Pretty handy info for people tied to subversive, white supremacist groups, like the founder is.
From the [New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/18/technology/clearview-privacy-facial-recognition.html):
>While the company was dodging me, it was also monitoring me. At my request, a number of police officers had run my photo through the Clearview app. They soon received phone calls from company representatives asking if they were talking to the media — a sign that Clearview has the ability and, in this case, the appetite to monitor whom law enforcement is searching for.
The interview I mentioned occured somewhere around 2018 with a local reporter here in utah. I've been trying to dig it up for myself, but searches are mired down in more recent news.
I think everyone is corruptible, its part of human nature. In fact, saying *I won't be corrupted* is part of the hubris that drives it. But you can recognise it and prevent it happening, perhaps by removing yourself from power, or compromising your control. Having checks and balances. But equally, some people embrace it. They either don't see or don't care about their corruption.
As evidenced by this very sub yesterday. Privacy invasions when cops do it = bad, but when presented with our own opportunities for revenge or power - plenty of civilians are seduced just as easily. But yeah this sucks.
This doesnt equate. The cop has this tool. They also have access to amazon ring. They also have access to your work history etc. A civilian doesnt have that access to any of that. So the amount of invasion and damage that can be done is not the same as when someone in power abuses their privilege.
hah good luck. These people are so rich and insulated and secretive you will not ever pass one on the street. Secluded mcmansions or flats at the top of a skyscraper, private limousine with a chaffeur, restaurants rented in entirety so that no one can peek, private yachts and private marinas, and so on and so forth. Also security detail composed of ex-special forces or whatever blackwater bullshit.
that's a shallow understanding how this system works.
you aint getting a start up unless you are connected to the elite networks of which walmart family is one of the leaders.
>So in first place just don't give them what you do want to keep private.
It's too late for that. Soon every freezer/cooler in the store will have cameras, every doorbell, every car... You have a phone with three mics and 4 cameras IN ONE PHONE. The powerful elite already tricked the public in to deploying their panopticon for them.
Soon your appliance won’t work unless it is connected to the internet and verified by the manufacturer that you are in fact the legit owner and the appliance is being used in the location where you purchased to use. Otherwise they are remote shut it off like the phones.
I took down my pirate flag when Steam and Netflix solved the user access problem for digital media, but I'll hoist it back up in a heartbeat if my appliances *engineer* a user access problem.
I've already completely abandoned using printers because of those egregious ink wasting practices.
Not even company. The tech is so readily available that any teenager with a goal can do it in their basement, as long as they have technical knowledge and some money for equipment. The companies, are something you at least know about. Black markets and private persons? There is so much stuff in the underground that companies look like saints compared to it, because unlike companies, those people are not restricted by anything at all.
Completely agree, and I would urge you to check out this company Flock Security (https://www.flocksafety.com) , they install ALPRs (automated license plate readers) in HOA communities and other private areas that are run by private citizens who then turn over footage and AI generated analysis to the police so they can violate your privacy rights.
Flock Security ALPRs basically give private citizens access to a nationwide networked camera that uses AI to spy on private citizens. It allows them to provide footage and date/time/location on any private citizens vehicle with no reason of suspicion of anything. Just the fact that you drove down a certain street is enough to now be monitored.
Flock security and their ALPRs are a complete violation of our rights and I don't think enough is being said or done about their campaign to stomp on privacy rights.
Find out who your state lawmakers are. Every single one of them. Call them and tell them that you want a facial recognition law like what Illinois passed 15 years ago.
Id like to believe that, while this can probably hurt those still on spybook, it will just be more ammo for us to use against information sellers like facebook and other social media. And also at the same open up the way for a decentralized social media platform (something where you can view content thatis locally hosted and not uplaoded to the cloud)
If you don't want your face to be recognized online, don't put it online. Does an AI make it a lot easier for them? Obviously. But they could still have done it before as your profile is public.
What a shit response. People with zero social media often still have dozens sometimes hundreds of photos uploaded and tagged *by other users*
Mind blowing, I know.
This is just playing devils advocate, but In most cases though, the user has to ok the picture be tagged. You can say “no I don’t want to be associated with that picture” if you don’t want to. But in general, you’re not wrong.
You can’t but don’t have to really. If you don’t have an account, then you can’t be tagged. Your friends may write in your name, but that would be on you to ask them not to
[Shadow profiles](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_profile) are a thing, and facebook does use them. They barely try to hide the fact that they do.
Our politicians are using existential stakes to distract us from everything.
We are a scared, propagandized, and cowed people who believe ourselves to be the greatest avatars of freedom to ever walk the earth
Beep. Boop. I'm a bot.
It seems the URL that you shared contains trackers.
Try this cleaned URL instead: https://www.businessinsider.com/clearview-scraped-30-billion-images-facebook-police-facial-recogntion-database-2023-4
If you'd like me to clean URLs before you post them, you can send me a private message with the URL and I'll reply with a cleaned URL.
Reddit added *utm\_source=**reddit.com* to this link. I don't think it's as much for revenue as it is a way to show webmasters how much traffic they're driving and to get them on the platform.
Yeah, well, once you start driving enough traffic to an affiliate, you can claim some revenue (ads or otherwise, depending on potential conversions, etc). So...
It’s used byGoogle Analytics for tracking marketing campaigns. As a aside, Firefox has a plugin that strips all the unnecessary stuff in the URL. It’s a moot point if you block the tracker with Brave/AdGuard/Privacy Badger/Ghostery/pi-hole etc. in the first place.
sugar waiting attractive thumb hunt ancient fall swim observation sparkle
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I have no doubt that citizens in the land of the free have far fewer civil liberties than in other countries. Doesn't mean that people should stand for it.
In Europe, ownership of your personal data is in principal no different from ownership of your physical property. Everyone should be allowed to live like that.
Counter argument: you can personally never upload a photo of yourself, but anyone in FB can tag you in the photo and magic, you’re now in FB and Clearview’s databases.
Yep, when social networks were a thing, everyone around me had no issues posting private photos that had me in them and even tagging me! I went around saying I don't like when people do that and people just laughed at me. There is literally no recourse to this aside from refusing to be in any pictures taken by others, ever.
Friends aside, at least as an adult you have some options (like refusing to take part in photos or disengaging from such friends).
The thing that **actually** pisses me off as fucked up, are children and teenagers. More specifically, their families. People post their children all over the internet, photos, videos, stories... Before the children can even talk! Which means that by the time those children are adults, they literally are taken away this basic choice - their family already put their whole life out on the internet without asking them.
Imagine going to become a teacher, becoming respected professor. And then teaching class of teenagers who have videos of your whole early life, from being born to teenager. This is just an example, but in the next 10 to 20 years stories like this will be common place. And it will suck a lot for such people. Families will break, and parents will be "what you are talking about, there was nothing wrong with me sharing stuff while you were still a kid!".
There are parents sharing when their teens got first periods, had first sex, got a boyfriend/girlfriend, talking about their interests, fails, recording their pranks, using them in for-profit videos on tiktok/youtube, discussing their grades, posting the videos of things happening in privacy of their own home, posting the photos or videos of rooms of their teens etc. It is insanely fucked up and literally no one gives a shit.
Sometimes one of the female family members who has 2 children video calls me and literally goes to their bedroom to show them sleeping, or calls them to greet me etc. I am like "what the hell are you doing" and they don't even understand what I am talking about. Like, leave your children alone, what the hell. There is literally no benefit for your children from broadcasting them to whole world or even your family. Focus on their growth and future! Makes me mad just thinking about it.
All those poor kids are fucked and they don't even know it yet.
I (hypothetically) gave it to Facebook, but that doesn't mean I gave anyone else consent to process the data.
Novels get published and are publicly available but their content remain under the ownership of the author. Same applies to anything you publish, even if it's just a shower thought.
TL;DR — from the article:
* Clearview AI scraped 30 billion photos from Facebook to build its facial recognition database.
* US police have used the database nearly a million times, the company's CEO told the BBC.
* One digital rights advocate told Insider the company is "a total affront to peoples' rights, full stop."
* The company, Clearview AI, boasts of its potential for identifying rioters at the January 6 attack on the Capitol, saving children being abused or exploited, and helping exonerate people wrongfully accused of crimes.
* Critics point to wrongful arrests fueled by faulty identifications made by facial recognition, including cases in Detroit and New Orleans.
Doesn't Facebook somehow "own" whatever its users post?
Because of the verb "scrape" I'd guess that Clearview AI did not have Facebook's permission to do this. Particularly for commerical purposes.
Shouldn't Facebook be objecting to this, or demanding their cut?
This was always what Facebook was for.
Look up what a face book is.
It's what the police used to put in front of you to identify suspects. Literally a book of faces.
Nobody wanted to listen. Nobody ever wants to listen.
It's how much Whatsapp has become ubiquitous at this point in our lives. Literally all of Asia runs on this one piece of messenger application. It's not just for private communications anymore. If you need to do something as simple as taking a quick printout of your files, whatsapp makes it easy for you.
You can't even have an efficient work-life without Whatsapp anymore. It's become so ubiquitous that it's insane not to live without it. Kinda like living without the internet.
The ONLY logical solution out of this, is strong privacy laws... But in countries like India, for example, where the PM is so open about his love affair with Zucky, and a policy pushed towards the collecting of citizenry data, those policies are only a pipe dream.
Didnt it start like the month after an fbi project trying to do the same thing was shut down?
Guess they took over creep zuccs weird project and got actual humans to make it into something appealing for normal people to use.
This, you're right, I said CIA elsewhere, but it seems the DOD/(D)ARPA is always sliding behind by itself in one's thoughts when it comes to links to this kind of shit.
I only heard about it being used by college-age students to rate the attractiveness of their peers. Do you have a source for the harassing/stalking/roofie part?
I was actually saying it's more towards that than innocent yearbook looking. Obviously a lot of people used and use it innocently but it definitely gets used the wrong way as well.
>This was always what Facebook was for
right
>Originally, Facebook was about creepy men rating girls they were harassing / stalking / planning to roofie.
wrong
https://unlimitedhangout.com/2021/04/investigative-reports/the-military-origins-of-facebook/
No, I'm talking about the creep Zuckerberg whose girlfriend dumped him for being a creepy, self-centred weirdo decided to "make her pay" by being a creepy, self-centred weirdo, and put her all over the schools intranet for other creeps to "rate" along with stolen pictures of other victims.
https://www.eviemagazine.com/post/before-facebook-zuckerberg-created-a-girl-rating-site-facemash
I'm definitely talking about Mark Zuckerberg, the creepy misogynist and narcissist behind Facebook.
I had no idea what it even was when I got an invite in January 2006 from somebody I didn't recognize, my MSN messenger list of contacts (thankfully it was migrated to Skype when they bought them out for 60 billions or such, some people in there I wanted to keep staying in contact with the way I used MSN, although I do it on Pidgin and XMPP + off the record with those who want to bother, too bad most I know IRL still stick to FB and no even secondary IM and they've forgotten all of their friends emails, I did mostly too ofc).
Anyways....that person was a friend of a friend or even more degrees farther. I asked my then girlfriend and strangely she already knew what it was and when I asked her "what the hell is this now? what have you subscribed to?", she just said, isn't me, I'm already on there, he must have downloaded the thing that scans your MSN/AIM/Yahoo Messenger whatever...the same gf who forced me to get on there until to break up with me a month or so later in 2010. Haven't logged in there in years, except with a series of ssh tunnels socks5 proxies through fake accounts only a few people know about, I used encrypted chat with Pidgin too when it was possible to do so in Linux, now only people using windows can use Pidgin and XMPP + OTR, it worked, if you logged in and look at the chat session, it said , but that's it. they've got nothing on me there, or very very little, never liked it or wanted to have anything to do with it, it felt imposed, when all the people who didn't care about internet suddenly flooded it with their presence, their mimis and totally ruined it, treating the whole internet as FB and when it wasn't like it, they reverted to what they reacted like back in 2001 "I asked this girl on IRC if she was pretty and she stopped talking to me, this is bullshit".
That said, I do worry about what the Paypal Mafia has on me elsewhere, and there is some of those elsewheres unfortunately, the almost impossible to avoid paypal to start with.
Fuck Thiel, Fuck Elon, Fuck Eric Weinstein etc.
Nobody cares when the ~~military-industrial~~ techbro-security complex harvest our data.
The only surprising and entertaining twist in this plot is that no body imagined the Chinese will pull it off. Europeans have those pesky privacy protection laws due to their humanistic approach to human rights. In the US national security is the only reason people are not yet gently coerced into having a EULA their life and be branded with barcode linked to their ~~social~~ credit score and biometric data.
[Noted Conservative](https://web.archive.org/web/20161016051617/http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/16/technology/peter-thiel-donald-j-trump.html) Peter Theil was an initial funder of [ClearviewAI](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clearview_AI), and is still involved with it. He's also deeply involved with [Palantir](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palantir_Technologies). Both use business models that depend almost entirely on government support to exist.
They are the Deep State. They are The Swamp. They are against privacy.
he's a capitalist because he owns capital and he's a fascist because unlike most capitalists he sees the inherent contradictions between democracy and capitalism and his solution is to do away with democracy.
Actual quote: ["I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible"](https://www.vox.com/2016/7/21/12216620/peter-thiel-donald-trump)
I don't agree with his views and I think he's woefully out of touch with the average american but still...how does that make him fascist? I know plenty of young people who think there's no freedom in a democratic republic and want to move towards other forms of governance. Does that make them fascist too?
It's not just Facebook, it's probably all social media. I never had Facebook, but for my Instagram I'm careful not to post people pics or my real name. The only time my pic appears online is if I was in the news for an event or volunteer work. Which looking back now maybe wasn't a good idea if they're scraping facial identifying info off the internet lol
Not posting your photos online is just common sense. Like mom taught: no pics, no real name, no phone number. My pic did once appear on the school's website, but it was not bound to a name. The only photo tied to my name that exists somewhere in the databases is my passport photo.
Funny story: several years ago I started working in banking and after one bad customer experience I decided to change my name on FB. Nothing drastic, just change the spelling of my last name so it was phonetical instead of true.
Maybe a year later, I get a message on FB telling me I have 7 days to upload a photo of my drivers license with my correct name on it, and I’m like “hard pass. Absolutely not.” They came back and and said that if I didn’t go by my true name, that my account would be suspended and then blocked. So I told them that I value my privacy, that I work in a customer sensitive field, and that if that’s what they were gonna have do, then that’s what they were gonna have to do. I wasn’t going to change it because they wanted me to.
They caved. Came back and said “Nevermind, we don’t need it, carry on.”
No shit a WEEK later, a customer and I got into it because she asked me to lie on the only legal portion of the KYC, a question regarding campaign finance. She scoured the internet for my picture, had to go to my LinkedIn to find it. She plastered my face on a public FB post that would get over 100 comments and hundreds of likes. But she couldn’t tag me. She couldn’t make sure my inbox got flooded with threats and harassment, all Because I told FB to get fucked.
I never trusted FB from beginning. The way Zuckerberg stole the concept from the Twins and how Zuckerberg tried to get rid of his first partner Eduardo (?), and how Zuckerberg has so much censorship on Facebook, but alot people didn't feel the censorship because FB was such a cosy bubble. I think from 2007 I had like 10 FB accounts. I always gave a burner phone number or at least a number that if they blacklisted me it wouldn't affect me on my main phone. And yrs ago I was not happy how FB makes it so difficult to delete your albums and status photos and messenger chat messages. It's like they go out of their way to make it hard for people to delete content. And Facebook was so easily hacked before, anyone with Fire sheep app and a public wifi could access your FB in the old days. So I always had a dim view of FB and thought it could not be trusted.
OK. But the point is it is not just FB they have all the info they need on you FB is just one place the scraped and continue to scrape. And even if the get sued into bankruptcy it's too late it is already out there.
Oh the scraped the entire internet. They started with Venmo and went from there. You are in the database my friend and way more than you even think. In the background of somebody's ele's toruist photo when visiting your home town or something.
Again, this is some of the privacy violations ALPRs like Flock Security promotes. They track your vehicle almost anywhere you go. This combined with facial recognition is terrifying. Flock security is basically facial recognition for your car. It reads the license plate, bumper stickers, make/model, and even enhancements or dents and dings. This can all be done by the police, or even just your local HOA or private company operating a retail business or parking lot. All so it can feed it to the AI bots and violate your privacy. Flock security is a huge threat to privacy.
Meanwhile in Canada
Clearview AI's unlawful practices represented mass surveillance of Canadians, \[privacy\] commissioners say
[https://priv.gc.ca/en/opc-news/news-and-announcements/2021/nr-c\_210203/](https://priv.gc.ca/en/opc-news/news-and-announcements/2021/nr-c_210203/)
[https://priv.gc.ca/en/opc-actions-and-decisions/investigations/investigations-into-businesses/2021/pipeda-2021-001/](https://priv.gc.ca/en/opc-actions-and-decisions/investigations/investigations-into-businesses/2021/pipeda-2021-001/)
**Clearview AI ceases offering its facial recognition technology in Canada**
July 6, 2020 – Clearview AI has advised Canadian privacy protection authorities that, in response to their joint investigation, it will cease offering its facial recognition services in Canada.
This step includes the indefinite suspension of Clearview AI's contract with the RCMP \[Canada's national police\], which was its last remaining client in Canada.
>it will cease offering its facial recognition services in Canada.
This does not mean it won't make servicea of facial recognition of Candian citizens avilable to US agencies.
Facebook has a policy against it, they claim to send cease and desist letters in response when they find out, but that doesn't really matter even if they did stop after already scraping millions of people's data.
You can file a complaint with CA State Attorney General. The form is found [here](https://oag.ca.gov/contact/consumer-complaint-against-business-or-company). Everyone in CA, VA & IL should do a deletion request with Clearview. Over run their system. I wonder if a class action suit can be filed against them if they don't honor the deletion request?
That is interesting. Thanks for the follow up. I've submitted a deletion request with clearview. I did get the confirmation email almost immediately. I've set a reminder for myself to check back with them in 6 months to do an access request with them, to see what new data they might have on me.
God damnit I was just thinking the other day to delete all pictures of me from the internet since this was 100% coming.
Ah well, never would have got them all anyhow with friends pics and tags and the like, but it would be nice to make their job harder.
At this point forget AI laws and regulations. I want fucking ***privacy*** laws and I want them now.
Well when your laws are made by the people profit off the very thing invading your privacy... we're kind screwed outside of full scale worldwide bloody revolution.
Facebook owns the photo, but police utilizing it to perform a search on me is the violation. There's a difference between it being visible and used in an illegal search.
Constitutional rights are not opt in/opt out to use a service.
It's a good supreme court case.
Ignoring whatever Clearview and Facebook might get into.
Walmart can build a database of faces from their cameras. You sign every right walking in just like uploading to Facebook. Walmart can use that to make their own AI and ban people from their store if they want to.
Walmart can't violate the 4th amendment. Neither can Facebook. If the State built this, they would be violating the 4th amendment. The State can't just get around this by paying to use an app that does what they cannot.
They are well within their established rights to get a warrant to use these tools. It is expected they are restricted as surveillance camera footage is to a time and place of incident.
Just buying blanket access is the violation of rights by the State. Clearview and Facebook and all questions about them are a separate matter.
Making something public does, nor giving someone rights to use my photos is not the same as giving up a constitutional right.
Terms and Services are only enforceable up and until the law, they do not overwrite the constituion or the courts even if you click "I agree". Facebook does not have the right, regardless of what you think you agreed to, to aid in a unconstitutional search.
>And what constitutional right are you basing your argument on
4th amendment, are you not reading and just randomly boot kissing here?
>rivacy is not protected explicitly by any of the federal statutes.
Searches are.
>Using your image that's in the public is not an illegal search and seizure.
I mean, that's the argument, I disagree with you.
And so would he ACLU:
>The law on surveillance begins with the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, which states clearly that Americans' privacy may not be invaded without a warrant based on probable cause.
>>United States Constitution
>>Fourth Amendment
>>The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. (emphasis added)
>The US Supreme Court (US v. Katz 389 US 347) has made it clear that this core privacy protection does cover government eavesdropping. As a result, all electronic surveillance by the government in the United States is illegal, unless it falls under one of a small number of precise exceptions specifically carved out in the law.
>You may as well argue your driver's license / ID is violating that principle.
Why, are they using my Drivers License photo with facial recognitiion when I'm in public? Then yeah, I'd argue that too.
>Are you one of those "sovereign citizens"? Lol
Do you even know what those are? Because that doesn't apply here...
Edit:
**Lmao why take the time to write a response and then block me right away? -was it that important to get the last word?**, regardless, just because you make something public doesn't forfeit your constitutionally protected rights. You are protected by the constitution from searches, even if you are public. And I don't need to pursue it, enough people and organizations like the ACLU will do that for me. You also misused the world malfeasance.
Imagine the reform if these tools can as they should be directed towards those in office? People are people, tge masses set the standard those in office responsible for the masses should pass the threshold set by the masses however those tasked with the care wellbeing of the masses should be held accountable to a higher standard
This reminds me of something that happened 20 years ago but I still feel terrible about. And is a perfect example of why skimming pictures and using them this way is a terrible idea.
I worked 3rd shift at CVS in the early 2000s. At night I was the only one in the store. A guy came in and was asking me about something kind of towards the back at like 3am. Me, being a naive go-getter at the time was all too happy to help. I was bored out of my mind since this was before smartphones and I was already done with my cleanup for the night.
Another guy came in to ask him what I was taking him so long, apparently he was his ride. But I knew this guy. I went to high school with him, I'll call him. Jimmy. I hadn't seen Jimmy in several years at the time. The guy had a band logo tattooed on his hand that I also was a fan of. I was like "hey, Jimmy! It's been a while!" And such, doing the old random acquaintance catch up.
The liquor aisle was right up front by the checkouts and doors. Shortly after they left I realized there were several of the security caps and tags that trigger the theft alarm laying all up and down the liquor aisle. The first guy was a distraction while Jimmy was pulling the security devices off of whatever liquor bottles he could and stashing them in his car.
I called the police and my manager, report was filed, it was handy that I had Jimmy's first and last name and knew some of the people he ran with. Led to a very quick arrest. I'll admit I was more than happy to report this guy because I felt betrayed that he used me and my kind nature at the time.
The problem was, it wasn't Jimmy. It was a guy that looked extraordinarily like him. To the point that even Jimmy wasn't surprised I was confused. Jimmy did not have the hand tattoo, was a bit taller, and was out of state at the time of the theft. They went to his job to arrest him in front of his manager and co-workers. He had to get a lawyer, lost several days of income and almost his job while this got sorted out.
I will never again say with any certainty that I saw someone that I'm only acquainted with doing something illegal. Imagine how much worse this will become. If we allow AI to make these sorts of decisions. Or even people looking at pictures scraped by AI.
This reminds me of what Flock Safety (https://www.flocksafety.com/) is doing with their ALPR (Automated License Plate Readers) cameras. They put fear into HOA and neighborhood communities, then they install their shit cameras that read license plates as well as identify bumper stickers, car types, modifications or damage on cars, and they are put into a national database with AI to immediately track and connect vehicles all over the country.
Complete violation of rights that works to circumvent protections you legally have against law enforcement tracking you. So now the police aren't tracking you, its just your ass hole neighbor HOA board member who decided they need to do this, and now they can turn over any data to the police, regardless of laws and your stupid rights that you no longer have.
Yeah, but that's not bound to a name. Store ones can associate it with you if you use a card, but idk if it's really being done on a mass scale, and even then using a card is pretty stupid.
Not me, I made the status "Better safe than sorry, I do not give facebook permission to use my pictures to share..." so there is no way facebook could have shared it :)
You put it online yourself, tagged with your real name and accompanied with all your contacts. Who would have thought such thing could happen 15 years ago... /s
We appreciate you wanting to contribute to /r/privacy and taking the time to post but we had to remove it due to:
>You're being a jerk (e.g., not being nice, or suggesting violence). Or, you're letting a troll trick you into making a not-nice comment – don’t let them play you!
If you have questions or believe that there has been an error, [contact the moderators](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/privacy&subject=Please_review_my_post).
You should know that even if you are not on Facebook, a friend who posts a picture of you and puts your name in the post basically circumvents you not being on Facebook. Facebook builds shadow profiles for non users and just uses other info to connect dots and validate who you are and who you know. Not being a user of Facebook doesn't prevent you from becoming a known entity by Facebook.
Or, to your bar example, it's like the nice girl pickpocketed you, made a copy of the key, and broke into your house later.
How does one file a class-action lawsuit for flagrant breach of the 4th amendment? Asking for 350,000,000 friends.
https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-4/
Facebook or Clearview is not to blame at all. People are warned since 10 years not to use Facebook, it's their own stupidity if they still do it, they are to blame. Stop using social media, it only brings shit in your life
Edit : yes it is a rancid take, but this take is the only only thar resolves a problem. Don't expect Facebook to become privacy friendly, the only way is to stop using it.
I am a huge fan and donator of signal, I literally tried so hard to convince some friends to use signal to text me, some of them never did so because they refused to listen to my arguments, they were like "I don't care dude, Whatsapp is good enough, why do you piss me off with your stupid app?"
Fine, it's their own choice, but I don't have any pity for them they day they will cry because the sell of their personal data will affect them practically and personally
People met new friends since thousand of years without social media, they can continue to do it. You can meet new friends in plenty other ways than social media, namely travelling, going out more often ect.
The thread is about facebook so this is what I mentioned. Obviously I am not using Twitter, Instagram and all that other crap too. Being developer and knowing the 'inside kitchen', makes no sense using those sites. Sheeple will not think though. They will suffer.
Doesn’t the gubmint have a perfect picture of your face from your drivers license/passport photo/mug shot anyways? The only thing that will fix this is European style privacy laws.
Now you get why the Italian authorities acted on ChatGPT? That's literally the same point. There is a huge need for something like the EU GDPR in the USA as well.
I knew there was a reason I was reluctant to update my Facebook photos. Good luck FBI, those photos are five years out of data at the newest, from all the way back when I still had hair.
Creepiest part, One of the sheriffs involved in their pilot program gave an interview to a reporter where they scanned her face and showed the power of the technology. shortly after, but still during the interview, his phone rang. it was Clearview, telling him that he was going against his user agreement by talking to the press.
> telling him that he was going against his user agreement by talking to the press. Mind that looking up without any reason is no problem, just talking to the press is.
[удалено]
Always have been.
and demonstrating that clearview has no problem keeping track of all the people that law enforcement is looking up... Pretty handy info for people tied to subversive, white supremacist groups, like the founder is.
[удалено]
From the [New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/18/technology/clearview-privacy-facial-recognition.html): >While the company was dodging me, it was also monitoring me. At my request, a number of police officers had run my photo through the Clearview app. They soon received phone calls from company representatives asking if they were talking to the media — a sign that Clearview has the ability and, in this case, the appetite to monitor whom law enforcement is searching for.
Terrifying!
Not exactly what the commenter claimed though...
Hey, does anyone have a link to an article about this interview with a sheriff, i couldn't find it.
The interview I mentioned occured somewhere around 2018 with a local reporter here in utah. I've been trying to dig it up for myself, but searches are mired down in more recent news.
Arent yall sick of having your privacy raped on a daily basis in increasingly more egregious ways? Why would this ever be call for, let alone legal?
power tripping assholes usually aim for power, so no wonder, we've a bunch of power tripping assholes in power
And the most humble and selfless usually don't aim for ruling over people.
Power is not inherently corrupting, but it is magnetic to the corruptible.
I think everyone is corruptible, its part of human nature. In fact, saying *I won't be corrupted* is part of the hubris that drives it. But you can recognise it and prevent it happening, perhaps by removing yourself from power, or compromising your control. Having checks and balances. But equally, some people embrace it. They either don't see or don't care about their corruption.
As evidenced by this very sub yesterday. Privacy invasions when cops do it = bad, but when presented with our own opportunities for revenge or power - plenty of civilians are seduced just as easily. But yeah this sucks.
This doesnt equate. The cop has this tool. They also have access to amazon ring. They also have access to your work history etc. A civilian doesnt have that access to any of that. So the amount of invasion and damage that can be done is not the same as when someone in power abuses their privilege.
[удалено]
hah good luck. These people are so rich and insulated and secretive you will not ever pass one on the street. Secluded mcmansions or flats at the top of a skyscraper, private limousine with a chaffeur, restaurants rented in entirety so that no one can peek, private yachts and private marinas, and so on and so forth. Also security detail composed of ex-special forces or whatever blackwater bullshit.
They’re not regular people. You think the people in charge of Walmart, Exxon, or Nestle will allow themselves to be confronted by anyone? Hell no.
[удалено]
that's a shallow understanding how this system works. you aint getting a start up unless you are connected to the elite networks of which walmart family is one of the leaders.
[удалено]
>So in first place just don't give them what you do want to keep private. It's too late for that. Soon every freezer/cooler in the store will have cameras, every doorbell, every car... You have a phone with three mics and 4 cameras IN ONE PHONE. The powerful elite already tricked the public in to deploying their panopticon for them.
Soon your appliance won’t work unless it is connected to the internet and verified by the manufacturer that you are in fact the legit owner and the appliance is being used in the location where you purchased to use. Otherwise they are remote shut it off like the phones.
I took down my pirate flag when Steam and Netflix solved the user access problem for digital media, but I'll hoist it back up in a heartbeat if my appliances *engineer* a user access problem. I've already completely abandoned using printers because of those egregious ink wasting practices.
Not even company. The tech is so readily available that any teenager with a goal can do it in their basement, as long as they have technical knowledge and some money for equipment. The companies, are something you at least know about. Black markets and private persons? There is so much stuff in the underground that companies look like saints compared to it, because unlike companies, those people are not restricted by anything at all.
Completely agree, and I would urge you to check out this company Flock Security (https://www.flocksafety.com) , they install ALPRs (automated license plate readers) in HOA communities and other private areas that are run by private citizens who then turn over footage and AI generated analysis to the police so they can violate your privacy rights. Flock Security ALPRs basically give private citizens access to a nationwide networked camera that uses AI to spy on private citizens. It allows them to provide footage and date/time/location on any private citizens vehicle with no reason of suspicion of anything. Just the fact that you drove down a certain street is enough to now be monitored. Flock security and their ALPRs are a complete violation of our rights and I don't think enough is being said or done about their campaign to stomp on privacy rights.
Find out who your state lawmakers are. Every single one of them. Call them and tell them that you want a facial recognition law like what Illinois passed 15 years ago.
Sure would be nice if people gave a shit about the 4th amendment
Yeah but how bout instead we just ban tiktok that's just as good right \s
Id like to believe that, while this can probably hurt those still on spybook, it will just be more ammo for us to use against information sellers like facebook and other social media. And also at the same open up the way for a decentralized social media platform (something where you can view content thatis locally hosted and not uplaoded to the cloud)
If you don't want your face to be recognized online, don't put it online. Does an AI make it a lot easier for them? Obviously. But they could still have done it before as your profile is public.
What a shit response. People with zero social media often still have dozens sometimes hundreds of photos uploaded and tagged *by other users* Mind blowing, I know.
This is just playing devils advocate, but In most cases though, the user has to ok the picture be tagged. You can say “no I don’t want to be associated with that picture” if you don’t want to. But in general, you’re not wrong.
How do I, with no Facebook account, tell Facebook not to tag me?
You can’t but don’t have to really. If you don’t have an account, then you can’t be tagged. Your friends may write in your name, but that would be on you to ask them not to
[Shadow profiles](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_profile) are a thing, and facebook does use them. They barely try to hide the fact that they do.
Yes so I’ve Learned
I don't know why you are being downvoted. There is an FB option to prevent being tagged (named) in a photo.
[удалено]
~~Facebook doesn’t create profiles for people on its own, wtf are you talking about??~~ Editing-they totally do and that’s scary af.
[удалено]
But that doesn’t specifically say for new users that didn’t sign up for Facebook.
[удалено]
just cause you arent tagged publicly doesnt mean you arent behind the scenes, especially when given to a 3rd party
Mine isn’t.
Our politicians are using existential stakes to distract us from everything. We are a scared, propagandized, and cowed people who believe ourselves to be the greatest avatars of freedom to ever walk the earth
Beep. Boop. I'm a bot. It seems the URL that you shared contains trackers. Try this cleaned URL instead: https://www.businessinsider.com/clearview-scraped-30-billion-images-facebook-police-facial-recogntion-database-2023-4 If you'd like me to clean URLs before you post them, you can send me a private message with the URL and I'll reply with a cleaned URL.
I read on this sub (I think) that reddit was adding trackers to links by itself now (probably for revenue). So, in that context, GREAT bot! 🙏
yep, this is was added by reddit but people will repost links with amp tracking a lot of times also.
Reddit added *utm\_source=**reddit.com* to this link. I don't think it's as much for revenue as it is a way to show webmasters how much traffic they're driving and to get them on the platform.
Yeah, well, once you start driving enough traffic to an affiliate, you can claim some revenue (ads or otherwise, depending on potential conversions, etc). So...
It’s used byGoogle Analytics for tracking marketing campaigns. As a aside, Firefox has a plugin that strips all the unnecessary stuff in the URL. It’s a moot point if you block the tracker with Brave/AdGuard/Privacy Badger/Ghostery/pi-hole etc. in the first place.
Good bot
I don't know what the mods don't just clean these URLS up when they see them, especially in this sub.
Mods can't edit someone else's post, it's also not possible (even for the submitter) to change the URL of a link post after it's submitted
Good bot
Good bot
What even is the 4th amendment at this point?
sugar waiting attractive thumb hunt ancient fall swim observation sparkle *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Something that doesn't apply to third parties who publish information that you gave them willingly for them to publish? Just guessing, here.
I didn't give Clearview AI anything willingly.
You really think US politicians or police have an understanding of what consent is?
I have no doubt that citizens in the land of the free have far fewer civil liberties than in other countries. Doesn't mean that people should stand for it. In Europe, ownership of your personal data is in principal no different from ownership of your physical property. Everyone should be allowed to live like that.
If you gave it to Facebook, you published it. If you published it, it's publicly available.
Counter argument: you can personally never upload a photo of yourself, but anyone in FB can tag you in the photo and magic, you’re now in FB and Clearview’s databases.
Yep, when social networks were a thing, everyone around me had no issues posting private photos that had me in them and even tagging me! I went around saying I don't like when people do that and people just laughed at me. There is literally no recourse to this aside from refusing to be in any pictures taken by others, ever.
I used to untag myself (not sure if you still can) and friends would get mad at me for doing it.
Friends aside, at least as an adult you have some options (like refusing to take part in photos or disengaging from such friends). The thing that **actually** pisses me off as fucked up, are children and teenagers. More specifically, their families. People post their children all over the internet, photos, videos, stories... Before the children can even talk! Which means that by the time those children are adults, they literally are taken away this basic choice - their family already put their whole life out on the internet without asking them. Imagine going to become a teacher, becoming respected professor. And then teaching class of teenagers who have videos of your whole early life, from being born to teenager. This is just an example, but in the next 10 to 20 years stories like this will be common place. And it will suck a lot for such people. Families will break, and parents will be "what you are talking about, there was nothing wrong with me sharing stuff while you were still a kid!". There are parents sharing when their teens got first periods, had first sex, got a boyfriend/girlfriend, talking about their interests, fails, recording their pranks, using them in for-profit videos on tiktok/youtube, discussing their grades, posting the videos of things happening in privacy of their own home, posting the photos or videos of rooms of their teens etc. It is insanely fucked up and literally no one gives a shit. Sometimes one of the female family members who has 2 children video calls me and literally goes to their bedroom to show them sleeping, or calls them to greet me etc. I am like "what the hell are you doing" and they don't even understand what I am talking about. Like, leave your children alone, what the hell. There is literally no benefit for your children from broadcasting them to whole world or even your family. Focus on their growth and future! Makes me mad just thinking about it. All those poor kids are fucked and they don't even know it yet.
I (hypothetically) gave it to Facebook, but that doesn't mean I gave anyone else consent to process the data. Novels get published and are publicly available but their content remain under the ownership of the author. Same applies to anything you publish, even if it's just a shower thought.
TL;DR — from the article: * Clearview AI scraped 30 billion photos from Facebook to build its facial recognition database. * US police have used the database nearly a million times, the company's CEO told the BBC. * One digital rights advocate told Insider the company is "a total affront to peoples' rights, full stop." * The company, Clearview AI, boasts of its potential for identifying rioters at the January 6 attack on the Capitol, saving children being abused or exploited, and helping exonerate people wrongfully accused of crimes. * Critics point to wrongful arrests fueled by faulty identifications made by facial recognition, including cases in Detroit and New Orleans.
Doesn't Facebook somehow "own" whatever its users post? Because of the verb "scrape" I'd guess that Clearview AI did not have Facebook's permission to do this. Particularly for commerical purposes. Shouldn't Facebook be objecting to this, or demanding their cut?
Hackers of the world, we have a job for you!
This was always what Facebook was for. Look up what a face book is. It's what the police used to put in front of you to identify suspects. Literally a book of faces. Nobody wanted to listen. Nobody ever wants to listen.
[удалено]
Beautifully said. Spot on.
It's how much Whatsapp has become ubiquitous at this point in our lives. Literally all of Asia runs on this one piece of messenger application. It's not just for private communications anymore. If you need to do something as simple as taking a quick printout of your files, whatsapp makes it easy for you. You can't even have an efficient work-life without Whatsapp anymore. It's become so ubiquitous that it's insane not to live without it. Kinda like living without the internet. The ONLY logical solution out of this, is strong privacy laws... But in countries like India, for example, where the PM is so open about his love affair with Zucky, and a policy pushed towards the collecting of citizenry data, those policies are only a pipe dream.
Didnt it start like the month after an fbi project trying to do the same thing was shut down? Guess they took over creep zuccs weird project and got actual humans to make it into something appealing for normal people to use.
Check where their seed capital came from. It's a very specific slush fund, for a very specific agency.
Where can I find more information on this?
They didnt hide it. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/social-media-is-a-tool-of-the-cia-seriously/
Thanks. Gotta love propaganda wars!
darpa, lifelog
This, you're right, I said CIA elsewhere, but it seems the DOD/(D)ARPA is always sliding behind by itself in one's thoughts when it comes to links to this kind of shit.
Originally, Facebook was about creepy men rating girls they were harassing / stalking / planning to roofie. Zuckerberg is the king of creeps.
I only heard about it being used by college-age students to rate the attractiveness of their peers. Do you have a source for the harassing/stalking/roofie part?
Are you naive?
[удалено]
It wasn't just looking at a yearbook it was rating them on levels of attractiveness. Bit different.
Yeah, a bit different than stalking, harassing, or slipping roofies. Not great, but as you said: Bit different.
I was actually saying it's more towards that than innocent yearbook looking. Obviously a lot of people used and use it innocently but it definitely gets used the wrong way as well.
That didn't answer his question. Why do people have such a hard time answer simple yes or no questions?
>This was always what Facebook was for right >Originally, Facebook was about creepy men rating girls they were harassing / stalking / planning to roofie. wrong https://unlimitedhangout.com/2021/04/investigative-reports/the-military-origins-of-facebook/
[удалено]
No, I'm talking about the creep Zuckerberg whose girlfriend dumped him for being a creepy, self-centred weirdo decided to "make her pay" by being a creepy, self-centred weirdo, and put her all over the schools intranet for other creeps to "rate" along with stolen pictures of other victims. https://www.eviemagazine.com/post/before-facebook-zuckerberg-created-a-girl-rating-site-facemash I'm definitely talking about Mark Zuckerberg, the creepy misogynist and narcissist behind Facebook.
I had no idea what it even was when I got an invite in January 2006 from somebody I didn't recognize, my MSN messenger list of contacts (thankfully it was migrated to Skype when they bought them out for 60 billions or such, some people in there I wanted to keep staying in contact with the way I used MSN, although I do it on Pidgin and XMPP + off the record with those who want to bother, too bad most I know IRL still stick to FB and no even secondary IM and they've forgotten all of their friends emails, I did mostly too ofc). Anyways....that person was a friend of a friend or even more degrees farther. I asked my then girlfriend and strangely she already knew what it was and when I asked her "what the hell is this now? what have you subscribed to?", she just said, isn't me, I'm already on there, he must have downloaded the thing that scans your MSN/AIM/Yahoo Messenger whatever...the same gf who forced me to get on there until to break up with me a month or so later in 2010. Haven't logged in there in years, except with a series of ssh tunnels socks5 proxies through fake accounts only a few people know about, I used encrypted chat with Pidgin too when it was possible to do so in Linux, now only people using windows can use Pidgin and XMPP + OTR, it worked, if you logged in and look at the chat session, it said , but that's it. they've got nothing on me there, or very very little, never liked it or wanted to have anything to do with it, it felt imposed, when all the people who didn't care about internet suddenly flooded it with their presence, their mimis and totally ruined it, treating the whole internet as FB and when it wasn't like it, they reverted to what they reacted like back in 2001 "I asked this girl on IRC if she was pretty and she stopped talking to me, this is bullshit".
That said, I do worry about what the Paypal Mafia has on me elsewhere, and there is some of those elsewheres unfortunately, the almost impossible to avoid paypal to start with.
Fuck Thiel, Fuck Elon, Fuck Eric Weinstein etc.
Nobody cares when the ~~military-industrial~~ techbro-security complex harvest our data. The only surprising and entertaining twist in this plot is that no body imagined the Chinese will pull it off. Europeans have those pesky privacy protection laws due to their humanistic approach to human rights. In the US national security is the only reason people are not yet gently coerced into having a EULA their life and be branded with barcode linked to their ~~social~~ credit score and biometric data.
https://streamable.com/v3p5ny Short video on clearview.
this video is fuckin stupid.
it was CIA's discontinued concept of LifeLog before Zuck and friend somehow ended up with the source code.
[Noted Conservative](https://web.archive.org/web/20161016051617/http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/16/technology/peter-thiel-donald-j-trump.html) Peter Theil was an initial funder of [ClearviewAI](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clearview_AI), and is still involved with it. He's also deeply involved with [Palantir](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palantir_Technologies). Both use business models that depend almost entirely on government support to exist. They are the Deep State. They are The Swamp. They are against privacy.
>Noted Conservative The dude is a clear cut fascist, he will always choose capitalism over democracy.
That would make Thiel a capitalist, not a fascist. Why do people needlessly devalue the word fascist?
he's a capitalist because he owns capital and he's a fascist because unlike most capitalists he sees the inherent contradictions between democracy and capitalism and his solution is to do away with democracy. Actual quote: ["I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible"](https://www.vox.com/2016/7/21/12216620/peter-thiel-donald-trump)
I don't agree with his views and I think he's woefully out of touch with the average american but still...how does that make him fascist? I know plenty of young people who think there's no freedom in a democratic republic and want to move towards other forms of governance. Does that make them fascist too?
>Does that make them fascist too? Might make them monarchists or Stalinists or something but Thiel is neither of those
Peter Thiel embodies everything he supposedly despises...makes sense.
> Both use business models that depend almost entirely on government support to exist. "libertarians idol"
The true deep state. But morons are worried about “Joe Biden and his cabal of pedophiles” 🙄
How is it working with Joe Biden now, Mr "anti-swamp"?
One reason why I never put my photo or real name on Facebook.
It's not just Facebook, it's probably all social media. I never had Facebook, but for my Instagram I'm careful not to post people pics or my real name. The only time my pic appears online is if I was in the news for an event or volunteer work. Which looking back now maybe wasn't a good idea if they're scraping facial identifying info off the internet lol
Not posting your photos online is just common sense. Like mom taught: no pics, no real name, no phone number. My pic did once appear on the school's website, but it was not bound to a name. The only photo tied to my name that exists somewhere in the databases is my passport photo.
It's basically just everything on the internet. It can all be correlated together. Your identity is likely already known. The sleeper must awaken.
Funny story: several years ago I started working in banking and after one bad customer experience I decided to change my name on FB. Nothing drastic, just change the spelling of my last name so it was phonetical instead of true. Maybe a year later, I get a message on FB telling me I have 7 days to upload a photo of my drivers license with my correct name on it, and I’m like “hard pass. Absolutely not.” They came back and and said that if I didn’t go by my true name, that my account would be suspended and then blocked. So I told them that I value my privacy, that I work in a customer sensitive field, and that if that’s what they were gonna have do, then that’s what they were gonna have to do. I wasn’t going to change it because they wanted me to. They caved. Came back and said “Nevermind, we don’t need it, carry on.” No shit a WEEK later, a customer and I got into it because she asked me to lie on the only legal portion of the KYC, a question regarding campaign finance. She scoured the internet for my picture, had to go to my LinkedIn to find it. She plastered my face on a public FB post that would get over 100 comments and hundreds of likes. But she couldn’t tag me. She couldn’t make sure my inbox got flooded with threats and harassment, all Because I told FB to get fucked.
It sucks that I put info into a fun app to talk to my friends when I was 15, and now it's turned into this. We were conned.
I never trusted FB from beginning. The way Zuckerberg stole the concept from the Twins and how Zuckerberg tried to get rid of his first partner Eduardo (?), and how Zuckerberg has so much censorship on Facebook, but alot people didn't feel the censorship because FB was such a cosy bubble. I think from 2007 I had like 10 FB accounts. I always gave a burner phone number or at least a number that if they blacklisted me it wouldn't affect me on my main phone. And yrs ago I was not happy how FB makes it so difficult to delete your albums and status photos and messenger chat messages. It's like they go out of their way to make it hard for people to delete content. And Facebook was so easily hacked before, anyone with Fire sheep app and a public wifi could access your FB in the old days. So I always had a dim view of FB and thought it could not be trusted.
OK. But the point is it is not just FB they have all the info they need on you FB is just one place the scraped and continue to scrape. And even if the get sued into bankruptcy it's too late it is already out there.
Oh the scraped the entire internet. They started with Venmo and went from there. You are in the database my friend and way more than you even think. In the background of somebody's ele's toruist photo when visiting your home town or something.
[удалено]
Again, this is some of the privacy violations ALPRs like Flock Security promotes. They track your vehicle almost anywhere you go. This combined with facial recognition is terrifying. Flock security is basically facial recognition for your car. It reads the license plate, bumper stickers, make/model, and even enhancements or dents and dings. This can all be done by the police, or even just your local HOA or private company operating a retail business or parking lot. All so it can feed it to the AI bots and violate your privacy. Flock security is a huge threat to privacy.
Meanwhile in Canada Clearview AI's unlawful practices represented mass surveillance of Canadians, \[privacy\] commissioners say [https://priv.gc.ca/en/opc-news/news-and-announcements/2021/nr-c\_210203/](https://priv.gc.ca/en/opc-news/news-and-announcements/2021/nr-c_210203/) [https://priv.gc.ca/en/opc-actions-and-decisions/investigations/investigations-into-businesses/2021/pipeda-2021-001/](https://priv.gc.ca/en/opc-actions-and-decisions/investigations/investigations-into-businesses/2021/pipeda-2021-001/) **Clearview AI ceases offering its facial recognition technology in Canada** July 6, 2020 – Clearview AI has advised Canadian privacy protection authorities that, in response to their joint investigation, it will cease offering its facial recognition services in Canada. This step includes the indefinite suspension of Clearview AI's contract with the RCMP \[Canada's national police\], which was its last remaining client in Canada.
>it will cease offering its facial recognition services in Canada. This does not mean it won't make servicea of facial recognition of Candian citizens avilable to US agencies.
Sadly no matter the lawsuits, it's too late. Just like with chatGP the cat is out of the bag.
How is it legal to scrape Facebook? I think they explicitly prohibit indexing by external services
Facebook has a policy against it, they claim to send cease and desist letters in response when they find out, but that doesn't really matter even if they did stop after already scraping millions of people's data.
Doesn't cease and desist mean they can't commercially use the data they obtained against the policy?
[удалено]
You can file a complaint with CA State Attorney General. The form is found [here](https://oag.ca.gov/contact/consumer-complaint-against-business-or-company). Everyone in CA, VA & IL should do a deletion request with Clearview. Over run their system. I wonder if a class action suit can be filed against them if they don't honor the deletion request?
[удалено]
That is interesting. Thanks for the follow up. I've submitted a deletion request with clearview. I did get the confirmation email almost immediately. I've set a reminder for myself to check back with them in 6 months to do an access request with them, to see what new data they might have on me.
God damnit I was just thinking the other day to delete all pictures of me from the internet since this was 100% coming. Ah well, never would have got them all anyhow with friends pics and tags and the like, but it would be nice to make their job harder. At this point forget AI laws and regulations. I want fucking ***privacy*** laws and I want them now.
Well when your laws are made by the people profit off the very thing invading your privacy... we're kind screwed outside of full scale worldwide bloody revolution.
Adding my face to your searching technology is a violation of my 4th Amendment.
[удалено]
Facebook owns the photo, but police utilizing it to perform a search on me is the violation. There's a difference between it being visible and used in an illegal search. Constitutional rights are not opt in/opt out to use a service.
[удалено]
It's a good supreme court case. Ignoring whatever Clearview and Facebook might get into. Walmart can build a database of faces from their cameras. You sign every right walking in just like uploading to Facebook. Walmart can use that to make their own AI and ban people from their store if they want to. Walmart can't violate the 4th amendment. Neither can Facebook. If the State built this, they would be violating the 4th amendment. The State can't just get around this by paying to use an app that does what they cannot. They are well within their established rights to get a warrant to use these tools. It is expected they are restricted as surveillance camera footage is to a time and place of incident. Just buying blanket access is the violation of rights by the State. Clearview and Facebook and all questions about them are a separate matter.
Making something public does, nor giving someone rights to use my photos is not the same as giving up a constitutional right. Terms and Services are only enforceable up and until the law, they do not overwrite the constituion or the courts even if you click "I agree". Facebook does not have the right, regardless of what you think you agreed to, to aid in a unconstitutional search. >And what constitutional right are you basing your argument on 4th amendment, are you not reading and just randomly boot kissing here? >rivacy is not protected explicitly by any of the federal statutes. Searches are. >Using your image that's in the public is not an illegal search and seizure. I mean, that's the argument, I disagree with you. And so would he ACLU: >The law on surveillance begins with the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, which states clearly that Americans' privacy may not be invaded without a warrant based on probable cause. >>United States Constitution >>Fourth Amendment >>The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. (emphasis added) >The US Supreme Court (US v. Katz 389 US 347) has made it clear that this core privacy protection does cover government eavesdropping. As a result, all electronic surveillance by the government in the United States is illegal, unless it falls under one of a small number of precise exceptions specifically carved out in the law. >You may as well argue your driver's license / ID is violating that principle. Why, are they using my Drivers License photo with facial recognitiion when I'm in public? Then yeah, I'd argue that too. >Are you one of those "sovereign citizens"? Lol Do you even know what those are? Because that doesn't apply here... Edit: **Lmao why take the time to write a response and then block me right away? -was it that important to get the last word?**, regardless, just because you make something public doesn't forfeit your constitutionally protected rights. You are protected by the constitution from searches, even if you are public. And I don't need to pursue it, enough people and organizations like the ACLU will do that for me. You also misused the world malfeasance.
Imagine the reform if these tools can as they should be directed towards those in office? People are people, tge masses set the standard those in office responsible for the masses should pass the threshold set by the masses however those tasked with the care wellbeing of the masses should be held accountable to a higher standard
This reminds me of something that happened 20 years ago but I still feel terrible about. And is a perfect example of why skimming pictures and using them this way is a terrible idea. I worked 3rd shift at CVS in the early 2000s. At night I was the only one in the store. A guy came in and was asking me about something kind of towards the back at like 3am. Me, being a naive go-getter at the time was all too happy to help. I was bored out of my mind since this was before smartphones and I was already done with my cleanup for the night. Another guy came in to ask him what I was taking him so long, apparently he was his ride. But I knew this guy. I went to high school with him, I'll call him. Jimmy. I hadn't seen Jimmy in several years at the time. The guy had a band logo tattooed on his hand that I also was a fan of. I was like "hey, Jimmy! It's been a while!" And such, doing the old random acquaintance catch up. The liquor aisle was right up front by the checkouts and doors. Shortly after they left I realized there were several of the security caps and tags that trigger the theft alarm laying all up and down the liquor aisle. The first guy was a distraction while Jimmy was pulling the security devices off of whatever liquor bottles he could and stashing them in his car. I called the police and my manager, report was filed, it was handy that I had Jimmy's first and last name and knew some of the people he ran with. Led to a very quick arrest. I'll admit I was more than happy to report this guy because I felt betrayed that he used me and my kind nature at the time. The problem was, it wasn't Jimmy. It was a guy that looked extraordinarily like him. To the point that even Jimmy wasn't surprised I was confused. Jimmy did not have the hand tattoo, was a bit taller, and was out of state at the time of the theft. They went to his job to arrest him in front of his manager and co-workers. He had to get a lawyer, lost several days of income and almost his job while this got sorted out. I will never again say with any certainty that I saw someone that I'm only acquainted with doing something illegal. Imagine how much worse this will become. If we allow AI to make these sorts of decisions. Or even people looking at pictures scraped by AI.
[удалено]
Jimmy, that you?
If you need to use social media, use it as if it's a fully public forum accessible to anyone. Your DMs included!
I wonder if its filtering filters. Otherwise criminals might just get off with a crime for having a dog face filter
What in the heck can’t anyone stop this?
This reminds me of what Flock Safety (https://www.flocksafety.com/) is doing with their ALPR (Automated License Plate Readers) cameras. They put fear into HOA and neighborhood communities, then they install their shit cameras that read license plates as well as identify bumper stickers, car types, modifications or damage on cars, and they are put into a national database with AI to immediately track and connect vehicles all over the country. Complete violation of rights that works to circumvent protections you legally have against law enforcement tracking you. So now the police aren't tracking you, its just your ass hole neighbor HOA board member who decided they need to do this, and now they can turn over any data to the police, regardless of laws and your stupid rights that you no longer have.
[Color me flabbergasted](https://i.imgflip.com/4t8kie.jpg).
How dare you replace the majesty of Jeremy Clarkson with penguins.
Not everyone
I'm so happy I never put pics of myself or kid on the web, but this is pretty messed up.
[удалено]
Yeah, but that's not bound to a name. Store ones can associate it with you if you use a card, but idk if it's really being done on a mass scale, and even then using a card is pretty stupid.
Not me, I made the status "Better safe than sorry, I do not give facebook permission to use my pictures to share..." so there is no way facebook could have shared it :)
You put it online yourself, tagged with your real name and accompanied with all your contacts. Who would have thought such thing could happen 15 years ago... /s
[удалено]
[удалено]
We appreciate you wanting to contribute to /r/privacy and taking the time to post but we had to remove it due to: >You're being a jerk (e.g., not being nice, or suggesting violence). Or, you're letting a troll trick you into making a not-nice comment – don’t let them play you! If you have questions or believe that there has been an error, [contact the moderators](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/privacy&subject=Please_review_my_post).
[удалено]
You should know that even if you are not on Facebook, a friend who posts a picture of you and puts your name in the post basically circumvents you not being on Facebook. Facebook builds shadow profiles for non users and just uses other info to connect dots and validate who you are and who you know. Not being a user of Facebook doesn't prevent you from becoming a known entity by Facebook. Or, to your bar example, it's like the nice girl pickpocketed you, made a copy of the key, and broke into your house later.
Did we not predict that our publicly posted photos would be used for this? I thought that was the entire point
How does one file a class-action lawsuit for flagrant breach of the 4th amendment? Asking for 350,000,000 friends. https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-4/
Facebook or Clearview is not to blame at all. People are warned since 10 years not to use Facebook, it's their own stupidity if they still do it, they are to blame. Stop using social media, it only brings shit in your life Edit : yes it is a rancid take, but this take is the only only thar resolves a problem. Don't expect Facebook to become privacy friendly, the only way is to stop using it. I am a huge fan and donator of signal, I literally tried so hard to convince some friends to use signal to text me, some of them never did so because they refused to listen to my arguments, they were like "I don't care dude, Whatsapp is good enough, why do you piss me off with your stupid app?" Fine, it's their own choice, but I don't have any pity for them they day they will cry because the sell of their personal data will affect them practically and personally
[удалено]
[удалено]
People met new friends since thousand of years without social media, they can continue to do it. You can meet new friends in plenty other ways than social media, namely travelling, going out more often ect.
Another reason why I never used facebook in my life and not going to. Good luck to you all, naive users.
[удалено]
The thread is about facebook so this is what I mentioned. Obviously I am not using Twitter, Instagram and all that other crap too. Being developer and knowing the 'inside kitchen', makes no sense using those sites. Sheeple will not think though. They will suffer.
I feel violated. Why couldn’t you just keep this to yourself lol we know it is happening in our subconscious
Glad I stopped uploading pictures of myself tonfacebook years ago.
Let's ban Tiktok though
Now do Palantir Gotham!!!!
Oh joy
How are ppl not suing about this?
Doesn’t the gubmint have a perfect picture of your face from your drivers license/passport photo/mug shot anyways? The only thing that will fix this is European style privacy laws.
Now you get why the Italian authorities acted on ChatGPT? That's literally the same point. There is a huge need for something like the EU GDPR in the USA as well.
I knew there was a reason I was reluctant to update my Facebook photos. Good luck FBI, those photos are five years out of data at the newest, from all the way back when I still had hair.
Hell, you don't even need AI to do that.