Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 159

Thread: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

  1. #26
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

    Can we opt out of the google glass app now?
    With multiple 'smart glass' developers now marketing their hardware, and with even more 3rd party facial recognition software developers, there won't be any truly effective means to 'opt out'. From early info it appears that individuals will be allowed to 'opt out' of a particular facial characteristics database ... but there could also be many other facial characteristics databases that the individual isn't even aware they are listed in. And of course there is no way to opt out of a state driver's license photo database, which is a matter of 'public record', which some facial recognition software developers are already working with certain states to be able to link to as an adjunct to existing background check search software.

    Also, the already in use facial recognition software by upscale dep't stores, by city street cams, etc., has already prompted some legal discussions regarding the potential 'regulation' possibilities for 'smart glass' devices / facial recognition software. The common thread legal point involved is a reasonable 'expectation of privacy' ... with the concensus being that people in 'public places' don't have any right to expect privacy. Unfortunately, all businesses which are open to the general public ( including strip clubs ) constitute 'public places'.

    Additionally, potential 'regulation' possibilities for 'smart glass' devices / facial recognition software are also limited by the legal concept of the 'public's right to know' ... the same legal principle which allowed sex offender ID databases etc. to be established to allow members of the general public to know that their neighbor / co-worker etc. was once charged with a sex crime, the same legal principle that allows local news media to report arrests, etc. Slippery Slope 301 !

    Notably, up until now, Google Glass has really been the only 'mature' smart glass product offering. Google VOLUNTARILY chose to restrict the packaging / bundling of facial recognition software with Google Glass because they did not want a ground-swell of 'controversy' to accompany the initial release of Google Glass for public sale. This voluntary restriction, in combination with Google Glass being the one and only product offering actually available to the general public, effectively postponed the resolution of the legal issues associated with the use of facial recognition software by the general public. However, as Google Glass and other competing 'smart glass' offerings start to proliferate later this year, Google's voluntary restrictions are extremely likely to 'fall by the wayside'.

    Privately owned businesses do, however, have a legal right to demand that cameras etc. be left at the door before a person is allowed entry to the premesis. However, where 'glasses' are concerned, it is arguable that the Americans with Disabilities Act might supersede the right of the business owner ... and especially so if the 'smart glass' incorporates prescription eyeglass lenses.

    With the non-Google 'integrated smart glass' offerings that are already available from other companies ( see pic in one of my previous posts ), plus this latest announcement that Google's 'smart contact lenses' will be hitting the market in the near future, the task becomes extremely difficult for business owners to identify which customers are coming in the front door equipped with 'stealth' video recording / facial recognition ID capabilities. Could you spot this stuck onto a customer's eyeball ?





    Also, camgirls who provide public performances in the form of streamed free video chat have no 'expectation of privacy' whatsoever. While facial recognition software works best with a direct camera image right now, software developers have already made big improvements in the effectiveness of using it on a 'second hand' image. And the evolution of 'True HD' webcam resolutions only makes that job easier.
    Last edited by Melonie; 04-16-2014 at 04:25 AM.

  2. #27
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    717
    Thanks
    1,880
    Thanked 1,415 Times in 521 Posts

    Default Re: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

    In that case how do you avoid being recognised by the software?

    One blog suggested nose plugs - or putting hair across one half of your face. But on the other hand those would make you less appealing to the customers too. :SS

  3. #28
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

    ^^^ if the generally available facial recognition software improves to the point of the 'commercial' facial recognition software already being used by upscale dep't stores, etc. ... the answer is 'plastic surgery'. Of course, this only works for a while, until a driver's license renewal or other facial characteristic database updates replace the original facial image / characteristics with the 'surger-ized' version.

    Indeed, based on what little public information has been released about 'commercial' facial recognition software, it appears to rely on precise measurements of the eyes, nose, mouth, chin, cheekbones etc. as well as the relative positions / distances between eyes and nose, between nose and mouth, between mouth and chin etc. If this is the case, then hair has nothing to do with it ... other than obscuring facial features from the camera.

    In regard to nose plugs, indeed inserting something that would distort the outer shape / dimensions of the nose would 'confuse' the facial recognition software. But, as you already pointed out, a dancer attempting to work with a distorted nose is likely to experience reduced earnings.

    For better or worse, it would appear that 'smart glass' devices plus facial recognition software will soon result in a 'determined' strip club or webcam customer being able to quickly determine the real name / address / other personal details for dancers and camgirls. The same technology is also likely to be used by 'bounty hunter' tax collection agents to seek out ( and thus collect paid rewards for ) dancers who have not reported their incomes. The same technology is also likely to be used during future background checks by state professional licensing agencies and sensitive 'straight job' employers. Or stated another way, thanks to 'smart glass' devices and facial recognition software, the 'anonymity' which dancers and camgirls have previously enjoyed via the use of stage names and cam names is likely to soon come to an end.
    Last edited by Melonie; 04-16-2014 at 07:30 AM.

  4. #29
    God/dess
    Joined
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    6,948
    Thanks
    2,846
    Thanked 5,526 Times in 3,113 Posts
    My Mood
    Angelic

    Default Re: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

    If you're starting to see people wear Google Glass in your neighborhood and you're nervous about the privacy implications of the new technology, Japan's National Institute of Informatics might have just the thing for you.

    The institute has created a pair of glasses that are built to block computerized facial recognition. The new glasses, called "Google Glass anti-glasses" by gadget blog Pocket-link, obscure people's facial features when seen on any cameras using infrared technology

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3474950.html

    When someone invents a problem, someone else invents a solution.

  5. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to slowpoke For This Useful Post:


  6. #30
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

    ^^^ good solution for 'walking around' in public ... but no realistic help while dancing or camming.

  7. #31
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

    and here's some 'real world' third party opinion by a new Google Glass user ... from

    (snip)But for the most part, other than the ever-present camera, Glass has left out the sexy/spooky stuff. In a studied effort to seem less creepy, Google is forbidding developers from adding facial-recognition apps to the official Glassware store, even though some have already been created, such as NameTag. For now, Glass is holding the moral line on that particular privacy concern, a policy which I’m dubious will continue, since Google’s historic attitude toward privacy was best voiced by trusty Chairman Schmidt: “If you have something you don’t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it in the first place.”

    But even if Glass never officially sanctions facial recognition, Facebook has just announced its own DeepFace software, which recognizes human faces with 97.25 percent accuracy (the human brain does the same with 97.53 percent accuracy). So ID’ing strangers could soon be as easy as winking a picture on your Glass, sending it to your Facebook page, then waiting for a match. So much for an anonymous stroll in the park."(snip)
    Last edited by Melonie; 04-20-2014 at 06:25 AM.

  8. #32
    Member Versalia's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    70
    Thanks
    38
    Thanked 58 Times in 21 Posts

    Default Re: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

    I wish I didn't have to live in 21st century!!! I though Facebook and the fact that typing in my name in Google reveals my address was creepy enough, but now technology is getting worse and worse...... This ain't freedom. If the governments don't ban that shit, there will be no freedom ever anywhere and for anyone. I don't care if I am a stripper, an investment banker or a burger flipper, I DO NOT want a random stranger to know what I do, where I live and how much I make..... WTF????

  9. #33
    Veteran Member ~*SwanPrincess*~'s Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    575
    Thanks
    2,471
    Thanked 1,062 Times in 389 Posts

    Default Re: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

    There is no more privacy in America. This stuff is downright scary.

  10. #34
    God/dess
    Joined
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    6,948
    Thanks
    2,846
    Thanked 5,526 Times in 3,113 Posts
    My Mood
    Angelic

    Default Re: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

    Quote Originally Posted by Versalia View Post
    I wish I didn't have to live in 21st century!!! I though Facebook and the fact that typing in my name in Google reveals my address was creepy enough, but now technology is getting worse and worse...... This ain't freedom. If the governments don't ban that shit, there will be no freedom ever anywhere and for anyone. I don't care if I am a stripper, an investment banker or a burger flipper, I DO NOT want a random stranger to know what I do, where I live and how much I make..... WTF????
    Government regulation is even worse.

  11. #35
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    571
    Thanks
    107
    Thanked 445 Times in 203 Posts

    Default Re: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

    People have chosen security over liberty. Google is simply providing a tool. Not that city and store camera databases havent been trimming us for years

    Cam girls...lets be honest. All a custie needs is facial rec software that reads his desktop screen and you lose anonymity.

    I am a techie against these 'advances' and a privacy rights nut....who accepts no amount of security can make us safe

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to pinups4 For This Useful Post:


  13. #36
    Featured Member lifetravelergirl's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2010
    Location
    On your regular's lap.
    Posts
    779
    Thanks
    1,156
    Thanked 758 Times in 304 Posts
    My Mood
    Amused

    Default Re: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

    Quote Originally Posted by GlamourRouge View Post
    I'm glad I photograph very different than I look IRL
    Except it doesn't matter how different you look, that is the magic of facial recognition software, you could even change your gender (as in medical sex-change with surgery) and it would still identify you.
    Smoking fetish guys need you to use real cigarettes ...
    Quote Originally Posted by AureliaC View Post
    Because they want it to slowly kill you, it's 90% of the appeal lol

  14. #37
    Member
    Joined
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    46
    Thanks
    9
    Thanked 24 Times in 14 Posts
    My Mood
    Cool

    Default Re: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

    Is this real? Wow, and then they wonder why people dance for so long and can't get out of it!

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to SexyForMe17 For This Useful Post:


  16. #38
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

    Cam girls...lets be honest. All a custie needs is facial rec software that reads his desktop screen and you lose anonymity.
    Unfortunately, exotic dancers aren't any 'better off' in this regard than camgirls. Promo pics on a strip club website, a 'stealth' pic shot by a custy while you are onstage, etc., can produce the same future result .... real name, real address, criminal record, credit report etc.


    Government regulation is even worse
    While I won't debate the political aspects of this issue, one fact needs (re)mentioning. US states are already employing 'tax bounty hunters' ... who are paid a percentage of any additional tax revenues they can generate. I can already envision 'tax bounty hunters' gearing up to make the rounds of strip clubs ... to take 'stealth' pics and thus determine the true identity of every dancer in the club ... to then cross-check against past state tax returns ( as well as social welfare benefit claims, etc. ) in the names of those identified dancers, and to then 'rat them out' in exchange for being paid a 'bounty' by the state.


    it doesn't matter how different you look, that is the magic of facial recognition software
    Indeed, unlike the human brain, computer facial recognition relies on precise measurements / proportions being applied to the eyes vs nose, nose vs mouth, mouth vs chin, chin vs cheekbones etc. Thus hair color or length, or anything else short of facial plastic surgery, will not 'mislead' computer facial recognition algorithms.


    and then they wonder why people dance for so long and can't get out of it!
    Indeed again ... I can also imagine prospective 'straight job' employers snapping a pic of every job applicant, running a facial recognition based internet search, and then asking 'tell me about your stripping / camming job experiences' ... or, more probably, simply saying 'thank you ... NEXT' .

    In point of fact, facial recognition software has been my most serious concern for some time now. There are undoubtedly a whole bunch of dancers and camgirls currently devoting a great deal of time and money toward obtaining a college degree. At the rate facial recognition software is improving / becoming accessible to the 'general public', it's unfortunately highly likely that by the time they graduate their state professional licensing agencies and prospective 'straight job' employers will be fully 'equipped' to discover their stripping / camming work history.


    Is this real?
    It's absolutely real !


    People have chosen security over liberty. Google is simply providing a tool. Not that city and store camera databases havent been trimming us for years
    In fact, the gov't and major corporations have had highly effective facial recognition software available to them for several years now. The only things which 'stopped' proliferation of facial recognition technology to other potential users has been A. the very high initial price of the software, and B. a voluntary ban by Google so that facial recognition opposition would not serve as a major obstacle to the release of Google Glass for sale to the general public. Well, the software will soon be 'virtually free' thanks to Facebook et al, and with the 'Smart Glasses' release already on a roll - i.e. anybody with $1500 could have purchased Google Glass as of last week, and several competing products are due to hit the market in a matter of months - both 'obstacles' have effectively been removed.
    Last edited by Melonie; 04-21-2014 at 12:21 PM.

  17. #39
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    571
    Thanks
    107
    Thanked 445 Times in 203 Posts

    Default Re: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

    I believe the application of these technologies without a warrant is a 4th amendment violation

  18. #40
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

    If the governments don't ban that shit, there will be no freedom ever anywhere and for anyone
    Unfortunately, many decisions on the underlying 'privacy' issues were already decided several years ago. For example, where use of facial recognition software by the general public is concerned, prior decisions establishing a 'Public's Right to Know' could pose a major obstacle. This is the same legal principle used to establish sex offender databases, to authorize 'private detective' activities etc. In fact, there is a convincing legal argument available which essentially equates the use of facial recognition software by a private citizen to the same private citizen engaging a 'private detective' ... with the only real differences falling in areas of cost and efficiency of the resulting investigation. Or put another way, in the past any 'rich' person could have already found out just about anything they wanted to know about a particular camgirl or dancer ... but it would have cost them thousands of dollars and taken weeks. A few months from now anybody with $1500 ( or whatever ) to spend on 'Smart Glasses' can find out just about anything they want to know about a particular camgirl or dancer ... in a matter of seconds.

    Where dancers and camgirls in particular are concerned, previous legal decisions have deemed 'public performances' to have no privacy rights ... although they are protected under copyright law against 'illicit' use of images / video for profit. Since running a facial recognition scan does not involve attempting to make an 'illicit' profit, the 'public performance' aspect prevails.

    There is yet another legal principle involving 'expectation of privacy' - which is arguably THE issue where potential gov't regulation of facial recognition technology is concerned. Court rulings have repeatedly held that such an expectation is limited to the 'privacy' of one's home, apartment, hotel room etc. ... with 'public places' carrying NO expectation of privacy. And every business that is open to the public ... whether that business is brick and mortar or online ... is considered to be a 'public place'.


    I believe the application of these technologies without a warrant is a 4th amendment violation
    ---> and I believe that the 2nd amendment grants me the right to buy and own a lightweight rifle for hunting in my home state of New York, but the prevailing law nonetheless 'disagrees'.


    In specific response to 4th amendment claims re 'unreasonable' search ... from

    (snip)"The FBI and DOD sponsored a legal series about the U.S. government using facial recognition; the latest forum was titled "Striking the Balance - A Government Approach to Facial Recognition Privacy and Civil Liberties." Whenever the word 'balance' is used, privacy and civil liberties are usually about to be kicked in the name of 'security.' When it comes to surveillance via facial recognition technology, federal law enforcement, intelligence personnel and national security agencies are looking into the "gaps in legal/policy authority that may result in privacy and civil liberties vulnerabilities if left unaddressed."

    The Future of Privacy Forum (FPF) Senior Fellow Peter Swire, also a law professor at Ohio State University, spoke about "Facial Recognition by the Government: Privacy and Civil Liberties Issues." Since using "one's facial image, with or without knowledge or consent," can identify and be used to track a person "an inherent tension exists between privacy and facial recognition." The forum was to "examine where the appropriate balance lies between crime and terrorism prevention using facial recognition and robust privacy safeguards." Swire started with two different perspectives about facial recognition, according to FPF.

    1) It has always been legal to observe people in public, and facial recognition technology is simply making this easier.

    2) Facial recognition technology allows an unprecedented ability to surveil and track people, and this information could be stored indefinitely and correlated with other personal information.

    Although "observing a person in public has traditionally not required a warrant," Professor Swire pointed out Fourth Amendment rights figure heavily into the constitutional issues impacting facial recognition tracking. Swire said the Supreme Court's GPS tracking decision "may dramatically impact privacy by requiring law enforcement agents to obtain a warrant to conduct surveillance on suspects in public, something law enforcement has never had to do. However, the fourth amendment contains a consent exception; if an individual consents to a search, a warrant is not required. Professor Swire pointed out that some might argue that individuals consent to going outside or to other public places ."(snip)

    The Professor's last point directly involves 'expectation of privacy' issues. With clear case law already having decided that persons involved in 'public performances' have no expectation of privacy, it would be an extremely difficult legal argument to claim that persons choosing to participate in 'public performances' i.e. exotic dancers and camgirls, have NOT provided consent as described above. Under the FBI / DOD legal analysis, any person who chooses to go outside or chooses to enter a public place for any reason has provided implied consent as described above.

    IMHO we've already slid too far down the proverbial 'slippery slope' to attempt to legally restrict the use of facial recognition technology in public places which do not carry an 'expectation of privacy'. Attempting to 'climb back up the slippery slope' would potentially involve the abolition of sex offender registries, restricting the ability of any person to take a picture in any public place without the express permission of any other person who might appear in the picture , restricting the ability of police to perform warrantless surveillance of suspected persons while they are in public places, restricting the ability of local media to publicize arrested persons who have yet to be proven guilty, abolishing 'private detective' agencies, restricting the ability to post images on social media /upload websites, as well as hundreds of other possibilities ... which IMHO falls into 'snowball's chance in hell' territory.
    Last edited by Melonie; 04-21-2014 at 10:24 AM.

  19. #41
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

    here's yet more feedback from Atlantic Magazine about a recent Carnegie-Mellon sponsored facial recognition test ...

    (snip) from The Atlantic:

    "With Carnegie Mellon's cloud-centric new mobile app, the process of matching a casual snapshot with a person's online identity takes less than a minute. Tools like PittPatt and other cloud-based facial recognition services rely on finding publicly available pictures of you online, whether it's a profile image for social networks like Facebook and Google Plus or from something more official from a company website or a college athletic portrait.

    In their most recent round of facial recognition studies, researchers at Carnegie Mellon were able to not only match unidentified profile photos from a dating website (where the vast majority of users operate pseudonymously) with positively identified Facebook photos, but also match pedestrians on a North American college campus with their online identities. ... '[C]onceptually, the goal of Experiment 3 was to show that it is possible to start from an anonymous face in the street, and end up with very sensitive information about that person, in a process of data "accretion." In the context of our experiment, it is this blending of online and offline data — made possible by the convergence of face recognition, social networks, data mining, and cloud computing —"(snip)

  20. #42
    Moderator
    Joined
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    901
    Thanks
    635
    Thanked 1,519 Times in 585 Posts

    Default Re: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

    Just as a note, in researching the experiment they used a database for comparison that has about 100000 entries, compared to the web with billions if not trillions of images. The computing power required to compare a random image with another random image is immense, and because to the growing number of images, getting larger.

    I am not prepared to panic.

    where this is useful, and is likely to be useful in the near future is comparing a live image, for instance, with a set of images; criminals, customers of the Peoria Kmart, University of Nebraska students.

    At present it is unlikely you are going to be randomly 'outed' because of facial recognition. If some one set out to compare your online image to a subset of people that includes you [residents of Grand Rapids for instance] they are likely to be successful, but that pretty much means they are already looking for YOU and would have found you by other means anyway.

    there is going to be a time when this will be the most effective way of identifying random people, but that time is simply not now.

    Last time I posted on this I looked and could find no online images of myself per google by searching for my name.

    I really think there are enough other things to worry about

  21. #43
    Member Versalia's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    70
    Thanks
    38
    Thanked 58 Times in 21 Posts

    Default Re: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

    I get how this facial recognition tool may be useful for government agencies like FBI, CIA, IRS. I also understand their desire to use such tools, but to give this tool to the general public is beyond ridiculous. I just don't understand why they would do it! However my guess is that Google just wants to cash in on selling this tool to the general public.

  22. #44
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

    ^^^ Indeed, Google, Facebook and many other ( imminent ) competing 'mass market' providers of both 'Smart Glass' technology and facial recognition software have a strong profit motive.

    In regard to the ability to easily and inconspicuously capture facial images, as well as the ability to deploy sufficient computing power for performing 'wide' facial recognition searches, up to now the only thing that really separated the gov't and huge corporations from the small companies and the 'masses' was cost. The recent / imminent release of Google Glass, Facebook DeepFace, and lots of other competing offerings of 'Smart Glass' devices and facial recognition software have really only served to lower the associated cost to the point where this technology now begins to become affordable for small companies and affluent individuals.

    From a purely legal standpoint i.e. 'expectation of privacy' protections, according to the US Constitution at least, the ability to perform warrantless searches on facial images gathered in 'public places' must apply equally to gov't entities, big corporations, small companies and individuals. It's a pretty safe assumption that said gov't agencies and big corporations, who have been using cameras to inconspicuously capture facial images, and who have been using facial recognition software for several years already, are not going to want to 'backtrack' to the point where a warrant must be obtained before a facial recognition search can be performed.

    Thus from a legal standpoint there would appear to only be two options to justify denying facial recognition search capabilities to small companies and individuals as you advocate. The first would be to actually 'backtrack' to the point where every facial recognition search requires a warrant or the express permission of the search 'target'. While this is not impossible, it is unlikely because the gov't agencies and huge corporations will lobby strongly against it. And even if this were to happen, this would not help dancers or camgirls avoid a facial recognition search turning up a past history of 'adult' work in conjunction with future 'straight job' interviews, professional license applications, etc. since the prospective employers and state professional licensing agencies will simply add a requirement to sign a permission form for a facial recognition search to the pile of other required permission forms releasing tax information, credit information etc.

    The other option would be to officially declare that gov't agencies are 'above the law' in the sense that they would be allowed to perform warrantless facial recognition searches while private companies and individuals could not. Talk about a slippery slope with a capital S !!! Is this a realistic possibility ? These days who knows !!!


    I'm not prepared to panic

    there is going to be a time when this will be the most effective way of identifying random people, but that time is simply not now.
    True on it's face, and at this point in time. However, there are undoubtedly a number of camgirls and dancers who are pursuing college degrees ... many in fields where an outed history of 'adult' work could limit their future professional career opportunities. Thus what's 'practical' in the way of facial recognition search results at this point in time is far less relevant than what will be 'practical' in the way of facial recognition search results 4 years from now when they finally graduate and start seeking state professional licenses and / or 'professional' jobs. As we all know, the amount of computing power which is available at a 'reasonable' price continues to grow exponentially over time. Thus Google Glass and Facebook DeepFace need to be viewed as just a 'first step' in the mass marketing of this technology ... with future capabilities similarly improving exponentially over time.

    As to what the capabilities of this technology will actually be 4 years down the road, nobody really knows. But for college student dancers and camgirls, it's certain that they are taking a 'calculated risk' that this technology will develop to the point where their history of 'adult' work IS going to be outed to prospective future employers - thus compromising their potential future professional job opportunities. And, obviously, nobody is going to refund tuition money to, say, a BSN graduate whose only lucrative future professional job offers come from inner city clinics, state prison hospitals, oil / gas rigs, etc.
    Last edited by Melonie; 04-21-2014 at 10:31 PM.

  23. #45
    God/dess simone87's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2012
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    5,171
    Thanks
    7,361
    Thanked 9,469 Times in 3,228 Posts
    My Mood
    Cheeky

    Default Re: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

    why would the anti camera glasses not be ok for camming or stripping? do they look weird or something?

  24. #46
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

    ^^^ you tell me ! This is how the anti camera glasses look to a digital camera ... and camming obviously requires the use of a digital camera.


  25. #47
    God/dess
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    7,964
    Thanks
    6,155
    Thanked 10,183 Times in 4,602 Posts

    Default Re: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

    They look a bit weird, but I don't see why they couldn't be used for camming or stripping. I think that most customers don't go to strip clubs or cam sites to look at the eyes.

  26. #48
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

    ^^^ valid observation, eagle2. But then again you aren't risking your 'livelihood' by attempting to wear anti camera glasses where the dancers and camgirls would be. I'd simply point out that, if a strip club or webcam customer is given the choice of patronizing a beautiful girl without such glasses versus a different ( maybe ... hard to tell ) beautiful girl wearing anti camera glasses, they're probably going to choose the former.

  27. #49
    God/dess simone87's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2012
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    5,171
    Thanks
    7,361
    Thanked 9,469 Times in 3,228 Posts
    My Mood
    Cheeky

    Default Re: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

    wow..well i guess that's out for the camming girls, but if they made them a little smaller and more like regular glasses i guess it could work for strippers. if a guy came in wearing google glasses and i was worried about my privacy, i wouldn't mind turning them off!

  28. #50
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Google just takes Giant Step towards 'outing' dancers and camgirls

    ^^ ^ maybe ^^^ However, for dancers there is also the potential issue of clubowners allowing girls to wear such anti camera glasses inside the club in the first place. The club is absolutely not going to allow such anti camera glasses to be worn when club promo pics are taken, when club website video streaming cameras are in use etc. !!!

    As to making anti camera glasses smaller, the whole reason that anti camera glasses are effective in 'confusing' facial recognition software is that the light sources are able to obscure the camera's view of the eyebrows ( actually the brow bone a.k.a. sub-orbital ridge ), inner eyes, and upper nose ... thus depriving the facial recognition software of important biometric data. If the glasses were to be made smaller, the light sources would no longer be in a physical position to obscure as much of this biometric data, thus rendering them less effective.
    Last edited by Melonie; 04-21-2014 at 11:18 PM.

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 08-15-2013, 09:47 PM
  2. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 07-29-2013, 09:24 AM
  3. AWESOME shit you've seen OTHER camgirls do! [non-outing]
    By Incantatious in forum Camming Connection
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 06-28-2013, 05:08 AM
  4. Iran Takes Another Step to Kill the Petro-Dollar
    By Melonie in forum Dollar Den
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-19-2012, 01:44 PM
  5. What to do when dancers step on your toes?
    By MissSeoulSista in forum Stripping (was Stripping General)
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 09-12-2008, 04:56 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •