Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 159

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

  1. #51
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    ^^^ 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.
    I guess it would depend on the customer. I've seen adult videos where the female wears a mask. If some females can get away with wearing a mask, then glasses should be okay. I've also seen strippers wearing regular glasses. Maybe they'll be able to eventually come up with transparent glasses that can't be penetrated by cameras.
    Last edited by eagle2; 04-21-2014 at 10:50 PM.

  2. #52
    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

    Just by coincidence, I came across this video on Facebooks's facial recognition:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4Rn38_vrLQ

  3. #53
    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 I also ran across this demo regarding 'real time' facial recognition matching to posted Facebook pictures ...



    Again, while it's important to be aware of what today's 'mass market' facial recognition capabilities actually are, in point of fact it is much more important to project what the 'mass market' facial recognition capabilities will be a few years down the road !!! Like it or not, 'adult' images posted to the internet today ... via tube sites, strip club websites, customer uploads etc. ... will almost certainly still be there a few years from now. Thus future facial recognition capabilities could pose a major obstacle when it comes time to retire from camming / dancing, when you graduate with a college degree etc., and attempt to seek a 'straight' job.


    Maybe they'll be able to eventually come up with transparent glasses that can't be penetrated by cameras.
    indeed this is a possibility. Unfortunately, it won't help where tube sites, strip club websites, customer uploads etc. have already placed unobscured 'adult' images of dancers and camgirls into the online 'universe'.
    Last edited by Melonie; 04-21-2014 at 11:42 PM.

  4. #54
    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 know that it's true, but I just don't understand why it is the way it is. Stripping as well as camming is legal in the United States. Why do we live in the society where if a girl was a stripper before, she's automatically without any further question and investigation is considered dirty, shameful, etc and is automatically guaranteed to not get a straight job. Isn't it unconstitutional? To me it sounds a bit like racism, when you discriminate someone by just one characteristic, but in case of strippers it is a discrimination by the work past.

  5. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Versalia For This Useful Post:


  6. #55
    Moderator Optimist's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2004
    Location
    House of Aion
    Posts
    8,074
    Thanks
    7,881
    Thanked 5,705 Times in 2,127 Posts
    My Mood
    In Love

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Versalia View Post
    I know that it's true, but I just don't understand why it is the way it is. Stripping as well as camming is legal in the United States. Why do we live in the society where if a girl was a stripper before, she's automatically without any further question and investigation is considered dirty, shameful, etc and is automatically guaranteed to not get a straight job. Isn't it unconstitutional? To me it sounds a bit like racism, when you discriminate someone by just one characteristic, but in case of strippers it is a discrimination by the work past.
    It's sexism alive and thriving. The stripper is vilified and abused the man is patted on the back. As a side note I noticed even on SVU a supposedly pro-female show they go to great lengths to denigrate the strippers in any story line that has them. You can time a good three minutes of dialogue dedicated to contemptuous quip after quip until they have beat the stripper into the ground with verbal abuse. Once she's safely disarmed of any power or credibility they go on to investigating the crime. That's America. Men own their sexuality and men and their wives own other women's sexuality. We "entice" men to cheat and in everyone's eyes,the next morning, we deserve whatever we get.
    “What a caterpillar calls the end of the world we call a butterfly.” - ECKHART TOLLE

  7. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Optimist For This Useful Post:


  8. #56
    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

    ^^^ actually, in many cases, the decision by 'straight' job employers not to hire former 'adult' industry workers is more pragmatic ( or at least so I have been told by business acquaintances ). From an employer's standpoint, a newly hired former 'stripper' ...

    - increases the likelihood of other employees being distracted from their work
    - increases the chances that a 'hostile workplace' lawsuit may be brought by the former 'stripper' or other female employees
    - increases the chances that a 'sexual harassment' lawsuit may be brought by the former 'stripper'
    - increases the likelihood that workplace drama will start coming from other female employees
    - increases the likelihood that false accusations may come from other employees if the former 'stripper' is given a raise or promotion
    - creates some chance that the business may experience 'public image' problems if the former 'stripper' employee is outed to business customers etc.

    All of these situations involve additional costs to the employer, albeit that some of the costs like lost productivity due to distraction are more subtle than, say, legal fees resulting from potential lawsuits. Obviously, the actual costs of a former 'stripper' being outed ... i.e. a school system firing a former 'stripper' teacher, a local children's hospital firing a former 'stripper' nurse ... with associated bad local publicity and loss of 'public trust' ... is hard to quantify.

    My business acquaintances tell me that, if given a choice of hiring a fully qualified applicant with an 'adult' industry background, versus hiring another fully qualified applicant with no such history, they will cover their own asses and hire the latter every time. Those business acquaintances would deny that sexism is involved in this decision ... merely economics and 'risk management'.

    On the flip side, I'm told that certain prospective employers LOVE to hire ex 'adult' industry workers. Inner city hospitals and schools love being able to hire qualified nurses and teachers who are US citizens and speak fluent English without an accent. 'Boom Town' employers have no problem hiring ex 'adult' industry workers in any capacity, since things are generally so 'rough and tumble' that the possibility of sexual harassment lawsuits crop up 10 times a day and are expected to be thrown out of court.
    Last edited by Melonie; 04-23-2014 at 04:29 AM.

  9. #57
    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 Melonie View Post




    ---> 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'.


    The second amendment has nothing to do with hunting nor does it refer to the weight of any firearms. The second amendment was specifically about allowing the citizens to own and bear arms for their protection from enemies both foreign and domestic.
    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

  10. #58
    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

    ^^^ my point of course was not actually about New York's ban on lightweight semi-auto hunting rifles ( banned because they happen to share a single characteristic with an 'assault weapon' ... in this case a plastic stock ). I happen to agree with your classic interpretation of the 2nd amendment. Obviously, New York legislators and judges didn't share that view ! The important point is that legal decisions can and have been made, and laws can and have been passed, that 'disagree' with classic interpretations of constitutional rights and liberties. And such legal decisions and laws are often justified by 'public safety' concerns trumping individual rights / liberties.

    This is, however, a highly relevant common point regarding regulation of the future use of 'Smart Glasses' and facial recognition software, where the 'public's right to know', and LE's need to ( continue to ) perform warrantless 'surveillance' on people in public places, will almost certainly trump an individual's ( already highly arguable ) 'right' to anonymity while in a public place that does not carry an 'expectation of privacy'.

    As a result of some of the questions raised, I asked an attorney acquaintance to speculate regarding how this is likely to develop. His personal view was ...

    - the 'Smart Glass' devices and facial recognition software will soon find their way into the hands of the general public ... well before any legal regulations are put in place

    - some 'unfortunate incidents' will wind up occurring as a result of the criminal misuse of this technology, which will find their way into mainstream media

    - at this point, legislator discussion regarding new regulations may start to take place

    - as part of those discussions, LE, big business, and 'public right to know' advocates will line up on one side, with individual rights advocates ( my attorney friend mentioned 'tea party' types ) lining up on the other side.

    Setting aside any and all political overtones, at the very least it appears that 'Smart Glass' devices and facial recognition software will soon wind up in the hands of the general public WITHOUT legal restrictions on their use in public places ( which, of course, includes strip clubs and the internet ). Whether or not legal restrictions are put in place at some point down the road is a separate question. Dancers and camgirls need to prepare themselves for dealing with this new technology soon being in the hands of the general public / their customers / prospective 'straight job' employers ... for some period of time at least.
    Last edited by Melonie; 04-24-2014 at 03:51 AM.

  11. #59
    God/dess ScarletKitten's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Hyperspace
    Posts
    2,208
    Thanks
    3,162
    Thanked 6,709 Times in 1,895 Posts

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

    Well, I was going to say that all the dancers should start a petition in their clubs to starting banning this thing, but then I read about the contacts....and well, there's no way of banning those. Unless, they start checking people's eyes, or scanning their eyes for these particular contacts. But would clubs actually go to those lengths? Probably not.

    Oh well. 1984 is here. It has been building up to this since 9/11/01. Just another way to ass-rape our basic privacy and liberty. This is why social media sucks. They have been planning this shit forever now. Just another facet of their grand agenda to keep us all in line, afraid, isolated, and stressed. So we don't come together....they want us isolated from each other, trapped in our own boxes so we are easier to control and manipulate with fear. Don't give in to fear, ladies. Keep going strong. I don't give a fuck anymore. I have no respect for this government/prison/military-industrial-complex/mk-ultra controlled-experiment fucking rat-race society. I have nothing to hide anymore because they are the ones who should be ashamed of themselves, cowering in the night, living in their underground hidden domes, operating HAARP controlling the weather and hiding alien civilization knowledge. It's only going to get worse. But we all have to just keep on fighting!

    "Get up, stand up. Stand up for your right!" - Bob Marley (never forget it)
    "Dancing tables, making deals with devils like a drunk beauty queen"

  12. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to ScarletKitten For This Useful Post:


  13. #60
    Featured Member
    Joined
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Puritanical New England
    Posts
    1,003
    Thanks
    1,798
    Thanked 931 Times in 495 Posts

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

    This! When is society in general going to come to the realization that many, many women have camed, stripped, escorted, bikini modeled, that they can't all be forbidden from working 'real jobs' or teaching kindergarten? Maybe because the economy still sux, we can afford to rule out otherwise qualified candidates because the pool is so large to pick from?

    Quote Originally Posted by Versalia View Post
    I know that it's true, but I just don't understand why it is the way it is. Stripping as well as camming is legal in the United States. Why do we live in the society where if a girl was a stripper before, she's automatically without any further question and investigation is considered dirty, shameful, etc and is automatically guaranteed to not get a straight job. Isn't it unconstitutional? To me it sounds a bit like racism, when you discriminate someone by just one characteristic, but in case of strippers it is a discrimination by the work past.
    Originally Posted by
    I don't know what it is about me that says "wife me up." Everyone wants to choke me or date me. Or both. This job is weird.


    Originally Posted by Nocturnelle
    ... Kittens are assholes but they're just so darn cute.

  14. #61
    Featured Member
    Joined
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Puritanical New England
    Posts
    1,003
    Thanks
    1,798
    Thanked 931 Times in 495 Posts

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

    This! When is society in general going to come to the realization that many, many women have camed, stripped, escorted, bikini modeled, that they can't all be forbidden from working 'real jobs' or teaching kindergarten? Maybe because the economy still sux, we can afford to rule out otherwise qualified candidates because the pool is so large to pick from?

    Quote Originally Posted by Versalia View Post
    I know that it's true, but I just don't understand why it is the way it is. Stripping as well as camming is legal in the United States. Why do we live in the society where if a girl was a stripper before, she's automatically without any further question and investigation is considered dirty, shameful, etc and is automatically guaranteed to not get a straight job. Isn't it unconstitutional? To me it sounds a bit like racism, when you discriminate someone by just one characteristic, but in case of strippers it is a discrimination by the work past.
    Originally Posted by
    I don't know what it is about me that says "wife me up." Everyone wants to choke me or date me. Or both. This job is weird.


    Originally Posted by Nocturnelle
    ... Kittens are assholes but they're just so darn cute.

  15. #62
    God/dess Vyanka's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Cash-Stack-istan Island
    Posts
    14,704
    Thanks
    6,564
    Thanked 11,625 Times in 3,697 Posts
    My Mood
    Angelic

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

    This is terrible on so many levels. I brought this up to someone I know and she told me that a customer walked in with a pair of those, when they first came out.

    I wouldn't think twice punching someone in the face if they walked into my club with that shit on. It's bad enough with cam/pic phones. Shit.

  16. #63
    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

    all the dancers should start a petition in their clubs to starting banning this thing, but then I read about the contacts....and well, there's no way of banning those. Unless, they start checking people's eyes, or scanning their eyes for these particular contacts. But would clubs actually go to those lengths? Probably not.
    this raises some good questions ... which I just asked my attorney friend about ...

    - under existing 'antique' law, clubs have the right to post a policy that bans photography inside the club. Under the same antique law, if a customer violates the no photography policy, the club has the right to confiscate film from the camera, but not the camera itself. In a 2014 'Smart Glass' or cell phone cam scenario, the club has the right to also ban the use of these devices. However, like the camera, the club cannot confiscate 'Smart Glasses' or cell phones used to take pics in violation of club policy. And since any pics will have already been transmitted to 'the cloud', there is no effective way for the club to stop images of dancers from 'escaping' from the club for use with facial recognition searches.

    - However, the club's right to ban photography inside the club is 'over-ridden' by the Americans with Disabilities Act. The ADA prevents clubs from refusing customers entry because they are wearing eyeglasses or contact lenses. Thus, arguably, the club cannot actually force a customer to remove certain styles of 'Smart Glasses' without facing a potential ADA lawsuit.

    - The law, however, does not prevent the club from purchasing and installing a wi-fi jammer and a cell phone jammer. While such jammers would not prevent pics from being locally stored in cell phone or 'Smart Glass' memory, it would prevent such devices from transmitting images outside the club as well as from connecting to other computers outside the club which could run a facial recognition search. Jammers, in combination with strict bouncer enforcement of the use of cell phone cams and 'Smart Glass' cams ( i.e. deleting al locally stored images before allowing the customer and his cell phone or 'Smart Glasses' to leave the club ) could actually reduce the probability of successful facial recognition searches being performed on dancer images.

    However, this jamming equipment would probably require at least a $1000+ investment on the part of the clubowner. since wi-fi and cell phone frequencies require separate jammers. And, obviously, the club would have to 'value' dancer anonymity more than customer dollars to actually provide strict bouncer enforcement which would 'offend' smart glass wearing customers.


    she told me that a customer walked in with a pair of those, when they first came out.
    Indeed, the use of these devices is only going to grow as time goes by. Also, the competing products are a lot more inconspicuous than the original Google Glass ... to the point where they may not 'stick out like a sore thumb' if worn into the club. Check out these smart glasses from ICIS ... see



    ^^^ there's no way that a club customer wearing ICIS smart glasses is going to be spotted immediately. And this will be even more the case when smart contact lenses hit the market.

    Of course, there is also the ( increasingly strong ) possibility that the club cares far more about earning money from customers than it does about protecting the 'anonymity' of the club's dancers ... at which point the club will simply leave smart glass wearing customers 'unbothered' and let the dancers deal with any consequences !!!


    When is society in general going to come to the realization that many, many women have camed, stripped, escorted, bikini modeled, that they can't all be forbidden from working 'real jobs' or teaching kindergarten? Maybe because the economy still sux, we can afford to rule out otherwise qualified candidates because the pool is so large to pick from?
    This was precisely the point made by my business acquaintances. As long as there is a pile of resumes from qualified candidates to choose from, the prospective employer is not going to subject themselves to potential increased workplace headaches and lawsuit risk by hiring a known 'adult' entertainer. This is also the reason that teachers, nurses etc with a known 'adult' entertainer work history won't have problems being hired by inner city hospitals and schools ... because there IS a shortage of qualified applicants ( since most teachers and nurses elect to work in a safer, more 'upscale', hospital or school environment ).
    Last edited by Melonie; 04-24-2014 at 10:38 AM.

  17. #64
    God/dess Vyanka's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Cash-Stack-istan Island
    Posts
    14,704
    Thanks
    6,564
    Thanked 11,625 Times in 3,697 Posts
    My Mood
    Angelic

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

    These eye wear gadgets can't be safe to wear? I mean, there is a gadget on someone's face. That radiation can't be good. Hopefully, with that in mind ppl will think before twice before putting these on their face.

    Heck. I don't sleep with my cel near my face.

  18. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Vyanka For This Useful Post:


  19. #65
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by Vyanka View Post
    These eye wear gadgets can't be safe to wear? I mean, there is a gadget on someone's face. That radiation can't be good. Hopefully, with that in mind ppl will think before twice before putting these on their face.

    Heck. I don't sleep with my cel near my face.
    You would hope so, but unfortunately majority of people are much rather to radiate the hell out of themselves than not to find out other people's business. On the side note, not only strippers lives will change with this "wonderful" invention, social lives of people not related to the adult industry whatsoever will change too. There will be no more normal flirting at the bars, everybody is going to know everything about each other; I also suspect that the criminal rates will "go high and reach the sky", since now every criminal will be equipped with a great tool that can help him determine whose house is more profitable to rob.

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to Versalia For This Useful Post:


  21. #66
    Moderator Optimist's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2004
    Location
    House of Aion
    Posts
    8,074
    Thanks
    7,881
    Thanked 5,705 Times in 2,127 Posts
    My Mood
    In Love

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Versalia View Post
    You would hope so, but unfortunately majority of people are much rather to radiate the hell out of themselves than not to find out other people's business. On the side note, not only strippers lives will change with this "wonderful" invention, social lives of people not related to the adult industry whatsoever will change too. There will be no more normal flirting at the bars, everybody is going to know everything about each other; I also suspect that the criminal rates will "go high and reach the sky", since now every criminal will be equipped with a great tool that can help him determine whose house is more profitable to rob.
    I was thinking just yesterday that this will allow criminals to profile cops knowing where they live who their relatives are etc. The rationale for this was bullshit when applied to stars and it's bullshit when applied to the general public. No one has a "right to know" a stranger's business. Frankly if they want to protect the public from predators, update the sentencing instead of giving molesters and rapist a slap on the wrist while trying child offenders as adults and ignoring child abuse victims through rampant underfunding.
    “What a caterpillar calls the end of the world we call a butterfly.” - ECKHART TOLLE

  22. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Optimist For This Useful Post:


  23. #67
    God/dess Vyanka's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Cash-Stack-istan Island
    Posts
    14,704
    Thanks
    6,564
    Thanked 11,625 Times in 3,697 Posts
    My Mood
    Angelic

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Versalia View Post
    You would hope so, but unfortunately majority of people are much rather to radiate the hell out of themselves than not to find out other people's business. On the side note, not only strippers lives will change with this "wonderful" invention, social lives of people not related to the adult industry whatsoever will change too. There will be no more normal flirting at the bars, everybody is going to know everything about each other; I also suspect that the criminal rates will "go high and reach the sky", since now every criminal will be equipped with a great tool that can help him determine whose house is more profitable to rob.
    Yes. Wishful thinking.

  24. #68
    Featured Member minnow's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,003
    Thanks
    242
    Thanked 519 Times in 315 Posts
    Blog Entries
    10
    My Mood
    Twisted

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

    I have a few general questions along with related secondary questions:

    1) Has anyone actually seen anybody wearing Google Glass ?
    a) If so, how easily distinguishable was it vs regular glasses?

    2) Has anyone actually purchased, or got an extensive "hands-on" sales demo with it ?
    a) Did you find "GG" to be user friendly/easily adaptable for every day routine things ? (Surfing web, checking email, web surfing, getting driving
    directions, etc.)
    b) Did you find the presentable view to be easy to read, or would you use GG more to conveniently download/transmit to other device ?

    3) For the facial recognition app., exactly which databases would it be tapping into ?
    a) Multiple prior posts have mentioned Facebook. What if prurient "person of interest" doesn't have a FB profile pic ? Would driver license bureau
    databases then be scoured?

    I realize that a video without a name can be of concern for "adult industry worker" later wanting a more conventional job/career. Facial recognition in an incriminating vid sans a name could be enough to torpedo their chances. But the broader implication for every citizen being surreptiously snooped on is even more chilling, especially if app taps into driver license state agencies. Whats next, bank accounts, auto and real estate transactions, etc.?
    I'm right 96% of the time. I don't sweat the other 5% .......................

  25. The Following User Says Thank You to minnow For This Useful Post:


  26. #69
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by minnow View Post
    Whats next, bank accounts, auto and real estate transactions, etc.?
    As creepy as it sounds, I won't be surprised if they decide that bank accounts are "the public right to know" and that having every criminal know your business will turn "our big world into a small friendly village".

  27. #70
    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

    ^^^ bank accounts no, but credit reports yes ! Indeed pulling credit reports is already possible via more conventional means. 'Smart Glass' technology really just speeds up the process.

    In regard to Google Glass itself, one of my acquaintances purchased them as R&D developer some time ago, and a couple more purchased them last week when sales began to the 'general public'. Google Glass itself 'sticks out like a sore thumb' while being worn. However, other companies like ICIS have much less conspicuous 'smart glasses' almost ready to hit the market. And, of course, the 'smart contact lenses' now in the R&D phase will be virtually undetectable while being worn.

    I have 'played around' with Google Glass, and personally I hate it !!! Apparently, it takes a fair amount of 'getting used go', and I find the device so 'creepy' that I really don't want to spend much time with it. However, it does perform as advertised, snapping pics with a 'wink'.

    In terms of facial characteristic databases, obviously Facebook is an early developer since they are simultaneously promoting facial recognition software. I am told that 'tax bounty hunters' are already working with state DMV's and state tax agencies to incorporate the state driver's license photo database. And an acquaintance tells me that competing 'smart glass' and facial recognition software developers have had web bots running for over a year now with the express purpose of scouring online versions of newspapers, trade publications, yearbook and alumni publications, social media and other free web content, to assemble a searchable photo database. The intent apparently is to have ready a monthly subscription facial recognition + background search service that is similar to today's background search only website offerings by the time that ICIS and other 'smart glass' developers release their competing products ( thus driving down the price ) later this year.
    Last edited by Melonie; 04-25-2014 at 04:33 AM.

  28. #71
    Newbie
    Joined
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Las Vegas / Pahrump
    Posts
    14
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts

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

    This is simple to fix, step into any courtroom, ID the Judge and read off their home address, as there is usually a room full of people there that they do not want knowing where they live, nor what skeletons they have in their closet. It may cost a contempt of court charge, but I would bet some privacy laws come quickly into effect. And I'm sure there are other esteem people who don't want everyone knowing where they live.

  29. #72
    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

    ^^^ actually, the identity and general personal info of judges, politicians, corporate exec's etc. is already a matter of public record. It won't make a speck of difference to them !

  30. #73
    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

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Salaries too.

  31. #74
    God/dess cherryblossomsinspring's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,244
    Thanks
    2,454
    Thanked 4,800 Times in 1,707 Posts
    My Mood
    Angelic

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

    People wearing google glass will eventually get the shit kicked out of them. You have to think if someone is a murderer and goes into a coffee house seeing one of those guys sitting there, he'll beat his ass , stomp those glasses out just to avoid coming up on a search. If anything people with google glass will become targets not the ones targeting others.

    It's like the person unknowingly became a security guard even if he doesn't get one of those nifty flash lights. Can you image what happens to men that kill for a living? They'll surely take out the google glass douche before doing their "job". Also the contacts? There are going to be some nasty eye injuries going to be reported in the near future and sales of a 'glass eye" where it's sole purpose will be for people not to stare into a dark hole in your face.

  32. The Following User Says Thank You to cherryblossomsinspring For This Useful Post:


  33. #75
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    - However, the club's right to ban photography inside the club is 'over-ridden' by the Americans with Disabilities Act. The ADA prevents clubs from refusing customers entry because they are wearing eyeglasses or contact lenses. Thus, arguably, the club cannot actually force a customer to remove certain styles of 'Smart Glasses' without facing a potential ADA lawsuit.
    I would think the law wouldn't pertain to glasses with cameras. If a club bans cameras, I think the club would have a legitimate reason to not let a customer enter the club with glasses that contain a camera.

  34. The Following User Says Thank You to eagle2 For This Useful Post:


Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... 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
  •