This is I believe the first time in human history that AI video cameras have been widely deployed, inside private homes, for the purpose of enforcing laws. Never mind the banal details: this is an incredible milestone.
Also, asking two verified-ID mainland china users to "vouch" for you and be responsible for your activities if you are a foreigner.
Almost every service in China requires "real name verification" - you can't play games without it, for example.
This has been place for several years, https://i.imgur.com/FBrCwuX.jpg
What the person above implies is that the other two are on the hook when you start spreading any Government information. I'd assume that the government would investigate anyone in your friend list if you do that though regardless of whether they verified you or not, so it's kind of a minor detail in my opinion.
What person? The first paragraph in ev1’s comment (and the ‘liveness’ reference in the reply) are not about ‘vouching’.
If they ask for KYC in the mainland I suppose it’s understandable since it serves a lot more than a chat app there (payment, SSO for a lot of other services).
Yeah it's a faff, but at least no one will accuse you of being an enemy of the state if you do this like trying to avoid tagging in China.
SIM cards are used for transmitting voice in an insecure fashion, so you can't be sure. Some voice codecs are even designed to do something very similiar to fingerprinting voices.
> No one is taking your [...] biometric details
They were already taken when you had¹ to get the ID in the first place.
¹ The federal republic directly adopted laws from nazi germany requiring ID for every citizen. This law was initially introduced to acquire data about jews and people fit for military service.
> to match everything you ever say or do against you just to activate a sim card
This was never about surveillance by private entities! Federal agencys can match everything you say based on the fact that the SIM card in your portable bug is linked directly to you.
> but at least no one will accuse you of being an enemy of the state if you do this like trying to avoid tagging in China.
You can be certain that you end up in a database if you use a foreign SIM card from a non-KYC-country for a long period of time in a residential area. Your only defence is your network provider not cooperating unless forced by law.
Germany is being turned into a surveillance state bit by bit and I am fed up by people trying to defend it!
I've literally been doing this for the last 11 years, guess I'm screwed then :P
>>They were already taken when you had¹ to get the ID in the first place.
Yes, and the mobile operator doesn't get them, while in the article discussed it's the "private" operator gathering all this data.
>>SIM cards are used for transmitting voice in an insecure fashion, so you can't be sure.
The difference being, that here it's done openly and in a visible fashion "either you do this, or you can't play our games".
>>¹ The federal republic directly adopted laws from nazi germany requiring ID for every citizen.
That sounds about on a level with an argument that since Hitler was vegetarian, all vegetarians are nazis. Your country adopted a lot of laws from the Third Reich. Mine adopted a lot of laws from the communist republic it once was. Neither fact makes those countries anything like their predecessors. The law that every citizen has to have an ID is a good one IMHO(wait for Americans to chime in and say this is against their personal freedom or something).
So hidden surveillance is more ok than open violations?
> That sounds about on a level with an argument that since Hitler was vegetarian, all vegetarians are nazis.
I just wanted to explain why germans have to have an ID.
I knew someone would inevitably come to this conclusion.
No, of course it's not better. But this article is very specifically about an open and overt gathering of biometric data.
Some Italian cell operators do. For example, when you are buying a new sim card for Iliad, you do this in front of an automated kiosk where you have to scan your ID, then face camera and say outloud "my name is Insert Your Name Here, and I would like to make a phone service contract with Iliad".
I thought that was reasonable, but it didn't occur to me that reading the numbers was enough to train an AI to reproduce my voice. Now I'm less sure.
Seems I need a more tech-savvy solicitor...
I think it's actually a legal requirement in the UK if they wish to allow you to sign up online.
This is in conjunction with ID scanning.
I think this functionality was necessary as part of complying with KYC laws. And AFAIK WeChat has very similar functionality to Revolut (among much more) so even if the app was non-Chinese (e.g. European), it would need a similar flow.
Basically identifying your customer and confirming their identity, e.g. via a video call or at a post office etc.
(Kind of like the scarier version of the store cashier stealing your credit card digits - because you can’t just order a new one.)
In the West, KYC means that a bank is going to ask to see your ID before letting you open an account.
In China, KYC means that, in order to use something as pedestrian as social media, you have to let the CCP AI dragnet build a profile that can be used to surveil you for the rest of your life.
Need to pay registration for car? Wechat
Need to verify covid screening to enter the country as a resident? Wechat
Need to request a taxi? Wechat
Need to pay your electricity bill? Wechat
EVERYTHING is done through wechat.
I'm not so sure about that, reading Facebook comment threads on news articles clearly shows that a real name policy isn't really stopping people from misbehaving online.
Might a real name policy have toned down the communication that lead to case Tenacity https://github.com/tenacityteam/tenacity/issues/99 , though?
I did notice nobody outright challenged the actual claim (except for the Facebook comment that touched the topic).
Why won’t you think of the children?
Same for smart speakers. It's a hairs breadth away from complete audio & video surveillance.
Eh, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep was more about empathy, the meaning of humanity, how we justify segregation, etc; its perspective on the human condition was at a much more fundamental/introspective level than the issues discussed in this thread. Though I suppose there might be parallels between the empathy box and the Mountain-Dew (TM) greentext in the top comment.
The subjugated population--the andys--were used not to critique subjugation itself as much as the analyze the implications of the justifications behind that subjugation, especially given the the fact that andys don't feel empathy and had to break the law to be where they are (and the protagonist + POV is a law enforcement officer). It wasn't about the what as much as it was about the why and its implications.
Books that critique the existence of norms/institutions are great, but my favorites are books that choose to accept their presented status-quos but analyze what the implications are and what accepting that status-quo means about ourselves; readers can then look inside themselves and make their own calls. It's the epitome of "show, don't tell".
ERROR: CANNOT BEGIN PLAY SESSION UNTIL PLAYER SHAVES FACE
I know you're joking, but a law was passed in Xinjiang back in 2014 preventing people with beards from riding public transport. You literally had to shave before you could board a bus.
Putting the discrimination aside (well that sounded insensitive but bear with me), very sorry for those poor people who are like me, who get a red face for DAYS after shaving.
Officially, no. But in reality, yes. They want to make the Uyghurs more Han to reduce feelings of separatism.
It's circular logic but probably good enough for the fascists...
Er, fascists? We're talking about the CCP here -- these are communists.
The Wikipedia definition "Fascism is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and of the economy" seems to tick all the boxes in the case of China, although I don't know if they fit the definition "far right" (too lazy to see if they tick those other boxes).
The problem with "-ist" and "-ism" words is everyone has their own definition what this means. Bernie Sanders can call himself a socialist that thinks the rich should be taxed more, and some dumbass will think he hates Jews because the Nazi party also has the word "Socialism" in it.
Also, if you want to say "They're communists because that word is in their party name", then the Democratic People's Republic of (North) Korea must be a great place to live, since they're democratic, and belong to the people!
Sadly, most people are not that smart. Which is one reason why so many people are willing to give up their privacy AND money in exchange for the "permission" to use those services.
The result was amusing. It was busted by picture of adult face, or by kids moving facial muscles.
The facial recognition was just a distraction to evade law enforcement.
I wouldn't be surprised if it's the same with these games. In fact, I would be surprised if a company went to great lengths to reduce their potential consumer base.
Today they use banking cards, which still work for age verification after they expired so they are just shared between the youngsters
So the main problem here is the law. Not Tencent. But many Chinese people support and even called for this law. The supports for this law is cultural, circumstantial and societal.
In the US, Tencent should adhere to US laws and cultural customs. First, for this specific case, Tencent won't implement it outside of China because 1) why would they limit their own ability to make money 2)why would they not align with US culture? Second, If US has a law that bans using facial recognition, all companies will comply and these issues will not exists. You can enforce practices and values through laws.
Also this is Tencent specific system. They are using facial recognition to verify the current user is who they say they are. Just like IPhone has face ID. Because for other verification methods, kids just bypasses them. And I believe they only do verification ones during the banned hours. It doesn't consistently monitor you. The law targets online gaming providers, and fines them if they provide service outside the allowed hours. It doesn't incarcerate kids. Law enforcement doesn't track kids playing games and when they play. And Tencent doesn't share kids data with law enforcement.
Tencent, like all major Chinese corporations, is just a thinly veiled extension of the Chinese state. And I'm sure someone will try a "no u" about Facebook etc. effectively being extensions of the US government but that doesn't change the reality of how all major corps in China operate.
The Chinese state defines Chinese laws so this is basically restating the GP's point that "Tencent is doing this to comply to Chinese laws"
It's technically true for American corporations (which follow American laws created by the American government), but as you mention, it's not quite the same because the American system of government has significantly higher inertia and building consensus is significantly higher effort, so you generally only see the effect in certain industries that span decades-long bi-partisan projects (e.g. military industrial complex)
the political theatre is only when they don't want to do something and delay. the state is swift with pursuing its interests.
I would argue these have already met overwhelming bipartisan consensus over the past few decades (particularly since 9/11). Your average privacy nut (myself included) are not too happy about it, your average person knows nothing about it, but your average senator or governor is strongly in favor.
Americans quite like out-of-sight out-of-mind solutions to problems involving Bad People, even unsavory solutions like mass spying or drone killings. The moment that the national security powers for example start blocking porn or video games, consensus and acceptance would instantly disappear.
They will, if they can make money doing it.
Knowingly maybe. But all those IP Cameras have had face detection for almost a decade, They've been deployed extensively in homes around the world, They've been phoning to their home to provide even basic features or at least the DDNS based features and are riddled with vulnerabilities.
One could use firewall, custom firmware to fix this to an extent but not everyone has the means or intention to do it.
Not only are you implying that there is a back door in the phone operating systems, but also in every other device on the same network as the phone to hide such traffic.
What you’re suggesting is certainly possible, but the idea that it’s been rolled out to the average person doesn’t seem likely.
Given how much analytics garbage phones regularly spew out, you'd have to perform HTTPS MITM attacks to check this – and that's the kind of thing that alters the behaviour of the system you're measuring.
I still don't think it's likely, but if somebody were to find some suspicious code, I have no real reason to doubt that it's doing something like this.
Thank god¹ android is open source.
¹ Not religious, I just don't want to thank google :\
If there is a generic backdoor it's certainly not in the OS but rather in the modems firmware. The scary part is that all modem manufacturers are based in countrys that are known to violate human rights in organized ways.
> What you’re suggesting is certainly possible, but the idea that it’s been rolled out to the average person doesn’t seem likely.
It's a known fact that government agencys of certain states hack devices of people they target. An "average person" is still affected by this since they can be targeted "by accident" for multiple reasons. (e.g. through friends, being at suspicious locations, wrong vacation destination etc.) So it doesn't even matter if a device is backdoored.
I notice a lot of network traffic coming from my phone to *.googleapis.com network endpoints, even when I'm not using my phone. So I'm not sure what point you're trying to make?