420 karma · joined June 3, 2014
I would absolutely assume that any system that sends your image to LE is part of a facial recognition system in practice. We know now that the cameras do recognize people and intentionally transmits images of them, for later identification.
For a long time I would argue (as an IT support person who would have to support your wireless keyboard problems) that having a wireless keyboard was wasteful and unnecessary if you never used it more than 3 feet from your computer anyway.
Feels pretty exploitive.
You can get them to acknowledge how perfectly aligned he is with fascist ideals and actions, somehow the jury is always out.
That tells me a lot.
I think MSG has the ability to ID every person at the Knicks game who booed for DJT, and you know how petty and sensitive that person can be.
Remember when Hegseth invited all the generals into one big room for some reason? Some people think that it was to point cameras at their faces and do a bit of sentiment analysis.
The tech is in place. Is there enough decency or the lack of enough motivation to make these scenarios unlikely? I'm not sure.
I can remember in the late 1990's Berkeley Public Library was considering adding RFID tags to the books as asset tags. The public push-back was significant and surprising at the time. Freedom-loving library patrons were concerned about nefarious tracking. Proponents of the new tags thought that the concept of tracking people or the books they read was rooted in paranoia.
In a very real way there ARE malicious AI agents working tirelessly to create and spread memes via language and sound to alter our brain software.
The latency is in the audience/performer energy.
That's almost 12 years now. A novice can now get ATmega32 USB devices Prime delivered. Not a cutting edge theoretical attack anymore but a basic tool in a every pen tester's toolbox now.
https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1213#i...
Mozilla makes great points. Even if the API is model agnostic, which it ought to be designed as from the very beginning to even be considered a spec, models can act vastly different.
Mozilla didn't say this but the user should at least be presented an option to choose which model (at least once) starting from day one, even if your browser only has one option available. That's assuming a universe where Google plans on actually being concerned about standards adoption.
Honestly, why should I even believe it?
It's good to have something to work with if these Web APIs are going to be part of a standard. I suppose this means that ALL the browser vendors are likely to implement something
I know that there might be $several ways those highly-paid engineers might still rationalize their work. Some of them might have ideological reasons to treat entire classes of people as unworthy of life. Within the model of their ideologies, the most evil things might be perfectly moral.
I wonder what reasons you have to disagree with people's moral stance against using AI as a weapon.