• 0 Posts
  • 26 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 2nd, 2023

help-circle


  • Thanks for the response! It sounds like you had access to a higher quality system than the worst, to be sure. Based on your comments I feel that you’re projecting the confidence in that system onto the broader topic of facial recognition in general; you’re looking at a good example and people here are (perhaps cynically) pointing at the worst ones. Can you offer any perspective from your career experience that might bridge the gap? Why shouldn’t we treat all facial recognition implementations as unacceptable if only the best – and presumably most expensive – ones are?

    A rhetorical question aside from that: is determining one’s identity an application where anything below the unachievable success rate of 100% is acceptable?


  • Can you please start linking studies? I think that might actually turn the conversation in your favor. I found a NIST study (pdf link), on page 32, in the discussion portion of 4.2 “False match rates under demographic pairing”:

    The results above show that false match rates for imposter pairings in likely real-world scenarios are much higher than those from measured when imposters are paired with zero-effort.

    This seems to say that the false match rate gets higher and higher as the subjects are more demographically similar; the highest error rate on the heat map below that is roughly 0.02.

    Something else no one here has talked about yet – no one is actively trying to get identified as someone else by facial recognition algorithms yet. This study was done on public mugshots, so no effort to fool the algorithm, and the error rates between similar demographics is atrocious.

    And my opinion: Entities using facial recognition are going to choose the lowest bidder for their system unless there’s a higher security need than, say, a grocery store. So, we have to look at the weakest performing algorithms.










  • I’ve recently been trying to focus on this! A few years ago I looked at my collection of various things I don’t really need and realized how little I know about maintaining them properly; I just bought things with no regard to how long it would be around. If I were to actually do the recommended weekly maintenance on everything including home, it’d probably be a full time job. I’ve since taken a step back and slowly worked one thing at a time into my weekly schedule while minimizing, and it feels pretty rewarding. It changed the way I value things, both at their peak of function and that have a small issue I wouldn’t have considered fixing before.


  • I think Ars Technica has it wrong with that wording, the FAQ from Google support linked in that article says:

    Can I still upgrade my Pixel device after 24 months?

    Yes, you can still upgrade your Pixel device after 24 months, you just won’t be able to renew your subscription to Pixel Pass. You can purchase or finance your next Pixel device directly from Google Store or Google Fi Wireless, and you have the option to trade-in your current Pixel device towards your next device. Current Pixel Pass subscribers received $100 towards their next Pixel purchase good for 2 years, which can also be used alongside available promotions.

    So you can upgrade your phone for the current term, but you can’t renew your subscription and upgrade again.



  • I don’t think you’re entirely wrong, but I think maybe you downplay the importance of a good team dynamic when choosing people. I’d take someone less skilled over a highly skilled but unapproachable jerk for the long-term health of the crew. In that way, I don’t think it’s bad to favor the more likable one depending on how we’re defining likable, and I don’t think that makes it simply a popularity contest either.



  • This is not a thing because that’s not a concern for developers. They make the software in whatever way they think it looks best, maybe add some accessibility options, and leave the fine-tuning to the user’s display options. It’s strange to me that you interpret this as an ideology issue for developers.