this post was submitted on 24 Feb 2024
372 points (98.4% liked)
Technology
59622 readers
2788 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This is a pretty "generous" take. I ask you then: if the company isn't doing communicating any of the scans/recordings, what is the purpose of the technology being installed in the first place?
Cameras are one thing.
But if you can actually process it, that's a meaningful cost per unit. The only reason you do that is if you're planning to use it.
This type of analysis is cheap nowadays. You could easily fit a model to extract demographics from an image on a Jetson Nano (basically a Raspberry Pi with a GPU). Models have gotten more efficient while hardware has also gotten cheaper.
MSRP is $100. Even assuming you can cut that to $50 in bulk, $50 per unit is something that manufacturers are going to take seriously as an added cost. They're not going to pay it without an intent to use it.
And that's before software costs. Even leveraging open source it's still going to take investment to tailor it to your deployment.
I doubt they would implement thing on every vending machine. They can still derive some useful analytic data from a smaller sample size
That's using it.
The only possible reason to have the hardware is because you intend to use it.
Marketing is often targeted, especially online (which is a huge privacy issue). I would guess they are using the data from these vending machines to measure the success of their marketing campaigns.
Like I said: generous. You are "guess"ing that what they are doing with it is above board. I'm not that trusting of corporations.
People trusted Boeing would put planes together with the utmost concern for safety... Then a fucking for feel off mid-flight.
The FAA failed to regulate Boeing. I'm pro regulation and laws that protect people's privacy. And if this company and the individuals within it break the law they should receive appropriate punishments with fines tied to international revenue.
My point is that the laws should relate to privacy independent of the technology. The "ban face recognition" narrative misses the point and doesn't address the threats. Facial recognition technology can be used in ways that don't threaten individuals privacy and non facial recognition technologies can be a threat to individual privacy.
It's cynical to assume this company is breaking privacy with no evidence. But it's fair to say there needs to be greater punishments and regulations