I wonder how long they can run this before their backend database vendor cuts them off with some flimsy pretext because this kind of thing is bad for business.
No backend database needed for what they did. It was just highlighting where the faces are in a shot of the crowd, same as modern smsttphone cameras do, but with a surveillance-type UI around it.
Thanks, I just watched the video linked by @spizzat2@lemmy.zip and I see that now. It’s actually a little disappointing and I’d love to see the same kind of public spectacle on hard mode with real-time doxxing from a commercial backend. That would be far more provocative.
I think the article hugely understated that nuance.
Yeah, it should at least try to get their name. If it could include their job, income, family members, etc. that’d be great. It’s pretty trivially possible. Maybe don’t include address, because they could turn out poorly, but they should show how easy it is to get data on people.
Yes, but depending on the country that could be (public + illegal) if it lists [what is legally considered] personal sensitive information or accidentally reveals someone’s secret like the Coldplay incident.
It would be fascinating, but IMO unnecessary and unethical.
Perfectly legal for “event security” to deploy facial recognition and watch live movement tracking annotated with real names and possibly other information purchased from a data broker, as long as it’s all done in secret. But illegal to let large numbers of people see the screen (maybe by mirroring it to the jumbotron). What a world.
At first I was imagining it was picking out faces from the crowd and matching them with social media pictures which it was then broadcasting to the crowd. THAT would get people’s attention!
Most people don’t know the difference, as made clear by the reactions of the public, comments on other social platforms, and the wording of the articles. So it’s just as powerful as it was.
I will agree that it was still powerful. All of the phone videos would memorialize any real doxxing so it’s maybe just as well that they didn’t do it.
I think it would be better with minor obfuscation like F***e L***e for Firstname Lastname. Something instantly recognizable to the victims/participants but not for the entire audience.
This disturbs me in the best way. I love/hate it.
I wonder how long they can run this before their backend database vendor cuts them off with some flimsy pretext because this kind of thing is bad for business.
No backend database needed for what they did. It was just highlighting where the faces are in a shot of the crowd, same as modern smsttphone cameras do, but with a surveillance-type UI around it.
Thanks, I just watched the video linked by @spizzat2@lemmy.zip and I see that now. It’s actually a little disappointing and I’d love to see the same kind of public spectacle on hard mode with real-time doxxing from a commercial backend. That would be far more provocative.
I think the article hugely understated that nuance.
Yeah, it should at least try to get their name. If it could include their job, income, family members, etc. that’d be great. It’s pretty trivially possible. Maybe don’t include address, because they could turn out poorly, but they should show how easy it is to get data on people.
Yes, but depending on the country that could be (public + illegal) if it lists [what is legally considered] personal sensitive information or accidentally reveals someone’s secret like the Coldplay incident.
It would be fascinating, but IMO unnecessary and unethical.
Perfectly legal for “event security” to deploy facial recognition and watch live movement tracking annotated with real names and possibly other information purchased from a data broker, as long as it’s all done in secret. But illegal to let large numbers of people see the screen (maybe by mirroring it to the jumbotron). What a world.
oh dont worry event security and LEA are neutral unbiased entities who can be trusted unlike the public
At first I was imagining it was picking out faces from the crowd and matching them with social media pictures which it was then broadcasting to the crowd. THAT would get people’s attention!
Most people don’t know the difference, as made clear by the reactions of the public, comments on other social platforms, and the wording of the articles. So it’s just as powerful as it was.
I will agree that it was still powerful. All of the phone videos would memorialize any real doxxing so it’s maybe just as well that they didn’t do it.
I think it would be better with minor obfuscation like F***e L***e for Firstname Lastname. Something instantly recognizable to the victims/participants but not for the entire audience.