Sometimes it feels like I'm the only one that doesn't trust biometric sensors. I mean it's basically magic. If for any reason the face detection algorithm doesnt match your face anymore you have the equivalent problem of losing the master password to your entire password store.
You could have it set up where your face is the one-and-only thing that identifies you, but that doesn't seem to be the case in practice.
Instead, we have the multipart authentication used in many places today: something you know (password), something you are (biometric fingerprint/face), and something you have (your physical device, your email account, your phone number).
Any one of these has downsides (stolen password, biometric misidentification or duplication, redirected phone number) but in combination with the others makes it much harder to circumvent authentication.
Almost all systems have some kind of fallback that rely on a 'something you know' like a master password, and can optionally only be changed if you have other authentication methods (like physically having the device in your hands).
Having multipart authentication allows for a better user experience (look at your phone and it unlocks) with an acceptable amount of risk (you have to have your phone and be you in order to unlock it), with systems to fallback to if something fails (get the super secret password off that slip of paper you hid in your mother-in-laws garden shed behind the loose brick in the wall). The typcial authentication flows are both more secure and more convenient, and the user is responsible for the security of the backup.
you really think that somebody cant come up with strong scientific evidence to support all of those? cmon, it's a lack of knowledge and imagination on your part. There are plenty of real scientific arguments against gay marriage or gay rights at large. You just dont ever hear them because everyone who ever so much as hints at them gets banned immediately.
When this actually becomes a widespread problem we can revisit the ban. Indeed, if mass-surveillance becomes so cheap that ordinary citizens can deploy it it makes sense for police & governments to also have access to it. Until then, don't.
Hate to break it to you: it is that cheap. I an looking at a $99 Intel Compute Stick driving a build of the enterprise FR software I write, connected to a $21 ELP IP camera. Total cost of hardware is less than $150, and the software is of course expensive. There is no reason a button or embedded-in-a-screw camera would not work just fine. Pandora's Box is open kids, and it is not closing.
Deploying and powering all of it at scale, not to mention getting bandwidth (so you'd need to set up a mesh network or get very cheap mobile data) is still out of reach of most. When that is sorted we can revisit.
Hate to break it to you again: the cameras and connection networks are already there. Also any real estate property of note had a traditional camera surveillance network added sometime over the last 30 years, and modern FR systems are designed to piggy back on them. Just add the less than $150 worth of hardware per camera, perhaps you only need 1-2 FR systems and ability to switch camera feeds and you're operational.
The original comment was about criminal gangs setting up their own surveillance systems to keep an eye on the police (among other things) and the argument was that if the bad guys can do it then why not allow the police to do it as well?
Property owners doing so on their own land is a whole different matter.
I just don't see it happening at a widespread scale yet. On the other hand if you give police the right to use these technologies you can bet you'll see police (and other government agencies piggybacking off them) deploying this everywhere very fast.
1. More profitable artificial food will replace natural foods, similar to how canola oil replaced butter for cooking. Vegan 'meat' will be the default, cheaper option in McDonalds which in turn makes natural food more expensive.
2. Russia and China will launch a competitive, international currency to fight the US dollar and China will humiliate the US in a regional conflict.
3. Most countries in the world will benefit from global warming or see no ill effects. Climate fear mongering will continue unimpressed by this.
4. Smartphones will be replaced by smaller optionally wireless computers, the screen will just be a screen and receive all the computing information from a detached CPU/GPU/computer you keep in your wallet. Commonly sold desktop monitors will have a place where you can slide in or connect your personal wallet computer wirelessly.
5. As social support systems in Europe start to crumble under the strain of continued limitless immigration, they will enact openly communist policies such as a duty to work for all citizens. This will be celebrated across the world as a progressive action to fight the low economic performance of the EU compared to China.
600k open websocket connections means that 600k people opened stackoverflow sites but dont click on anything right?
Because they still only have 550req/s. Interesting how much more power you need just to keep track of state.
You say that somebody is wehmütig when he is purposefully trying to be sad and down on him or herself or everybody, so Wehmut is somewhat derogatory. If you tell somebody that they are wehmütig, it means that they are actively being dumb, basically. Melancholy is more like a wistful sadness also considered negative but connected to some tragic event or maybe when thinking about better times in the past a bit too much.
I just found the perfect way to sum this all up and I'm making a prediction: NRA ads will be banned on twitter but Planned Parenthood ads will not. The total lack of self reflection and thinking on part of Twitter is really something else. Facebook made the right decision, Twitter made the wrong decision. It cannot be more obvious.
I think you cant take that person's word for what was actually going on in that situation. Somebody that still gets so angry about other people never wanted to kill themselves in the first place, in my opinion. They happily jumped on the option that you are annoying and so that's the escape out of that situation.
