AI could steal fingerprints from high-resolution selfies, experts warn

[daffy duck]

Good!

 

[yannus]

This has nothing to do with "AI good" or "AI bad"... might as well argue "tech good / tech bad"...

Tech always progresses - AI is simply the latest tool technology has given us. Just like every other tech, some will use it to benefit humanity (the medical field LOVES AI) while others will misuse it.

Don't blame the tech - blame the humans who use it.

"Don't blame the tech, blame those who own it" would be the correct version, as even if evil hackers are a problem, corporation is much much worse.
Another correction, AI in the medical field COULD have been a wonderful tool, but will just be used to erase human expertise, then raise the prices.

 

[Squid Surprise]

"Don't blame the tech, blame those who own it" would be the correct version, as even if evil hackers are a problem, corporation is much much worse.

No... gonna blame the people who always think that tech advances are bad... how many people are complaining about the invention of electricity?

Another correction, AI in the medical field COULD have been a wonderful tool, but will just be used to erase human expertise, then raise the prices.

No... it IS a wonderful tool... I love that I can get a CT scan and have the results within minutes instead of waiting a week...

 

[Puiu]

You could do this without AI too, it just took a lot longer and a very skilled person to do it

 

[yannus]

No... gonna blame the people who always think that tech advances are bad... how many people are complaining about the invention of electricity?

No... it IS a wonderful tool... I love that I can get a CT scan and have the results within minutes instead of waiting a week...

You didn't understand my answer, I wasn't talking about buyers nor users but corps, I made it quite clear, users don't own AI.

The same about CT scans, I said it could have been (ok IS ) a wonderful tool, but if you look at how things evolve, you also know that soon there will be no more radiologists and most doctors will lose their job, and at that point, corps will do whatever they want with AI prices.

 

[mbrowne5061]

From what I've read, my opinion, you are safer from a search without a warrant of your device using a password or PIN than biometrics. Biometrics are viewed as physical keys, where they cannot compel a password\PIN from you because it is considered "testimonial" (5th amendment self incrimination...etc.).

It is a legal grey area, which can vary from state to state. Consult a lawyer!

IIRC, in the US, it is not that biometrics are considered "physical" - which is still protected under the fourth amendment - but that they are considered "public". As dumb as that is. The "logic" applied by the courts is you leave your fingerprints behind every time you touch something, your retinas are captured every time someone takes your photo; the only limitation is if enough information is left behind during either of these random moments, and the courts generally agree that this is enough that they can compel you to unlock your device if this is the only lock on it.

I.e. if you setup a physical key to unlock a device, such as a FIDO key, that is still better protected legally than biometric keys; and LEOs & prosecutors would need a warrant to seize this key (and device). But once they have that warrant, if there is no accompanying PIN/password/passphrase/knowledge-in-your-head that is needed to use the key, then they can unlock your device and everything inside of it is free to use as evidence in a case.

I wonder if this is why corporations and govt. agencies are pushing for the adoption of passkeys? They're like a software version of hardware keys: no accompanying "knowledge" needed to use them to unlock a device or account. And we already know files can be seized via a search warrant, so its not a stretch to assume passkeys will be the same.

 

[Squid Surprise]

You didn't understand my answer, I wasn't talking about buyers nor users but corps, I made it quite clear, users don't own AI.

The same about CT scans, I said it could have been (ok IS ) a wonderful tool, but if you look at how things evolve, you also know that soon there will be no more radiologists and most doctors will lose their job, and at that point, corps will do whatever they want with AI prices.

I understood it - I disagree with your pessimism… not everything runs like apocalyptic sci/fi…

 

[yannus]

I understood it - I disagree with your pessimism… not everything runs like apocalyptic sci/fi…

Inflation does

 

[ZedRM]

Yet another reason, in a long series of reasons, to ban AI?

 

[ZedRM]

I understood it - I disagree with your pessimism… not everything runs like apocalyptic sci/fi…

Yet we have already seen very seriously negative effects caused directly by AI. You can disagree all you wish, the facts of reality stand against you.

 

[Endymio]

Yet another reason, in a long series of reasons, to ban AI?

This is pure insanity. The image processing tech here has literally tens of thousands of application. I referred earlier to what it's accomplishing in the field of cosmology, but in medical imaging it's even more revolutionary: it promises to not only diagnose far better and faster than a human radiologist, but to bring down the cost of such diagnoses from several thousand dollars to mere pennies.

Yet we have already seen very seriously negative effects caused directly by AI. You can disagree all you wish, the facts of reality stand against you.

We've seen no such thing -- except some embarrrasingly dishonest articles attempting to link AI to all sorts of things, including -- recently on this very site -- the false claim that "AI" had caused a power utility to stop serving residential customers.

 

[Squid Surprise]

Yet we have already seen very seriously negative effects caused directly by AI. You can disagree all you wish, the facts of reality stand against you.

Really? Name some... and "people losing jobs" doesn't count... most of those jobs losses are execs using AI as an excuse. Most companies over-hired during the pandemic and are now adjusting...

 

[onebignerd]

IIRC, in the US, it is not that biometrics are considered "physical" - which is still protected under the fourth amendment - but that they are considered "public". As dumb as that is. The "logic" applied by the courts is you leave your fingerprints behind every time you touch something, your retinas are captured every time someone takes your photo; the only limitation is if enough information is left behind during either of these random moments, and the courts generally agree that this is enough that they can compel you to unlock your device if this is the only lock on it.

I.e. if you setup a physical key to unlock a device, such as a FIDO key, that is still better protected legally than biometric keys; and LEOs & prosecutors would need a warrant to seize this key (and device). But once they have that warrant, if there is no accompanying PIN/password/passphrase/knowledge-in-your-head that is needed to use the key, then they can unlock your device and everything inside of it is free to use as evidence in a case.

I wonder if this is why corporations and govt. agencies are pushing for the adoption of passkeys? They're like a software version of hardware keys: no accompanying "knowledge" needed to use them to unlock a device or account. And we already know files can be seized via a search warrant, so its not a stretch to assume passkeys will be the same.

I am only repeating how courts have worded their decisions and understand the definitions and terms used.

 

[ZedRM]

This is pure insanity.

Is it? What I call insane is the proliferation if AI, the resources being recklessly dumped into it, and the complete disregard for environmental concerns surrounding it, much like cryptocoin a few year ago. Same kind of waste, same levels of greed based profiteering, different kind of tech. What I also find insane is the apparent inability for certain people to see the house burning down around their head. No one is perfect, are they Professor? Example?

We've seen no such thing -- except some embarrrasingly dishonest articles attempting to link AI to all sorts of things, including -- recently on this very site -- the false claim that "AI" had caused a power utility to stop serving residential customers.

This! This problem has been well documented by a number of credible news outlets. Fortune, San Fran Chronicle, Ars Technica just to name a few(because a search engine is soooo hard to use, isn't it). But it's gotta be false, right? Fake news, right? Because it couldn't possibly be true that a for-profit power company wants to drop one set of customers for different higher paying set customers, right? No, can't be true, not at all.

Really? Name some...

I just named one above, there are others. If you had been paying attention, you'd know what they are.

and "people losing jobs" doesn't count... most of those jobs losses are execs using AI as an excuse.

Oh? Is it now? I guess all the people I've seen being replaced by AI in my local area are just excuse cases.

Most companies over-hired during the pandemic and are now adjusting...

That's the excuse.

 

[Squid Surprise]

I just named one above, there are others. If you had been paying attention, you'd know what they are.

Oh? Is it now? I guess all the people I've seen being replaced by AI in my local area are just excuse cases.

That's the excuse.

No… the excuse is AI… the reality is different… try harder…

 

[Endymio]

This! This problem has been well documented by a number of credible news outlets. Fortune, San Fran Chronicle, Ars Technica just to name a few

At least two of those three are hives of yellow journalism, well known for printing misinformation. But feel free to post a link to one of those stories and I'll be happy to show you why it's incorrect.

Because it couldn't possibly be true that a for-profit power company wants to drop one set of customers for different higher paying set customers, right? No, can't be true, not at all.

Logic really isn't that difficult. It's not of matter of whether such an event is "possible", it's false simply because the facts demonstrate otherwise. This particular utility planned this move more than FIFTEEN YEARS AGO; it's simply been repeatedly delayed. Furthermore, you've failed to even understand what the story even stated: the residential customers themselves are still being served by the same utility they've always been ... but that utility must now purchase power from elsewhere.

Once again: this has literally zero to do with "AI". It's a result of Californians believing they could easily import power from elsewhere, rather than producing their own as all other states do.

 

[ZedRM]

No… the excuse is AI… the reality is different… try harder…

Logic really isn't that difficult.

Yet you two seem to struggle with it. Funny right?

As discussion with two people who are more worried about being right than on factual reality is like screaming under water, I'm out. Go ahead and flex some more and get in the last words.

There is this example : https://www.techspot.com/news/112451-meta-reassigning-7000-workers-ai-jobs-while-laying.html
Right here at TechSpot. Imagine that.

 

[Squid Surprise]

Yet you two seem to struggle with it. Funny right?

As discussion with two people who are more worried about being right than on factual reality is like screaming under water, I'm out. Go ahead and flex some more and get in the last words.

There is this example : https://www.techspot.com/news/112451-meta-reassigning-7000-workers-ai-jobs-while-laying.html
Right here at TechSpot. Imagine that.

That’s exactly my point. These are layoffs because of the fact that Meta hired too many people - and their VR has been a disaster. Obviously they’d reassign as many as possibly to AI - that’s profitable!

This isn’t AI taking jobs - this is corporations attempting to streamline their organizations!

It’s easy to “blame AI”… but it’s not taking anyone’s jobs!