Saturday, September 22, 2012
"Facedeals" seems to have journalists running in circles (despite "reassurances")
Facebook seems to be running around in circles on the use of its facial recognition technology (and not just in Europe), and so are news journalists trying to explain what Facebook is or is not doing. For example, taste the word salad (and maybe imagine a recipe) in this story in the New York Times by Somini Semgupta and Kevin J. O’Brien, here.
Here’s another tasty story trying to explain Redpepper’s Facebdeals on a site called “All Facebook” by David Cohen, here.
There seem to be several companies and sites on the web called Redpepper (trademark issues, maybe?), but the Facebook page for advertising agency in Nashville hits a homerun with some “cute” men whose appearance, perhaps accidentally, corresponds to preppy gay stereotypes. (Check the link).
I suppose this matter about Facedeaks will go pretty viral. (although talk about it has been around for a month or so.) This next video about it plays “Fireflies”:
Oh, yes, you do have to grant Facedeaks permission.
Seriously, I wonder how facial recognition technology can be dependable. People can look alike, or not alike, in lower resolution images commonly found online. It would take a certainly amount of resolution to measure facial components accurately. Faces (and bodies) can look different in sunlight than in flash. How would the presence or absence of beards or other hair affect recognition?. Lookalikes (especially of Bill Clinton) are all too common.
And for some people, it’s going to be problematical. Some people say they cannot “afford” to allow others to have a visual record of their whereabouts. Oh, the police, yes (especially in London). But not other real people.
Related post: Aug. 19.