This is I believe the first time in human history that AI video cameras have been widely deployed, inside private homes, for the purpose of enforcing laws. Never mind the banal details: this is an incredible milestone.
The chinese app wechat already does this in private homes for the purpose of enforcing KYC and "misinformation tracking" - you are required to repeat after it, repeat every phoneme/syllable to form a voiceprint (and coincidentally enough to basically train something to replicate your speech), look straight ahead, rotate around your head, and follow its instructions to sign in again.
Also, asking two verified-ID mainland china users to "vouch" for you and be responsible for your activities if you are a foreigner.
Almost every service in China requires "real name verification" - you can't play games without it, for example.
The technology exists, right. But have you experienced it anywhere outside of China? I, for one, have not (at least in the UE). I strongly believe that the average western customer is not be willing to go through such a process.
Most (all maybe?) of the new German banks and fintech products seem to offer it as they have no physical branches, you can often open accounts directly from your smartphone. Some will offer a way of identifying yourself via a post office with your passport too.
What the person above means is different. If you open an account, nowadays you have to ask someone that already has a Wechat account to scan a QR code to vouch that you are indeed who you claim to be. It doesn't actually do ID identification though and it doesn't have to be a Chinese mainland user. It can be any other active Wechat account. Full ID Identification only works with a China mainland bank account IIRC.
What the person above implies is that the other two are on the hook when you start spreading any Government information. I'd assume that the government would investigate anyone in your friend list if you do that though regardless of whether they verified you or not, so it's kind of a minor detail in my opinion.
Really? I’m outside of China, and signed up for WeChat (for work) but never had to do any of the KYC things. They only took my number to send an OTP.
If they ask for KYC in the mainland I suppose it’s understandable since it serves a lot more than a chat app there (payment, SSO for a lot of other services).
When I tried to install WeChat because I was going to travel to China, it kept making me verify my account repeatedly, I guess it was because my phone was rooted...
This is for the equivalent of Facebook Messenger or playing a F2P game, not fintech - bank requires even more, and linking a "real name ID" IRL bank account anyway.
Basically every modern "mobile-first" bank/stock brokerage app, etc. is built on that. With a lot of them there is still a human in the process giving you the instructions (usually from a call center), but it's gradually shifting to tech-only solutions.
I called Fidelity in the US about my account, and the agent told me the system was taking a voice print, to be used to verify me the next time I called in.
That's hardly comparable though. No one is taking your voice print and biometric details to match everything you ever say or do against you just to activate a sim card. Not to mention that buying a travel sim card that doesn't require ID is absolutely trivial, or even getting one shipped from any other European country which doesn't have this requirement is simple and easy.
Yeah it's a faff, but at least no one will accuse you of being an enemy of the state if you do this like trying to avoid tagging in China.
> No one is taking your voice print and biometric details
Some Italian cell operators do. For example, when you are buying a new sim card for Iliad, you do this in front of an automated kiosk where you have to scan your ID, then face camera and say outloud "my name is Insert Your Name Here, and I would like to make a phone service contract with Iliad".
SIM cards are used for transmitting voice in an insecure fashion, so you can't be sure. Some voice codecs are even designed to do something very similiar to fingerprinting voices.
> No one is taking your [...] biometric details
They were already taken when you had¹ to get the ID in the first place.
¹ The federal republic directly adopted laws from nazi germany requiring ID for every citizen. This law was initially introduced to acquire data about jews and people fit for military service.
> to match everything you ever say or do against you just to activate a sim card
This was never about surveillance by private entities! Federal agencys can match everything you say based on the fact that the SIM card in your portable bug is linked directly to you.
> but at least no one will accuse you of being an enemy of the state if you do this like trying to avoid tagging in China.
You can be certain that you end up in a database if you use a foreign SIM card from a non-KYC-country for a long period of time in a residential area. Your only defence is your network provider not cooperating unless forced by law.
Germany is being turned into a surveillance state bit by bit and I am fed up by people trying to defend it!
>>You can be certain that you end up in a database if you use a foreign SIM card from a non-KYC-country for a long period of time in a residential area. Your only defence is your network provider not cooperating unless forced by law.
I've literally been doing this for the last 11 years, guess I'm screwed then :P
>>They were already taken when you had¹ to get the ID in the first place.
Yes, and the mobile operator doesn't get them, while in the article discussed it's the "private" operator gathering all this data.
>>SIM cards are used for transmitting voice in an insecure fashion, so you can't be sure.
The difference being, that here it's done openly and in a visible fashion "either you do this, or you can't play our games".
>>¹ The federal republic directly adopted laws from nazi germany requiring ID for every citizen.
That sounds about on a level with an argument that since Hitler was vegetarian, all vegetarians are nazis. Your country adopted a lot of laws from the Third Reich. Mine adopted a lot of laws from the communist republic it once was. Neither fact makes those countries anything like their predecessors. The law that every citizen has to have an ID is a good one IMHO(wait for Americans to chime in and say this is against their personal freedom or something).
I've had to add this exact functionality ("Look left and repeat these numbers") as part of KYC for a mobile app similar to Revolut.
This is in conjunction with ID scanning.
I think this functionality was necessary as part of complying with KYC laws. And AFAIK WeChat has very similar functionality to Revolut (among much more) so even if the app was non-Chinese (e.g. European), it would need a similar flow.
I believe that the average customer anywhere just don't care. I care but nonetheless did go through such a process as it was somewhat required for me to pay taxes on Brazil using 'Gov.br' SSI app.
In the West, KYC means that a bank is going to ask to see your ID before letting you open an account.
In China, KYC means that, in order to use something as pedestrian as social media, you have to let the CCP AI dragnet build a profile that can be used to surveil you for the rest of your life.
Wechat is basically a bank as you can use it to send money, hence KYC. If all the CCP wanted was to build a profile they'd just ask for ID and then scoop up every call you make.
Yes, indeed. That said put in another way, they're just a bank and Facebook at the same time, which is indeed scary. Not that it would be very different if they were different services for spying purposes, the government can always centralize the data.
Hahahahahaha, I'm sorry. This is a ridiculous take. It sounds as if you are justifying handing over your entire digital identity, which includes given someone so much information about yourself that you could be easily impersonated, is justifiable because it will cut down on online trolling? Not to mention, you are giving all of this information to a regime that regularly "disappears" people for dissenting stances, and is actually running literal concentration camps.
> As privacy invading it is, I can easily see how this would be effective means to curb bad behavior online, such as trolling or spamming—or worse.
I'm not so sure about that, reading Facebook comment threads on news articles clearly shows that a real name policy isn't really stopping people from misbehaving online.
As human rights invading as it is, I can easily see how forced sterilization would be an effective means to curb bad genetics, such as being short or fat - or worse.
It's amazing! Hundreds of SciFi writers predicted such surveillance, I dont think many predicted it arrive by invitation - i expect many parents will support this.
Same for smart speakers. It's a hairs breadth away from complete audio & video surveillance.
Semi-coherent and very subjective thoughts about my favorite book follow. Sorry, I just have to gush.
Eh, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep was more about empathy, the meaning of humanity, how we justify segregation, etc; its perspective on the human condition was at a much more fundamental/introspective level than the issues discussed in this thread. Though I suppose there might be parallels between the empathy box and the Mountain-Dew (TM) greentext in the top comment.
The subjugated population--the andys--were used not to critique subjugation itself as much as the analyze the implications of the justifications behind that subjugation, especially given the the fact that andys don't feel empathy and had to break the law to be where they are (and the protagonist + POV is a law enforcement officer). It wasn't about the what as much as it was about the why and its implications.
Books that critique the existence of norms/institutions are great, but my favorites are books that choose to accept their presented status-quos but analyze what the implications are and what accepting that status-quo means about ourselves; readers can then look inside themselves and make their own calls. It's the epitome of "show, don't tell".
The real clever kids will eventually realize that those games from Tencent are just stupid money grabbing time wasters, and then stop playing.
Sadly, most people are not that smart. Which is one reason why so many people are willing to give up their privacy AND money in exchange for the "permission" to use those services.
>ERROR: CANNOT BEGIN PLAY SESSION UNTIL PLAYER SHAVES FACE
I know you're joking, but a law was passed in Xinjiang back in 2014 preventing people with beards from riding public transport. You literally had to shave before you could board a bus.
Why? Was it an anti-Muslim thing? Disgusting anyways.
Putting the discrimination aside (well that sounded insensitive but bear with me), very sorry for those poor people who are like me, who get a red face for DAYS after shaving.
Do you know what the euphemistic justification was? “Cleanliness”? I cannot think of one that is not absurd to even the dimmest ethno-nationalist of my imagination.
If I had to guess they'd just say the beard is a symbol of separatism, therefore if you refuse to shave then we might consider you to be sympathetic to the separatist movement, you wouldn't want us to think that, would you?
It's circular logic but probably good enough for the fascists...
Geez, serves me right for using an "-ist" word and getting an anal retentive "They're a different sort of '-ist'" comment.
The Wikipedia definition "Fascism is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and of the economy" seems to tick all the boxes in the case of China, although I don't know if they fit the definition "far right" (too lazy to see if they tick those other boxes).
The problem with "-ist" and "-ism" words is everyone has their own definition what this means. Bernie Sanders can call himself a socialist that thinks the rich should be taxed more, and some dumbass will think he hates Jews because the Nazi party also has the word "Socialism" in it.
Also, if you want to say "They're communists because that word is in their party name", then the Democratic People's Republic of (North) Korea must be a great place to live, since they're democratic, and belong to the people!
There are very few countries worldwide that can look through their history and not find a single culture that has been eliminated or at least marginalized.
Not inside the private homes, but in 2008, Tabaco vending machines with facial recognition feature to verify the age(20+ years old) are deployed in Japan.
The result was amusing. It was busted by picture of adult face, or by kids moving facial muscles.
Taspo and the “I am truthfully and honestly over 20” button at convenience stores aren’t meant to stop anyone. They only exist so the government and industry can claim they are cracking down on underage smoking and drinking, not to actually stop underage people from smoking and drinking, because how boring would that be?
They did that to verify your age to buy cigarettes on a vending machine a short amount of time in Austria. Obviously everyone was tricking it with paper masks.
Today they use banking cards, which still work for age verification after they expired so they are just shared between the youngsters
Of course it was. They want minors to buy the stuff.
The facial recognition was just a distraction to evade law enforcement.
I wouldn't be surprised if it's the same with these games. In fact, I would be surprised if a company went to great lengths to reduce their potential consumer base.
I think they exist mostly to make busybody moral guardians STFU. They don’t actually buy smokes at vending machines or alcohol at 7-11 so have no idea if the measure work or not.
Tencent is doing this to comply to Chinese laws. They won't do this if there is no such law. And the law says: "internet gaming companies have responsibility to not provide internet gaming service to minors between 10pm and 8am". I am sure tencent won't want to do this if they had the chance. 1) it limits their ability to get play time and sell to kids. 2) its more work on their end.
So the main problem here is the law. Not Tencent. But many Chinese people support and even called for this law. The supports for this law is cultural, circumstantial and societal.
In the US, Tencent should adhere to US laws and cultural customs. First, for this specific case, Tencent won't implement it outside of China because 1) why would they limit their own ability to make money 2)why would they not align with US culture? Second, If US has a law that bans using facial recognition, all companies will comply and these issues will not exists. You can enforce practices and values through laws.
Also this is Tencent specific system. They are using facial recognition to verify the current user is who they say they are. Just like IPhone has face ID. Because for other verification methods, kids just bypasses them. And I believe they only do verification ones during the banned hours. It doesn't consistently monitor you. The law targets online gaming providers, and fines them if they provide service outside the allowed hours. It doesn't incarcerate kids. Law enforcement doesn't track kids playing games and when they play. And Tencent doesn't share kids data with law enforcement.
Tencent, like all major Chinese corporations, is just a thinly veiled extension of the Chinese state. And I'm sure someone will try a "no u" about Facebook etc. effectively being extensions of the US government but that doesn't change the reality of how all major corps in China operate.
> Chinese corporations [are an] extension of the Chinese state
The Chinese state defines Chinese laws so this is basically restating the GP's point that "Tencent is doing this to comply to Chinese laws"
It's technically true for American corporations (which follow American laws created by the American government), but as you mention, it's not quite the same because the American system of government has significantly higher inertia and building consensus is significantly higher effort, so you generally only see the effect in certain industries that span decades-long bi-partisan projects (e.g. military industrial complex)
> national security letters and secret courts have no inertia and need no bipartisan consensus.
I would argue these have already met overwhelming bipartisan consensus over the past few decades (particularly since 9/11). Your average privacy nut (myself included) are not too happy about it, your average person knows nothing about it, but your average senator or governor is strongly in favor.
Americans quite like out-of-sight out-of-mind solutions to problems involving Bad People, even unsavory solutions like mass spying or drone killings. The moment that the national security powers for example start blocking porn or video games, consensus and acceptance would instantly disappear.
The word "incredible" usually has a positive connotation, of something impressive being achieved that benefits society. Those case is incredible, but has such severe privacy concerns that there is no such positive effect present. AI has a great deal of promise if used responsibly, but gross invasion of privacy shows promise of a different kind. This is a horrific milestone.
>first time in human history that AI video cameras have been widely deployed, inside private homes, for the purpose of enforcing laws
Knowingly maybe. But all those IP Cameras have had face detection for almost a decade, They've been deployed extensively in homes around the world, They've been phoning to their home to provide even basic features or at least the DDNS based features and are riddled with vulnerabilities.
One could use firewall, custom firmware to fix this to an extent but not everyone has the means or intention to do it.
It's not the first time. All smartfones have a microfone and a camera. And if you think that they are used only for making pictures and talking on the phone - dream on.
Don’t you think someone — possibly a user of this site — would have noticed the network traffic?
Not only are you implying that there is a back door in the phone operating systems, but also in every other device on the same network as the phone to hide such traffic.
What you’re suggesting is certainly possible, but the idea that it’s been rolled out to the average person doesn’t seem likely.
If there is a generic backdoor it's certainly not in the OS but rather in the modems firmware. The scary part is that all modem manufacturers are based in countrys that are known to violate human rights in organized ways.
> What you’re suggesting is certainly possible, but the idea that it’s been rolled out to the average person doesn’t seem likely.
It's a known fact that government agencys of certain states hack devices of people they target. An "average person" is still affected by this since they can be targeted "by accident" for multiple reasons. (e.g. through friends, being at suspicious locations, wrong vacation destination etc.) So it doesn't even matter if a device is backdoored.
> Don’t you think someone — possibly a user of this site — would have noticed the network traffic?
Given how much analytics garbage phones regularly spew out, you'd have to perform HTTPS MITM attacks to check this – and that's the kind of thing that alters the behaviour of the system you're measuring.
I still don't think it's likely, but if somebody were to find some suspicious code, I have no real reason to doubt that it's doing something like this.
Don’t you think someone — possibly a user of this site — would have noticed the network traffic?
I notice a lot of network traffic coming from my phone to *.googleapis.com network endpoints, even when I'm not using my phone. So I'm not sure what point you're trying to make?
