To the surprise of nobody, people that only get information from sources that validate their own beliefs (in this case social media and corporate LLMs), ends up believing all kinds of hoaxes.
I would not be surprised to find similar rates among people that only rely on religious figures for health matters.
No no, from the full article it seems they are building (again) a database of people’s biometrics. They are kept in the app, but from an early analysis it looks like there is a client-server mechanism to “pull” biometric information to your phone and start recognizing people with your glasses. I guess only time will tell how they will implement it, and if there will be enough pressure again to have them remove this terrible functionality.
“Though not yet enabled, NameTag sits inside a Meta AI companion app that’s been downloaded over 50 million times and is necessary for use of key features of its smart glasses, including Ray-Ban and Oakley models. If activated, it will transform faces captured by Meta’s glasses into unique biometric signatures, commonly known as faceprints, and check each one against faceprints stored on the user’s phone—a database that’s currently configured to receive updates from Meta. Recognized faces will trigger notifications, while the rest are cropped, indexed, and saved to a folder marked ‘pending’.”
It seems that the code is in the specific app for the glasses. Another very relevant passage:
“NameTag would revive a type of technology Meta said it had sunsetted in 2021, when the company announced it would delete more than a billion faceprints belonging to Facebook users following years of controversy over its photo-tagging system. Meta ultimately paid $650 million to settle a class-action lawsuit brought by Illinois users and, in 2024, agreed to a separate $1.4 billion settlement with Texas over allegations it had unlawfully collected biometric data from users.”
I may have a forgettable life, so I’ll make sure to have an unforgettable death.
AI (or what we call AI currently) is definitely capable of making decision it wasn’t trained for, it’s the whole reason why LLM are so effective, they learned enough patterns about how humans think and react, that they can apply it to other situations.
Now, if you talk about RELIABLY making decisions then I definitely agree with you. They can’t even be reliable with stuff they extensively saw in training, when you get out of the “confort zone” the odds of it taking the correct decision drops fast.
But with AI companies trying to get as much data as they can from their workers and from common people, and with the scary new trend of smart glasses (even though I’m a fan of augmented reality as a concept) we will see how things evolve…
deleted by creator
While I cannot agree on having to prove your identity online, this is ON PAPER better than what individual governments are doing right now (from what I know, I may be wrong though). I still don’t like it and think it’s a bad idea in general, but if EU countries are going to implement it in any case, at least it’s better to have something that protects your anonymity both ways (the government cannot see and track what your are visiting, and the sites cannot see and track your identity).
BUT, this is in paper. We will have to see the actual implementation.
And I would much rather not have anything like this (but good luck with all the far right parties that are being pushed right now…).
Have a Kindle Paperwhite (1st gen). Have send over USB, through Calibre - software, never used the web one -, books and documents in various formats. Never had an issue.
It’s not only inherent to the technology, it is actively trained, as sycophancy brings more engagement…