You should see what Google has done with the latest version of the Phone app. You used to be able to click on contacts and that would show you.. your contacts. Now it shows recent calls with a search bar for contacts. Say I want to call a friend named Dave. As soon as I start typing, search results begin populating, but none of the names it offers start with "D", they just contain "D" somewhere. It could be the middle of a last name. And I can't figure out why they'd fuck this up. There are no ads to be injected into my attempts to find a contact, so I have to wonder if this is just the beginning of a push to ruin every convenience so users will turn to Gemini for everything.
It's not as bad as you say. If you search in the Phone app, a single letter search returns contacts with a name field (and then a company field, and then a notes field) starting with that letter. It works reasonably well.
The Contacts app is worse and returns anything with a string anywhere in the contact details starting with that letter.
>anyone being targeted by facial recognition by definition has to be known to law enforcement already
Or they could use the self-checkout at Walmart, or walk through a Target, or buy a hammer at Home Depot. The government buys data from a wide variety of sources, without warrants or other oversight. Yours too.
"Biometric Information
What Information Does This Include?
Facial recognition.
Where Do We Collect It From?
Via cameras at select stores, in parking lots, and at other facilities as permitted under applicable laws.
Why Do We Collect and Disclose It?
Fraud prevention, security, and asset protection.
Who Do We Disclose It To?
Service providers that process information on our behalf, such as security and fraud prevention services.
Law enforcement, public and government authorities, and other entities as we deem reasonably necessary to comply with law, support investigations, and protect the rights and property of you, us, and others.
Any successor to all or part of our business.
Advisors and consultants.
Our affiliates and subsidiaries."
What’s your assertion, that the government is using images of people in public or various stores to target anybody black, brown, or other non-white humans?
The man pictured stopped by ICE in the article is black. Are you claiming that facial recognition is being collected on all 50 million black American citizens and used to target people? How would this work differently than stopping random non-white people in the street and asking for legal status (I’m not claiming this doesn’t happen, I’m asking how it differs from your techno-fantasy scenario and why the resources would be investigated the way you claim it works).
Payment information and license plate scans are combined with biometric data to build profiles on every individual. It doesn't matter what shade your skin color is.
You still didn’t explain what this has to do with “ICE bounty hunters”, how this is used to specifically identify illegal immigrants, or why I should even care that illegal immigrants who broke the law by virtue of their presence here are being deported.
Does anyone believe that the US regime, an entity that utterly ignores the needs of its masses in favor of a relative handful of lobbyists, is really going to install a representative government that exists to improve the lives of Venezuelans instead of enriching the same powers that it's beholden to?
I wouldn't say entirely. I had a client with a large company contact me on LinkedIn saying that they wanted to buy my product but no one would respond to their emails. Their system was nuking my responses until I set up DMARC reporting, and I had no indication it was happening on my end. No "failed to deliver" message and nothing in the logs, just email that vanished into the ether.
That's interesting! Can you share which provider their MX record pointed to? Silently disappearing emails are typical Microsoft Forefront antics (but definitely also a misfeature of other products), but mostly when the originating domain has a p=reject DMARC policy. You didn't happen to relax that at the same time you added the reporting parameters?
But once your DMARC, DKIM & SPF is configured correctly, there should be no reason for an MTA to reject your mail due to DMARC, right? I have DMARC reporting turned on, but am considering turning it off.
Back when I ran email for a large sender, I turned DMARC reports off once I got things settled in, and might turn it on to debug issues.
There was nothing to do about the reports most of the time. Just get mad that people are accepting spoofed mail that fails DKIM and SPF.
But mostly, the phishing campaigns with our branding just stopped spoofing addresses. Turns out, lots of email clients don't show the sender address and people who get a phishing email about Service Y from info@johnsplumbingservices.example.com may get phished.
The excessive emojis were enough for me to move on. I haven't touched an OpenAI product in over a year. I've maintained an ad-free household for over a decade. OpenAI will not ever be a part of my life any more than it is now. Just like Facebook.
I agree. Back in the 90's there was plenty of skepticism, along with some mockery, surrounding the internet. But you never saw headlines like "Lawyer caught using the internet" or "Artist busted using the World Wide Web".
reply