Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Major source of privacy loss (Score 2) 205

by pittaxx (#43574161) Attached to: Google Releases Glass Kernel Source Code

Nah, the late MS pro-privacy campaign is more of a PR stunt (aka "we are doing something different than google"). Their record is more or less on par with Google (they have Bing that is just as information hungry).

The only reason we didn't see many headlines about that is because MS don't really do much innovation these days and no one cares.

Comment: Re:Major source of privacy loss (Score 1) 205

by pittaxx (#43574071) Attached to: Google Releases Glass Kernel Source Code

Except that it you have to activate video recording manually.
And it would kill your battery in an hour if all that was running without your notice.
And source code is published so you could check that it's not happening.

As pointed out many times before, you can do much more stuff with your smartphone and you can still enforce "no glass" policy on your property.

Comment: Re:Privacy and etiquette (Score 2) 155

by pittaxx (#43125323) Attached to: Developers Begin Hunt For a Killer App For Google Glass

Well, I imagine that they would be slightly "rude" than phones and tablets, but not by much:

As the screen is positioned near the top of the eye, you would still be clearly able to tell quite clearly when the person is looking at you and when his eyes jump upwards towards their small screen (unless you on a significantly elevated surface),

They would not be recording all the time either - I imagine that would just kill the battery life. In fact, given that the batteries on these are bound to be rather small, I imagine you will probably be able to do much less recording with these than with your smartphone. Not to mention, that by looking at this it seems that the recording etc is voice activated (or will involve some fiddling with with the glasses, which might give you a hint).

As far as "analyzing" goes, there was an article about app that will try to identify people based on what they are wearing , but I'm very skeptical when people begin to talk how good it is, but anything beyond human shape recognition is still borderline fiction these days ( at least for the consumer devices).

Comment: Why not just drop TLDs (Score 5, Informative) 135

by pittaxx (#42066199) Attached to: World Governments Object To New gTLDs
No one respects the conventions at this point anyway and I don't see much point in using them any more. Big companies just register everything available anyway, and small ones has to deal with trolling an scamming. It's just an extra vector for profit to some people, the way I see it. I'd say just drop the requirement for TLDs and let the people use current ones if they want to.

Comment: Re:Hmmm.... (Score 1) 29

by pittaxx (#40931465) Attached to: Facebook Facial Recognition Under Scrutiny In Norway
You don't have to upload photos of yourself - there are always those school photos that pop up (where you would offend a bunch of people if you untag yourself) or random photos by other people you didn't even notice being taken... I'd say not using facebook is the only way to protect your privacy, unless you live in a deserted island.

"Falling in love makes smoking pot all day look like the ultimate in restraint." -- Dave Sim, author of Cerebrus.

Working...