Facebook Is Backing Away From Facial Recognition. Meta Isn't.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Vox: Facebook says it will stop using facial recognition for photo-tagging. In a Monday blog post, Meta, the social network's new parent company, announced that the platform will delete the facial templates of more than a billion people and shut off its facial recognition software, which uses an algorithm to identify people in photos they upload to Facebook. This decision represents a major step for the movement against facial recognition, which experts and activists have warned is plagued with bias and privacy problems. But Meta's announcement comes with a couple of big caveats. While Meta says that facial recognition isn't a feature on Instagram and its Portal devices, the company's new commitment doesn't apply to its metaverse products, Meta spokesperson Jason Grosse told Recode. In fact, Meta is already exploring ways to incorporate biometrics into its emerging metaverse business, which aims to build a virtual, internet-based simulation where people can interact as avatars. Meta is also keeping DeepFace, the sophisticated algorithm that powers its photo-tagging facial recognition feature.

"We believe this technology has the potential to enable positive use cases in the future that maintain privacy, control, and transparency, and it's an approach we'll continue to explore as we consider how our future computing platforms and devices can best serve people's needs," Grosse told Recode. "For any potential future applications of technologies like this, we'll continue to be public about intended use, how people can have control over these systems and their personal data, and how we're living up to our responsible innovation framework."

oh man, I called that

[otherPerry]

too lazy to go get my comment from a couple days, but a blind man could see that loophole.

Re: oh man, I called that

[Goatbot]

Lol so true, you were not alone with those thoughts.

Re:

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Good news, however, for those of us who suffer from extreme face blindness.

The problem with the old database is that it *specifically* had bad data. I was tagged in so many photos that I wasn't in from well meaning family that the algorithm was labeling pictures of certain breeds of trees as possibly containing me.

Proper face recognition software should enable a person using Facebook Stories By Rayban glasses to recognize anybody in their friends list. The current database, has too much garbage to do that

Re:

[infolation]

I think Martin Luther called it in about 1530 with "What The Right Hand Gives, The Left Hand Takes".

Except Facebook's taking hand seems to be doing a lot more work than the giving one.

Re:

[ayesnymous]

I said the other day that Facebook would be copying all the facial data to Meta's servers before deleting it.

Is this really something that we care about?

[GoHawks]

I have no plans to sign up for Meta as I don't see anything super exciting about it. To me it's like the 3D movie craze that never really happened. I feel this will eventually be a flop and Facebook will go back to Facebook.

Re: Is this really something that we care about?

[Goatbot]

Think of the Matrix, or any other number of dystopian futuristic movies. Basically going hook us up to gaming rigs and milk us for data. Already this generation is so connected that real life is just a place to sleep and eat, their lifes are online.

Re:

[gtall]

Maybe they'll rename the company Faceplant.

Re:

[godel_56]

But think of the possibilities, dick-pics and Goatse in 3D, coming at you!

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

AR

[waspleg]

You don't have an account? That's nice, someone you know does, and if they wear the headset now you've been assimilated. They are infamous for dark profiles [dailymail.co.uk].

Re:

[JonnyCalcutta]

I'm not denying the actual claim, but please don't link to the Daily Mail as a source. Its the equivalent of using the National Enquirer or a Spiderman comic (except the Daily Mail is far more insidious). Apart from anything else, linking on only supports their nasty, tabloid journalism.

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:

[s4080326]

Because they want to link your virtual presence with your real life presence. The vanilla end-goal would be if you tried on a red shirt on your avatar, the next time you go to the shops a camera would detect you and you would be shown an add for a red-shirt outside the highest bidding clothes store and the sales assistant would be given a tip-off about your size style and budget to finish the deal.

Facebook by any other name...

[Gravis Zero]

would be just as evil.

so now we find the real reason for meta

[ClueHammer]

so facebook can be two faced!

Second Life Support?

[douglasfir77]

So will you be able to play Second Life on a PC in Meta's uhh... meta verse? Asking for a friend!

Re:

[infolation]

How do you kill that which has no life? [youtube.com]

But will they delete the metadata?

[HalAtWork]

They'll delete templates but the photos will still be tagged, allowing them to maintain all associations and links between people.

Re:

[jenningsthecat]

They'll delete templates but the photos will still be tagged, allowing them to maintain all associations and links between people.

But really, will they truly delete anything? I'm not buying it. I can delete lots of stuff on my computer - hell, I can even wipe the drive - and then stand with my hand on my heart and honestly say that I deleted stuff. And as long as nobody asks about my backups, it all looks cool. And even if I was asked about backups... well, I could lie. I probably wouldn't lie. But Facebook? Oh yeah, that's right, they've NEVER lied about anything, so I guess it's all good!

For that matter, they might even think they'v

Re:

[Rockoon]

The one thing I know for certain is that nobody should be going into their backups deleting stuff, even facebook.

Re:

[Mister Transistor]

He's not saying that. Just the opposite, that they WON'T delete anything, except perhaps a fake sacrificial "active data set" that is the current stuff, but yesterday's backups are all still there was his point.

Not that they would try to alter history by deleting things FROM backups! Oh, noes. Actually though, that would be perfectly legal unless they were subpoenaed or given a specific court order telling them not to touch them as "evidence". But that HAS NOT HAPPENED as of yet.

let me fix the post

[Anonymous Coward]

Mark Zuckerberg is doubling down on being a worthless pile of crap and plans to rape the world for as long as he wants.

Until everyone abandons Facebook, nothing is going to change. If everyone decided to uninstall FB app and delete their accounts, in a few months, FB could go bankrupt. Will it happen? I doubt it. It's human nature to put up with BS and dick-tators.

Re:

[Ceseuron]

I don't think it's as much human nature to put up with Facebook as it is addiction to a platform that has been deliberately designed to perpetuate and accelerate that addiction. Ask anyone with an account why they still use it and they'll immediately give you a list of reasons why they still use Facebook, despite knowing full well what kind of company Facebook is and the toxicity and pure evil that it represents. What's more, those reasons will be given much in the same way a meth addict tries to justify th

Re:

[windypops]

I think there's a sliver of hope that Facebook's past its peak. Full disclosure: I still have an account, and am probably one of the addicts you describe. But I mainly use it for content consumption, and rarely if ever post anything. My kids barely use it. It's my and my parents' generation that are still hopelessly in its thrall, and we're dying off slowly but surely. I think there's also a whiff of revolution in the air around "screen time". The pandemic's made people think about how much time they spend

Re:

[GoJays]

Just because you don't post anything doesn't mean you aren't giving them any data. They track what content you consume on their platform, how long you look at it, what you like, what you dislike, who's posts you click on more than others. If you have the app installed on your phone, they track your movements, the places you frequent, they read your contacts, messages, they know everything about you. They have you by the balls and you don't even know it. ...but you don't post anything, so you are okay...

Re:

[windypops]

Umm, I do know it. I don't post anything because I don't really have any inclination to. I don't think I've found some clever way to avoid Facebook's surveillance.

Alphabet

[The Evil Atheist]

Google did it first. Just spin off a parent company that still does the shady shit.