Things that make me laugh

[arthurking83]

First up. Things that make me laugh are 'immediacy'. The world has gone immediacy crazy. Being the first to do this, or the first to show that, breaking the news .. ie. overall its a race. The problem is the race is to the bottom!
Recent events re one seriously button pushing crazed president and the common topic in the news and current affair world at the moment of fake news comes to mind.
The more immediate the news has broken, the more sceptical I am of it, it's content it's source what it means in the grand scheme of things .. basically I'm switching right off.
I keep hearing people refer to seeing some 'news item' on Facebook! .. I'm thinking to myself, are you that stupid to read/watch facebook posts and think .. news!
When I see it on ABS news between 7-730 .. I then take notice. Until then it's fake news(to me).

Anyhow, rant over ... new rant(possibly fake rant) coming :D

So, I hit my bookmark to Thom Hogan to see if he has something interesting to add to the world of photography today, and I think he's hit a new low in his blog post:

Thom's blog site article (http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/the-pros-versus-the-amateur.html)

Now I'm not normally picky-choosey but this article kind'a hit a bit of a nerve for me.
Disclaimer: I'm a bit of an anti Apple/Mac geek. Have been for many years now having experienced for myself that Apple gear is just over priced junk.... whereas Wintel(Windows/Intel) gear is plainly underpriced junk. So why pay more for unreliable junk, when you can build it yourself for much less!

Thom has always been a massive Apple fanboy, and in this latest post of his he's hit new lows. Note tho I generally like his musings, but don't like his fanboism for Apple.
This coming quote was what got me going:


Handoff almost works. What that means is that I can answer calls while sitting at my computer (or now via my watch), or pass photos or other documents I'm working on between devices. I say almost because there are still some glitches. The other day I didn't get any phone calls and couldn't make any. That's because Handoff got confused about something. It took turning it off and back on to restore my phone ("Did you try turning it off and on?" ;~).
This is cut and paste, I added nothing I typed nothing.

For those not interested in the blog/writings the basic points he's made there was that Apple made a professional presentation of their new tech(the iPhone blah blah, and ho hum model uber cameras or some other over priced garbagey thing) and how much more professional they are at making all these things all work together in a coherent environment, and seamless workflow .. blah blah yadda yadda .. seriously not worth reading unless you're a fully paid up member of the Apple fanboy club yourself.
EXCEPT the fact that it doesn't seem to want to work! Funny that, huh? ;)
So we're told over and over that it's Apple, it just works. :rolleyes:

Thoms waxing lyrical got so hysterical, he forgot to mention a very important point in his blog.Maybe his Handoff wasn't really off, but so fully and completely ON .. he didn't notice!(something very important)!!!
He then goes on how FaceID can do such and such .. and so and so .. probably settle all the current comical drama being played out between messers Trump and Kim ILL Idiot too!
But what Thom somehow managed to not mention along with the failed Handoff thing (he personally experienced) was that the single most important aspect of Apple's presentation, the FaceID part, failed miserably during the presentation to do it's thing.

So this is how the 'pros' do it! :rolleyes:
They lavish billions on PR to over-hype their crapware, completely suck in the idiot fanboys to the point where they're intoxicated with the excess hype and forget to note down the vital information.
So pro in this context refers to charlatans masquerading as tech companies of self-importance.

Remember this next time you're looking for pro gear .. it has to NOT work reliably, be over-hyped in ability, basically provide no real benefit to the community other than to display mindless animated emojis! ;)
And with that you have the perfect pro gear!

Why is this important, and why have I just ranted over the issue?
(see, you needed to read the article :p)

Because on the flip side, Sony, the amateur company providing their user base with seemingly average products that no one wants to really use, and really can only be used as basic tool for this average user, probably living in the dark of a disconnected world still back in the stone age .. or something :confused013
I'm not exactly sure what Thom is trying to express here(in his blog post).
Sony make products that seemingly take forever for the content to get to social media(apparently). This is what I'm getting from Thom's posts. Because the Sony gear isn't connected, therefore Sony is the amateur company providing the consumer with 'dark ages' gear .. or something like that.
But nowhere, in my searching did I find any reference to the Sony gear presented NOT WORKING!!
From that I surmise that it must have worked during the presentation that Sony had provided.

So, in not providing an instant ability to get this content from the device to social media, Sony is labelled the amateur .. and I'm guessing that this could be because the gear just worked too .. maybe?

OK .. so now I know which way to search when I'm looking for new gear .. avoid the pro stuff, from the pro manufacturer .. and go with the amateur stuff from the amateur manufacturer! :D

Thanks Thom for the heads up. :th3: ... and I'm hoping that remembered turn off and on again all your gear to be able to read this post :p


Seriously: I'm no luddite or technophobe. In general quite the opposite. BUT .. first things first is reliability, operability, and usability.
ps. with the term usability for me means not so much interoperability through connectivity, but most importantly not requiring a battery or charge every 10-15mins with light use. DSLR .. now shooting for 1800-5000 images on a single charge.

[Tannin]

Ha! Over in an investing forum I belong to, as soon as people learn that I've just retired after half a lifetime in tech, they can't understand why I haven't got a whole portfolio full of trendy tech stocks. They just don't get it. Surely I'd be the very first person to be buying into apps and gadgets and cloudy stuff?

Mate, I've spent half a lifetime learning the hard way that it pays to never, ever trust anything a technology salesdroid says. I can read the annual report of a perfume retailer or a mining company and see things that make sense to me - I don't have to understand perfume or gold mining to read a cashflow and a balance sheet, but whenever I read technobabble my eyes glaze over and my BS-o-meter flashes straight into the red zone.

[ricktas]

I always find these Apple show-n-tell events really quite amusing.

Apple likes to tell everyone how their advances are 'new' and 'the biggest step forward', yet their new iPhone has facial recognition, wireless charging and no home button. Yep New and a big step forward for everyone owning Apple, for those with Android, its everything they have had for the last 2-3 years. I also had to stifle a giggle when they talked about R&D and their wonderful new screen. A screen that Samsung make and supply to Apple. Apple's R&D arm must be a few pimply teenagers searching google for the best screen manufacturers and putting in an order.

I don't mind Apple products, I just find their unfounded belief that they invented everything a bit hard to swallow. Their insistence that announcing a new product means telling everyone 'for the first time ever' or 'new' or 'biggest step forward' when it is all marketing fluff and anyone with an IQ over about 70 could see that they are not the cutting edge tech company they boast about being.

[arthurking83]

....

I don't mind Apple products, I just find their unfounded belief that they invented everything a bit hard to swallow. ....

Like FaceID.
I got my Huawei gigantorphone back in Aug '15 and it also used a face recognition unlock system. I tried it, found it stupid turned it off and never thought to turn it on with my new phone again.

[ricktas]

Like FaceID.
I got my Huawei gigantorphone back in Aug '15 and it also used a face recognition unlock system. I tried it, found it stupid turned it off and never thought to turn it on with my new phone again.

Yep and no physical home button. There are dozens of different brand/model Android phones out in the wild that do not have a physical home button.

[ameerat42]

^^My sentiments APPROXIMATELY^^. - That is, to the extent I had any:rolleyes::rolleyes:
Yes I half watched (= heard/glanced toward the TV while it was on) that skit where the
face recognition didn't work and vaguely thought that I had heard of it before. I then realised
what was happening and thought - Whackos!

Why does Apple gear over-cost? - Walk past an Apple store to see.

I am not particularly an anti-Apple person, just against the hype. (But that's like shouting at the wind.)
(However, it helps clear the mental lungs sometimes:D)

[MissionMan]

I think it's a fair perception of the problem but not 100% fair on Apple. For example, Samsung's face ID could be fooled by a photograph of the person, Apple's works off a 3D version of the person. So Samsung are quick to say they were first to market but they were first to market with a solution that was insecure and didn't actually work properly.

As an example, Apple tends to be later to market but their implementation of a function is far more polished. So yes, you will find there are people that have done it before, but that would apply to most phone manufacturers. The question is has it been implemented well enough to make it usable?

As a small business (15 people) owner, I work across setting up our devices. On the phone front we have a mix of Android and Apple and we have mostly Asus laptops (that we buy for staff) with the odd member who uses a BYOD Macbook or Macbook Pro. I can tell you for a fact that setting up exchange on an Apple device is at least 50% quicker than Android, and ironically, setting up exchange on a Apple laptop device is quicker and easier than setting it up on a Windows laptop. How it can be easier to setup exchange on Apple vs Windows is a mystery to me.

Then you look at the implementation of Microsoft's tablet. When you switch to tablet mode, it defaults to a full network login. Every person I know asks for it to be switched to a 4 character pin, but Microsoft still default it to the least likely to be used option. Again, this is something Apple is better at. Microsoft use a tech team to do their UI.

In all honesty, Microsoft is getting better, but there are things you see on Windows that would simply never occur on Mac's.

On the overcost side, I would also beg to differ. Buy a premium Windows laptop (there are many), not the cheap plastic ones and you'll find the pricing comparable. The difference in Apple don't play in the cheap end of the market.

[Tannin]

I would argue that any IT department which still uses Exchange needs to be redeployed, and equipped with tools more suited to their talents, such as mops and brooms.

[ameerat42]

Is this MS Exchange?:confused013

[Tannin]

^ Yes, Exchange, among technicians and network admins, probably the most-hated program in the history of computing. (Netware was up there with the leaders back in the 1990s, but it died and nobody bothered going to the funeral.)

[MissionMan]

I would argue that any IT department which still uses Exchange needs to be redeployed, and equipped with tools more suited to their talents, such as mops and brooms.

Exchange with Office 365 is quick and easy to set up and scalable for most small organisation. Should have clarified that. I don't think many people use on prem exchange these days.

[ameerat42]

Ta to both...

[arthurking83]

I think it's a fair perception of the problem but not 100% fair on Apple. ....

To be sure: this thread(my post) wasn't a dissing of Apple products. I only made the disclaimer that I am a fairly ardent anti Apple person from my experiences with the gear.
I'm actually fairly anti M$ too, and the OS is massively overpriced considering it's market penetration. I really cost them no more to make a million copies as it does to make 10 billion copies, and price should reflect that.
AND!!! Home version should be free for a single license, and paid versions should be Pro or higher versions of the OS.

But to be clear, the main gist of the post was to highlight how perception of something is tainted, rose coloured or otherwise, even by the likes of a well respected blogger like Thom Hogan is(on the whole).
Of course not everyone will agree with him, I find 99% of his writings to hit the mark.

But to label Apple the professional outfit in this blog entry because they do 'integration' so well .. and his dismissive tone in that 'handoff' system wasn't working added to the fact that FaceID wasn't mentioned.
And then to add to that, he describes Sony as 'amateurs' simply because they do things the 'old way' not to his liking. I don't think he really stopped to think for a moment .. or a day .. that maybe the reason Sony(and all other camera manufacturers) still do it the old clunky way is that it's less unreliable!

Like I said, I generally agree with his musings. Simple things like file naming in camera .. why stick to the yesteryear old method of 8 characters .. when the world moved on from that about 30 odd years ago?
I'd like to name my files in a more meaningful manner, according to camera, which negates the need to batch rename them as they're transferred onto the PC.

Nikon .. are similar, and more accurately even more conservative. They obviously have a major philosophical trajectory they intend to adhere too .. keep it simple, keep it reliable, make sure it works under arduous conditions.
I'm sure Canon is the same.
I don't know this for sure, but I doubt very much any photographer is out in -30°C blizzard like conditions photographing rare/endagered species with stupid iPhones! and even if they were(stupid enough to do so), I'm sure that wifi and or mobile reception will be pretty much zero or less .. so the immediacy factor means .. squat.

I think people (in general) seem to have this belief that camera makers produce gear simply to suit these people's specific needs and requirements.
For people like Thom, who require urgency of social media upload .. just get e freaking phone and be done with it. leave the camera behind! .. it's not rocket science. The product already exists! there's no need for Sony to make upload to Scrapbook, or Facetime, or whatever inane social site quicker. They need to produce a camera that doesn't lock you out of the the device, doesn't stop exchanging emails with the kettle, fridge and car security system to tell you where you left it.
There is always a need for stable camera gear, the stuff you bring out when the (so called)pro stuff refuses work.

[MissionMan]

To be sure: this thread(my post) wasn't a dissing of Apple products. I only made the disclaimer that I am a fairly ardent anti Apple person from my experiences with the gear.
I'm actually fairly anti M$ too, and the OS is massively overpriced considering it's market penetration. I really cost them no more to make a million copies as it does to make 10 billion copies, and price should reflect that.
AND!!! Home version should be free for a single license, and paid versions should be Pro or higher versions of the OS.

But to be clear, the main gist of the post was to highlight how perception of something is tainted, rose coloured or otherwise, even by the likes of a well respected blogger like Thom Hogan is(on the whole).
Of course not everyone will agree with him, I find 99% of his writings to hit the mark.

But to label Apple the professional outfit in this blog entry because they do 'integration' so well .. and his dismissive tone in that 'handoff' system wasn't working added to the fact that FaceID wasn't mentioned.
And then to add to that, he describes Sony as 'amateurs' simply because they do things the 'old way' not to his liking. I don't think he really stopped to think for a moment .. or a day .. that maybe the reason Sony(and all other camera manufacturers) still do it the old clunky way is that it's less unreliable!

Like I said, I generally agree with his musings. Simple things like file naming in camera .. why stick to the yesteryear old method of 8 characters .. when the world moved on from that about 30 odd years ago?
I'd like to name my files in a more meaningful manner, according to camera, which negates the need to batch rename them as they're transferred onto the PC.

Nikon .. are similar, and more accurately even more conservative. They obviously have a major philosophical trajectory they intend to adhere too .. keep it simple, keep it reliable, make sure it works under arduous conditions.
I'm sure Canon is the same.
I don't know this for sure, but I doubt very much any photographer is out in -30°C blizzard like conditions photographing rare/endagered species with stupid iPhones! and even if they were(stupid enough to do so), I'm sure that wifi and or mobile reception will be pretty much zero or less .. so the immediacy factor means .. squat.

I think people (in general) seem to have this belief that camera makers produce gear simply to suit these people's specific needs and requirements.
For people like Thom, who require urgency of social media upload .. just get e freaking phone and be done with it. leave the camera behind! .. it's not rocket science. The product already exists! there's no need for Sony to make upload to Scrapbook, or Facetime, or whatever inane social site quicker. They need to produce a camera that doesn't lock you out of the the device, doesn't stop exchanging emails with the kettle, fridge and car security system to tell you where you left it.
There is always a need for stable camera gear, the stuff you bring out when the (so called)pro stuff refuses work.

I agree, I think there are very few neutral people in this world. We all carry with us some form of baggage whether it's intolerance, brand bias or simply bad experiences

I think people always forget that no matter who the company is, they are there for one sole purpose...make money for their shareholders and improve profitability. People can play the "Apple cares about their employee card" but the harsh reality is if Apple provides good service through their Apple stores, it's for the sole purpose of:

1. To get customers to buy direct so they make more margin
2. To keep customers happy so that they buy more product

There is nothing noble about Apple, Microsoft or any other corporate. I think it's critical for people to remember that when they buy goods. I buy goods from Apple because my experiences with them have been good, and my expereinces with Microsoft have been poor, but if one of those change, my allegiance will change as well. I think Nikon as an example, would be well aware of how quickly customers can turn on them based on their flawed or failed strategies. Apple themselves are suffering leakage as a result of their failed strategy for hybrid devices. Blackberry and Nokia are examples of how quickly a company can die with the wrong strategy and the lack of consumer loyalty when things go bad.

The good part about the marketing is that we as consumers win, as companies are forced to innovate to keep ahead. It's an incredibly fickle market and one bad product (Samsung battery failure) can see a substantial loss of customer base fairly quickly. On the converse, one new product can see billions in revenue.

[ricktas]

For example, Samsung's face ID could be fooled by a photograph of the person, Apple's works off a 3D version of the person. So Samsung are quick to say they were first to market but they were first to market with a solution that was insecure and didn't actually work properly.

As an example, Apple tends to be later to market but their implementation of a function is far more polished.

Yep their 3D version of faceID is really well polished, that it failed to work during their presentation. :D

[MissionMan]

Yep there 3D verson of faceID is really well polished, that it failed to work during their presentation. :D

But at least you can't stick a photo in front of it and unlock someone's phone.

[ricktas]

and @MissionMan, I agree with your post (#14) above.

Personally I think Apple do quite well with their products, it is just this never-ending marketing that they use that tries to impress the assumption that they are 'world first' developers at every release of a product. Every time they step on stage to announce something, they feel the need to say they invented something new. When in actuality it is not new, only new to Apple. Take Nikon as an example (as you did), they bring out a product and announce it has 38MP (for example). They do not say they invented sensors, just this particular MP. Or your beloved Fuji, who I have never seen say they invented mirrorless. But Apple would come out and say they found a new way to do mirrorless..better, so it's a world first and they have invented it. This is what i find annoying about Apple. This need to be seen to be the cutting edge creator, by announcing that you are...even when you aren't.

[ameerat42]

Bad apple! (https://www.incimages.com/uploaded_files/image/970x450/rotten-apple-1725x810_12112.jpg):nod:

[MissionMan]

and @MissionMan, I agree with your post (#14) above.

Personally I think Apple do quite well with their products, it is just this never-ending marketing that they use that tries to impress the assumption that they are 'world first' developers at every release of a product. Every time they step on stage to announce something, they feel the need to say they invented something new. When in actuality it is not new, only new to Apple. Take Nikon as an example (as you did), they bring out a product and announce it has 38MP (for example). They do not say they invented sensors, just this particular MP. Or your beloved Fuji, who I have never seen say they invented mirrorless. But Apple would come out and say they found a new way to do mirrorless..better, so it's a world first and they have invented it. This is what i find annoying about Apple. This need to be seen to be the cutting edge creator, by announcing that you are...even when you aren't.

I think it's the american way when it comes to marketing. In kitesurfing they give all the gear lovely names like "Octopus pump". That said, the japanese do it as well with lovely marketing spins like "fastest AF" with a tiny 1 next to it and then a disclaimer at the bottom that says "when tested on a comparable mirrorless camera in the price range of $600-$1200". I've even seen people argue it because they believe the crap. Someone mentioned that Canon's liveview focus was the fastest mirrorless focus on the market as a result of the marketing spin Canon put on it which then had a disclaimer at the bottom limiting it to comparable DSLR cameras which they missed.

At the end of the day, you have to decipher between the bull no matter who it is

[arthurking83]

Bad apple! (https://www.incimages.com/uploaded_files/image/970x450/rotten-apple-1725x810_12112.jpg):nod:

Rotten Apple (https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/aliceinchains/rottenapple.html), even!

[ameerat42]

Quite relevant generally, AK.

[Plays With Light]

Yep their 3D version of faceID is really well polished, that it failed to work during their presentation. :D

Here's what actually happened, if you're interested, Rick.


In a statement provided to Yahoo (https://finance.yahoo.com/news/really-happened-apples-face-id-fail-onstage-181213050.html)'s David Pogue, Apple says the device locked after several people interacted with it ahead of Federighi, causing it to require a passcode to unlock.
Tonight, I was able to contact Apple. After examining the logs of the demo iPhone X, they now know exactly what went down. Turns out my first theory in this story was wrong--but my first UPDATE theory above was correct: "People were handling the device for stage demo ahead of time," says a rep, "and didn't realize Face ID was trying to authenticate their face. After failing a number of times, because they weren't Craig, the iPhone did what it was designed to do, which was to require his passcode." In other words, "Face ID worked as it was designed to."


Oh, and I'm not a fanboy, but I did want to know what actually happened, rather than just jump on the Apple-bashing bandwagon.

[arthurking83]

Good to know the why's and how's here:
Once again my thread wasn't an apple bashing attempt .. just the comments made by Thom, and how they came across.

But on the topic of the FaceID thing .. it'd make more sense to me that if others tried to log into the device using their faces .. you think the simpler setup would be for the device to simply ignore them a trillion times if need be .. but then just work for the right face!

I don't understand the need for the passcode.

I can understand the need for one if the security was pin number of pattern based .. you could probably try to hack this way in some elite hacker way using some elite hacker methodology.
But FaceID only supposedly uses real faces .. and to try to hack into it with real faces requires real faces .. I can't imagine any elite hacker tools that can present a trillion real faces until an acceptable one is realised by the device!

ie. to me it's sounding like BS .. in that there must be a way to 'hack into it' using some other method .. if it forces a passcode on multiple failed attempts!
Take into account that they're saying that they're confident that it only works on real faces not photos ... or caricatures or whatever.
Apples PR firm comments smells like the output of a sewer to me .. but that's me!.. predominantly ignorant of Apple's wares, but also a non fanboy.

[Plays With Light]

But on the topic of the FaceID thing .. it'd make more sense to me that if others tried to log into the device using their faces .. you think the simpler setup would be for the device to simply ignore them a trillion times if need be .. but then just work for the right face!

I don't understand the need for the passcode.
Me neither, I agree, that it would be far more effective to just ignore other peoples faces, rather than locking you out and forcing you to enter your security PIN again.

I reckon it will be a right royal pain in the bum, to borrow your catch phrase, Arthur, for all those new owners who are going to experience meddling from friends, coworkers, family, etc... wanting to see if it works on their faces. What a nightmare! :eek:

Obviously it hasn't been thought out very well thus far. Apple may well change things though, as they are pretty quick to act on mass complaints.

Oh, and Thom really does come off as the ultimate fanboy doesn't he! :rolleyes: I'll stick to taking on board his thoughts photographic though.

[arthurking83]

My other thought re FaceID is how it handles changing faces .. not so much over time, but what about having 'bumped into a door' at the local police station! ;)
Bumping into a door at the local lockup (as we've all seen and heard on the news) can result in quite severe facial swelling .. lockup doors are fairly rough inanimate objects! :p

So question is, lets say a typical Los Angelean middle aged princess has just come out of the clinic having a fair amount of nipping and tucking done to facial areas .. will FaceID still recognise them?


The other aspect that came up when I was listening to the radio a few days back .. the doogooder, leftwing, privacy nazi, hippies are all up in arms because this feature now makes it easier for security forces to easily unlock the phone just by waving it in front of a potential suspect .. whereas before they had to force them to enter an unlock code(pin or whatever).

I'm thinking; are these privacy advocate people on drugs, or just too simple to know better, or have been living on the planet Thnong in the outermost depths of the delta quadrant .. or something(craniums up posteriors kind of situation).

Face recognition security options has existed for years now on phones .. but now Apple has also entered the fray, and all of a sudden it's a privacy issue! :rolleyes:

[Tannin]

Once again my thread wasn't an apple bashing attempt

No problem there, I believe you. But apart from that it was quite a good post.

- - - Updated - - -

Seriously now, biometric "security" is a terrible, terrible idea.

I wrote the following a few months back over at another forum I belong to in response to a Federal Minister's idiotic thought bubble. (Presumably it was Dutton, but that doesn't really matter.) It remains as true today as it was back then.



This is a really, really stupid idea. It could only be supported by a Minister with no clue at all about digital recognition technology and how it works. Let's do a quick Digital Biomentrics 101 refresher

For simplicity, assume that the sensors and scanners and all the associated technology work perfectly every time. (They won't, of course. Just assume this anyway.)

Your biometric data is scanned. (Never mind how, we are assuming the scanners are perfect in every way. Never mind what data - fingerprints,retinal patterns, the shape of your head, whatever else, it doesn't matter.)

The scanned data is turned into a set of numbers.(We don't have to know how. It doesn't matter how.)

Those numbers are stored as a digital record, which can then be used to identify you. (We are still assuming perfection in the process such that there are no mistaken identities, no mixed-up records, no false positives, nothing. OK, that is a completely unrealistic assumption, but let's be crazy-generous and assume it anyway.).

Now no-one can pretend to be you. Right? It's not like guessing or stealing a password, 'coz no-one else can have your biometric signature. Right?

Wrong.

You see, the system doesn't compare biometrics with biometric records. It compares the numbers the scanner makes with the numbers in your digital record.

Now what happens when (not if, it's a when) someone obtains access to your biometric record? They can pretend to be you. They have your numbers and there is nothing, repeat nothing, you can do about it. Ever. For the rest of your entire life, the person who stole your data can pretend to be you. So can anyone they sell it to. Or anyone they give it to. Or anyone who hacks their database.

There is no escape. With a stolen passport, you can have it cancelled and get it replaced. With a stolen PIN you can change it. With a stolen password, you can make a new one.

With stolen biometric data, you are screwed. Buggered every way you turn. Well, maybe you could have skin grafts and get a head transplant.

But wouldn't it be easier to do that head transplant on the Minister? Now? Before he enacts this insane policy? Hell, the new head might even have a brain in it.

[Steve Axford]

But, Tony, this assumes that the string of numbers representing you cannot change, that this iPhone 8 will be the only device into the future (Apple will be happy, though maybe not as they rely on new models to make their profit) and that technology and the world will stop with the creation of a biometric for each person. Sounds a bit Sci-Fi to me.

[arthurking83]

.... Sounds a bit Sci-Fi to me.

Phone that scan your face, read your fingerprints, understand your voice .. all in the name of security!! That also sounds a bit sci fi to me, and 10 years ago no one would have ever thought it'd become a reality.

What we think of sci-fi now, is probably going to be a reality in 10years time .. most likely less than that.


When I first tried face security on my Sony experia a few years ago now .. I turned it off basically immediately.
It was too annoying, in that every time you looked at the phone just to check the time, it'd unlock .. and all I wanted what that locked screen that I had configured with the clock on it.

The way it worked: phone in sleep mode, pull it out of pocket, press a button on the side to wake it up to get to the lock screen, look at clock, put it back in pocket.
Doing that (and that's all I wanted to do, not get into the phone) would unlock the phone, so I would have to lock the phone again before I put it in pocket.

I can understand the reasoning behind face ID for other security related tasks, like entering a building, or logging into a desktop computer or something that's not a mobile device type thing tho.

[Steve Axford]

Ah, you mistake my meaning. My mistake. I really meant that assuming a fixed future is reminiscent of Sci-Fi books that are a little too simplistic. I too have ignored face recognition in the past because it was so enreliable, but things change. I am guessing that Apple thinks that they have changed enough to make it work. Time will tell.

[MissionMan]

No problem there, I believe you. But apart from that it was quite a good post.

- - - Updated - - -

Seriously now, biometric "security" is a terrible, terrible idea.

I wrote the following a few months back over at another forum I belong to in response to a Federal Minister's idiotic thought bubble. (Presumably it was Dutton, but that doesn't really matter.) It remains as true today as it was back then.

You could do that without biometric systems. Replace your photo and your identity is largely gone...but IT isn’t always that simply. I work in some of these fields of consulting where we have to look at these types of scenarios. For example, you can use worm (write one, read many) media to lock certain data, so it cannot be changed. I.e. once your identity is validated, it’s impossible to change, if there is an error, they create a new version of the record and the old version cannot be purged and change logs are generated which can’t be deleted, so if you come forward and say someone stole your ID, the old version will still be there along with a record of who changed it.

For these types of scenarios, I have to go to court and prove the data could not be changed, and what mechanisms are in place to prevent change. It’s actually relatively easy to prove. Most tech leaves behind so many breadcrumbs that it’s surprisingly hard to do something without leaving behind a trail, even with the use of proxies.

[ameerat42]

Hmm! I wonder how these things work if you're a nobody?:confused013

[arthurking83]

Hmm! I wonder how these things work if you're a nobody?:confused013

I'm proof that 'a nobody' can make these systems work! :p

I recently tested the no brainer theory tho .. need the physical head, as it has the eyes to visualise where I'm going .. and I don't want to be relegated to chook status yet.
But, the other day my no brain theory (head still intact for the visuals, but brain disconnected for a moment) accidentally saw me have a major incident at work where I nearly dropped a very large heavy bit of transport gear(50ft and 10 ton) onto the ground and costing a lot of $s).

So considering all those peripheral bodily elements, I'm sure the device biometrics still work for me.