Psych out the psyche-less?
Reminds me of the very very early 'success' at recognition of tanks. The day before the big demo to DOD a couple new photos failed. Then they realised they hadn't trained with any photos of tanks in shadows."
In a pleasing symmetry, boffins have used machine-learning algorithms to develop a T-shirt design that causes its wearer to evade detection by object-recognition cameras. Brainiacs at Northeastern University, MIT, and IBM Research in the US teamed up to create the 1980s-esque fashion statement, according to a paper quietly …
My favoured anti-radar measures don't include Teslas but do include things like the Shrike, ALARM and Sidearm.
Oh, and LIDAR is not RADAR - one will blind you, the other only sterilise you :-)
Anon as my previous employer tends to take a dim view of people borrowing company hardware for personal use :-) :-) :-)
Maybe you will be lucky and the Tesla software will incorrectly classify you as a large inanimate object and see you as an obstacle to avoid...
I don't know where you get the idea that Tezzler's software wants to avoid large inanimate objects. All it does is follow the clearest lane markings. It's a slightly clever lane departure warning feedback system. It's not really engineered for other types of accident avoidance.
Here's me berating you for not stopping before you got to the unnecessary bit, and there I go and do it. I should've said:
It's not really engineered.
There. I'm happy now.
Tesla if programmed with decent logic:
Oh my God, there's another car coming into my lane...um, er, um...I'll hit this inanimate object over there and the frame and airbags will protect my occupant better than hitting another car.
Oh my God, there's another car coming into my lane...um, er, um...well crap there's a person in my only escape lane so instead of almost assuredly killing him I'll take the hit with the other car on since our crumple zones and air bags should at mean everyone at least survives in the cars.
Dominic Toretto, programmed with Hollywood logic:
Oh my God, there's another car coming into my lane. I'll hit this inanimate object over there, bounce up on two wheels, thread between oncoming traffic, drop to four wheels, hit this convenient ramp on the side of the road, fly over five rows of oncoming traffic and land on the proper side of the highway, safe from oncoming baddies.
Today's joke is by Ben Mackay
Officer: Hello, Mr. Kornada. I'm calling to follow up on your recent ethics test.
Officer: You were asked the classic trolley car problem. You said that you would redirect the trolley to hit one person rather than hitting five. It was your reason for doing so that disturbed us.
Officer: "It would do less damage to the trolley car."
Officer: Yes, you are correct, but I really think you're missing the point here.
> Maybe don't walk in front of a moving car, Tesla or not, anyway?
In a thread on this site about a self-driving car hitting a pedestrian I suggested that if she'd stepped right into the path of a nearby car driven by a *person* she'd have still gotten hit.
Got downvoted into oblivion. This is a rough neighborhood.
When training the 'AI' on the images, its not really known what its actually using in the image to categorise it. From tests it appears that its usually the texture of the objects that you want to recognise, not the shape. So what the 'AI' really is doing is looking at the clothes, not the person and then not recognising any of the 80s clothes as what humans wear as it wasn't trained with any images containing them.
All rubbish! It has just been Halloween. Enough home made solutions there, no need for big research programmes. This was all done for just some pieces of candy...
To be made illegal as soon as policing gets fully outsourced to so-called "AI".
Probably already covered by:
"Walking in a loud shirt in a built-up area during the hours of darkness."
Not the Nine O' Clock News - Constable Savage
Very interesting article, thank you. It’s a topic I find really interesting and covered recently in my blog (actually just yesterday I uploaded a video of me wearing my anti-tech clothing too). This kind of solution works much better than tinfoil hats and Halloween masks.
Joking aside interested in looking for companies with strong ethics in this space, like the one mentioned here https://wellthatsinteresting.tech/facial-recognition-technology and more companies working in anti-tech clothing research.
I will be following your thoughts on this topic now and happy to share thoughts/ideas.
All these comments and so not a single mention of Willam Gibson's "ugly t-shirt".
It was a plot point in his book Zero History published in 2010, and was described as a very ugly t-shirt, with a deformed face like pattern, which would cause CCTV cameras to stop recording when they detected it. (This was implied to be some sort of collusion between the manufacturers of the facial recognition system and the deep state). Gibson says that the idea actually came from Bruce Stirling.
“So ugly that digital cameras forget they’ve seen it.”
“Cameras can see it. The surveillance cameras can all see it, but then they forget they’ve seen it.”
“Because their architecture tells them to forget it, and anyone who’s wearing it as well. They forget the figure wearing the ugly T-shirt. Forget the head atop it, the legs below, feet, arms, hands. It compels erasure. That which the camera sees, bearing the sigil, it deletes from the recalled image. Though only if you ask it to show you the image. So there’s no suspicious busy-ness to be noticed. If you ask for June 7, camera 53, it retrieves what it saw. In the act of retrieval, the sigil, and the human form bearing it, cease to be represented. By virtue of deep architecture. Gentlemen’s agreement."
I was an activist for a bit. There was one protest where everyone wore identical face paint, mainly reflective white. The arresting cops couldn't identify the protesters in court, because they were all identical, so no convictions. I note that the Hong Kong face mask protesters were mixing with Hong Kong trick and treaters.
To avoid all CCTV, yet remain inconspicuous to humans, we later put IR leds into £1 glasses to dazzle the cameras.
I have a red baseball cap emblazoned with the word
No T of course. The orange one's supporters look puzzled for a second, think I'm one of them, and smile a little hesitantly. The Dems look at at, do a double take, and smile hesitantly. So I'm flying under everyone's radar and bringing somewhat good cheer to all...
An established "technology" - see https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jan/04/anti-surveillance-clothing-facial-recognition-hyperface
I've purchased a few T-shirts with this pattern on them (they are easy to find), and spent 6 months on business trips in China and never got recognized once! People just called me the white devil/ old foreigner with the crazy t-shirt.
Now the downfall of these technologies is that it is pretty simple for the authorities just to lock up all the people with the funny clothing.
Why does this newspaper call scientists and generally anyone in technical profession boffin or boffins. And you use it all the time, what the hell is the matter with you? If you feel so feel you need to be abusive about their profession or professionns, why do you feel compelled to report their scientific or technical findings?
Honestly, grow up.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019