Amazon's Palm Print Recognition System Raises Concern Among US Senators | Hacker News Reader

Amazon's Palm Print Recognition System Raises Concern Among US Senators

gadgets.ndtv.com

22 pointsraninepaths20 comments

A bold position to take for representatives of a government that maintains multiple databases of fingerprint scans for foreign nationals and their own citizens…

A big difference between a representative democratic government and a private company, I'd say.

Yes, definitely. The government can put you in jail or shoot you, while Facebook can sell your data to advertisers.

...or other governments. And there's already precedent for getting around pesky things like the 4th amendment by simply buying your data from another country who has it.

Facebook has a lot more power than that, and you have no authority over them.

What power does Facebook have?

Are you saying you don't think they have any power?

Over my life? I don't know what sort of power they have over my life no.

If you are a Facebook user, there's a good chance you are manipulated by what you see there. Everyone denies it affects them (as I might, if I used Facebook), but it works. I trust the people who say they are vulnerable to manipulation - at least they give themselves a chance.

Facebook manipulates people you know (unless none of them use Facebook). Social media has dramatically changed some people I know well.

Facebook has enormous influence in the society you live in (perhaps depending on where you live), which affects you. Facebook has great power over the news people read, and Facebook is where many conspiracy theories spread, as examples.

I don’t get to vote for who runs Amazon.

Yeah, not much more power than gov'ts have. Controlling the flow of information is pretty banal.

https://time.com/6075539/facebook-myanmar-military/

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/09/how-facebooks-free-i...

Government is just the biggest “private” company, whose business is violence[0] - both the use and mitigation of it. Every citizen is a stakeholder. Foreigners are not invested, they are competition, both friendly and not. We vote at shareholder meetings called elections.

From this simplistic framework I wouldn’t say there is a big difference. About the only thing I can think of is scale, and optimization for human wellbeing instead of profit, but that hardly feels true in the modern world.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_violence

Yeah, very big difference indeed. I'd take the private company over government any day. Remember, companies have to ask you to buy their wares, govt just sends armed fighters to your home.

Really? They are both effectively the same, except Amazon will sell the data gathered to the government and anyone else willing to pay for it. And those companies will sell it to other companies. And some of those companies will get hacked and then the data goes s effectively public domain.

It would be better if neither collected the data, but second best is that Facebook doesn't.

Facebook already doesn’t.

The article is about AMZN collecting palm prints of people that opt in to a specific program that has alternatives.

The US gov doesn’t have alternatives. When they ask for your biometric data you give it, or else they deny your clearance/ background check/entry to the country.

You don't really have much choice about corporate surveillance unless you live in a cave and never communicate with anyone, and I have no power over Amazon.

The government is limited by the voters, Constitution, laws, and two other branches of government. I have no power over Amazon.

Anyway, I don't see why the government is relevant: Amazon is the topic, as you said.

It's almost like performance art. Every now and then some lawmakers dutifully "raise concerns" about surveillance capitalism and the outsize rewards (and subsequent influence) it's combination with the extreme scalability of tech brings about - but it's really meaningless. Even if, every now and then, there is enough outrage to meaningfully delay something it always dries up and the lawmakers feel zero pressure to resist the issue the next time it surfaces in another guise.

Thankfully palm print recognition for in person payments isn't that bad in the scale of everything else going on.

What does intrigue me though is how happy governments seem to be with ceding so much information & control to the corporations. I know the Chinese govt. is cracking down on this suddenly but western govts. don't seem that interested in doing so. Maybe we really are destined for some sort of Snow Crash future where companies can replace governments...

> Thankfully palm print recognition for in person payments isn't that bad in the scale of everything else going on.

It's an authorization key that once it gets out it can't be replaced. I imagine it's only a matter if tine before the palm suggests get stolen and are used to spoof authorization.

the real issue with biometrics is that you can't properly secure them. you can hash a password, but a palm/finger/eye scan cannot use a zero knowledge proof. they also change over time and can be mimicked using a photo taken from a smartphone camera.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com