When anyone or anything says that their product works “up to x%” I always presume it doesn’t really work at all.
Christ, 1% is included in that “up to 95.5%” vague bullshit statement.
Comment on Humans can be tracked with unique 'fingerprint' based on how their bodies block Wi-Fi signals
Seleni@lemmy.world 2 days ago
accurate matches up to 95.5% of the time
and they’re more privacy-preserving than visual images
Uh-huh.
D_C@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
toynbee@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I hate it when commercials say "up to 100%. It’s literally a pointless metric; that could mean anything from 0% to 100%, inclusive.
novus_dervish@lemmynsfw.com 1 day ago
I believe the reason they had to say “up to” is because the “signatute” will vary day to day ever so slightly (natural weight fluctuation), and if you gain or lose weight it can change dramatically, so the AI would have to constantly consider that and adjust it’s records.
Honestly, unpopular opinion, but as long as it isn’t very short wavelength RF and they allow for self-hosted/open-source alternatives, I do find it a bit more privacy respecting than cameras, of course they have to say they are using the technology in public places.
It also has it’s ways of fooling it, instead of wearing a wig and a false nose, you could wear a carbon-infused silicone fat suit to change the way you interact with RF.
Smoogs@lemmy.world 23 hours ago
Sounds like an ad tailored specifically to putin
iglou@programming.dev 2 days ago
My thought exactly. Their definition of privacy is… interesting