I doubt Franken has any anti-Apple agenda here. People are on edge regarding anything to do with personal data, the Internet, devices, security etc. they want the politician to ask questions, even if they seem overly simple. We have had politicians in the past who were science and tech savvy, but they still asked simple questions and avoided any detailed technical speak. This is because the majority of people in our country are utterly devoid of any science knowledge. If I were to say "The electron has a negative charge" most people in the US would get a blank stare on their faces and go "wut?" So while those of use who don't fear or avoid science and technology, wish politicians would raise the bar a bit, it's never going to happen since they need the nincompoops votes. It's just how the system works, so I'm not holding anything against Franken and others who ask valid but simple or even redundant questions. Now, the ones who ask loaded questions with an anti-science agenda - I have no use for them.
There are simple questions and outright misinformation to push an agenda. In this case, it's the same "just asking questions" that essentially invites a canned response of his own choosing. People doing this kind of thing don't give a hoot about actual reality: it's all about framing reality to suit his need. He's doing the same song and dance as climate deniers or more. On the left its the whole ridiculous crusade against GMO, in the middle idiotic crusades against vaccines, and on the right, climate.
No kidding. The Equifax breach directly and negatively affects 147 million Americans and this dummy wants to haul in Apple about Face ID. Who are the idiots who elected this "comedian"?
I do more than my share of reasonable protections for the security of my accounts so that I'm such a difficult target that a random hacker simply wouldn't target me, but if they have access to what Equifax has on me then that gets flipped, making me a prime target. I'm considering a 3-bureau credit freeze, but If that happens they may still have enough info to bypass it and "still need to monitor all bank, credit card and insurance statements for fraudulent transactions." I'm still unsure if the effort and cost is overkill since my CCs offer credit monitoring—not sure if from all bureaus—and I get my free 3 bureau reports as PDFs to store securely on an annual basis as it's a Calendar reminder and only takes 10 minutes to complete.
Agreed. Tim should ignore Frankenstein so he can best spend his time on getting rid of that video-obscuring notch!
You're bothered by the notch but not the top and bottom of the video being cut off to play 16:9 content at that aspect ratio? Why not just play it as the 5.15" video where you also get the full corners at 90°? Now, you may say that cinematic movies have a wider aspect ratio as a counter argument, but it's still not better than the 4.7" display in any way, and there's still the more perplexing issue of wanting an iPhone display to focus on watching movies designed for a big screen.
The finger scan is not a protected means "legally" in that you cannot refuse to give it... whereas a passcode can be refused legally in some countries.... it only stands to reason that facial scanning will definitely not be protected and law enforcement will be allowed simply to put the phone near your face. This was a question I saw arise during the keynote and I am definitely a supporter for the next step which would be face and audible passcode. So with all that said... I do support some inquiry and posturing so that we people are protected from overreach. By the way.... it would also be nice to have a KILL audible keyword so that it can wipe or (dare I say) brick your phone.
I've decided to look at Al's interest as a well-timed positive for Apple. Why?
1. The day Apple officially announces facial recognition technology, the media gives the tech a lot of press. Everybody is expecting Apple's tech to be much more secure than Samsung's tech. This is a big win for Apple even before Face ID hits the market.
2. One day after Apple announces Face ID, a US Senator is asking questions about the tech. And... more press about Face ID spreads around the world.
3. Apple's response deadline Friday, October 13, 2017, two weeks before the iPhone X can be preordered. So for the next month there will be a lot of chatter about Face ID.
4. Make could make this an even better marketing opportunity for Apple, iPhone X and Face ID is if other governments around the world ask Apple to answer similar questions.
5. By the time iPhone X can be preordered the "hunger" by Apple fans to buy the $999 and $1149 iPhones will be much greater than analysts have projected.
6. If Google implements its version of facial recognition tech using Qualcomm tech, the tech will be compared to the best smartphone facial recognition tech on the market. And... Face ID will get more press.
You're bothered by the notch but not the top and bottom of the video being cut off to play at that aspect ratio? Why not just play it as the 5.15" video where you also get the full corners at 90°?
Don't forget "hot." I'm hot and bothered by the notch. So are you. You just don't know it yet.
As to Frankenstein, he's hot and bothered that a piece of silicon might discriminate based on a face. Well -- shock, shock -- it DOES discriminate! That's it's whole purpose. The tech picks out 1 face out of 7.442 billion and only allows that 1 face to unlock a given phone. How awful! And Mobird was spot on with his earlier remark. If you hide your face with a burqa or bag over your head... guess what? the iPhone won't unlock! Can't you just see the lawsuits brewing? Politicians come out of the woodwork to feed on people's fears.
At the end of the day we must come to realize that PEOPLE ARE PLAIN NUTS. Yep, that includes you and me too. We're all nuts. Just some are less nuts than others. Strangely, I feel the urge to eat some pecans right about now...
Hey Al... why aren't you raising such a stink with Android phones like Samsung implementation of Face recognition which was proven broken on day one? Why ONLY Apple?
Ah right... Apple gets your web clicks.
I liked Al as a comedian. His political side is a joke.
People are sending samples of their DNA to various companies in droves to find out more about their ancestry. All those DNA profiles are going into databases and being rigorously cross matched, in essence for medical research that the customer didn't sign up for. I think Apple taking a picture of your face is rather benign in comparison. Until you can take out money at an ATM with a face print, I am not too worried.
This is what happens when you put people who know roughly one-half of what they really should know about a subject in positions of authority. You end up with a bunch of semi relevant questions that make the person asking the question think they are acting like they know what the hell they are talking about when in reality they know far less. But being the authority they feel compelled to speak. It’s basically “questioning for effect” and filling dead space with words or sound to impress other (usually junior) members of the speaker’s staff who are also not subject matter experts. In truth it’s all well meaning and harmless posturing as long as the person asking the questions has the backing of knowledgeable people who actually understand the subject. These displays of word-spew try to mask incompetence with authoritative sounding words, whether or not such words are relevant to the matter at hand. You’ll see this behavior quite frequently with politicians but also when senior leaders in industry are present in discussions and meetings where they have nothing meaningful to contribute to the discussion but feel compelled to speak anyway, because you know, they are in charge.
Certainly Apple will update the senator about all the internal discussions regarding Face ID, the technical details of how it is implemented and their roadmap for the future. Basically, their secret sauce. Just because he is interested and wants to know.
The Senator asked "what safeguards has Apple built into the system to prevent nefarious actors from unlocking iPhone X by simply holding it up to an owner's face. "
This is a question I am asking as well. I would not purchase the phone without being satisfied that someone who mugs me or for that matter the police - could not hold the phone to my face and activate it. Without an absolute safeguard and perhaps even a kill password my company sure won't be using it. I am hoping Apple have this addressed and the Senator and the public will be satisfied that privacy is absolute.
Having a Senator, Congressman or any elected government official inquire about technology, much less security issues is like a 5 yr old asking how are black holes formed...No clue what they are asking or why. And they certainly don’t care, it just looks good in the press or on paper.
The Senator asked "what safeguards has Apple built into the system to prevent nefarious actors from unlocking iPhone X by simply holding it up to an owner's face. "
This is a question I am asking as well. I would not purchase the phone without being satisfied that someone who mugs me or for that matter the police - could not hold the phone to my face and activate it. Without an absolute safeguard and perhaps even a kill password my company sure won't be using it. I am hoping Apple have this addressed and the Senator and the public will be satisfied that privacy is absolute.
1) You can find out this information very easily without getting a letter written to you personally by the CEO of corporation.
2) What assurances do you have with any passcode? Is a PIN "mugger proof"? Here's a hint: At one time any Mac with a password protected screensaver could be logged into by simply tripping the buffer overrun due to a bug in 10.2 Jaguar.
This is what happened when Samsung or other Android makers tried to steal Apple's thunder by pushing their crappy solutions to the market as fast as possible. People losing confident in Apple FaceID is partly stemmed by Samsung's easy to be fooled FaceID - despite a total different technology but the name.
Worse still, people calling Apple iPhone X is a copy of all the already done that in Android version. Please, give me a break.
Comments
He's doing the same song and dance as climate deniers or more. On the left its the whole ridiculous crusade against GMO, in the middle idiotic crusades against vaccines, and on the right, climate.
1. The day Apple officially announces facial recognition technology, the media gives the tech a lot of press. Everybody is expecting Apple's tech to be much more secure than Samsung's tech. This is a big win for Apple even before Face ID hits the market.
2. One day after Apple announces Face ID, a US Senator is asking questions about the tech. And... more press about Face ID spreads around the world.
3. Apple's response deadline Friday, October 13, 2017, two weeks before the iPhone X can be preordered. So for the next month there will be a lot of chatter about Face ID.
4. Make could make this an even better marketing opportunity for Apple, iPhone X and Face ID is if other governments around the world ask Apple to answer similar questions.
5. By the time iPhone X can be preordered the "hunger" by Apple fans to buy the $999 and $1149 iPhones will be much greater than analysts have projected.
6. If Google implements its version of facial recognition tech using Qualcomm tech, the tech will be compared to the best smartphone facial recognition tech on the market. And... Face ID will get more press.
As to Frankenstein, he's hot and bothered that a piece of silicon might discriminate based on a face. Well -- shock, shock -- it DOES discriminate! That's it's whole purpose. The tech picks out 1 face out of 7.442 billion and only allows that 1 face to unlock a given phone. How awful! And Mobird was spot on with his earlier remark. If you hide your face with a burqa or bag over your head... guess what? the iPhone won't unlock! Can't you just see the lawsuits brewing? Politicians come out of the woodwork to feed on people's fears.
At the end of the day we must come to realize that PEOPLE ARE PLAIN NUTS. Yep, that includes you and me too. We're all nuts. Just some are less nuts than others. Strangely, I feel the urge to eat some pecans right about now...
I think Apple taking a picture of your face is rather benign in comparison. Until you can take out money at an ATM with a face print, I am not too worried.
You're not good enough, not smart enough and doggone it, people hate you.
This is a question I am asking as well. I would not purchase the phone without being satisfied that someone who mugs me or for that matter the police - could not hold the phone to my face and activate it. Without an absolute safeguard and perhaps even a kill password my company sure won't be using it. I am hoping Apple have this addressed and the Senator and the public will be satisfied that privacy is absolute.
Go do some ‘real’ work Al.
2) What assurances do you have with any passcode? Is a PIN "mugger proof"? Here's a hint: At one time any Mac with a password protected screensaver could be logged into by simply tripping the buffer overrun due to a bug in 10.2 Jaguar.
Worse still, people calling Apple iPhone X is a copy of all the already done that in Android version. Please, give me a break.