My problem with FaceID is that it further degrades our individual privacy and makes us more vulnerable to both over-officious government and predatory marketing.
TouchID is my physical finger on this phone. FaceID is my face on a potentially global database. Coming from the UK, one of the most surveilled societies in the western world, I find this worrying.
I'm not interested in being reduced to a target for near-field / face-recognition ads or constant surveilance.
You are already such a target as long as you live in the cities. Go live in plain wilderness then, where supposedly there are no surveillance cameras.
Anyway, your concerns may have sound reasons but you are in the wrong place to manifest activism against global surveillance. Apple doesn’t maintain a global database of faces nor does it surveil anyone.
And Face ID does work offline. It does not send any data over the cloud. Still doubtful? Here is the proof: Apple has developed a brand new neural engine chip for this offline processing. That shows how much Apple manifests a strong commitment to privacy. That is Google that would send your face to its AI servers, not Apple. Apple’s face recognition AI is totally imprisoned in your pocket, completely isolated from the world.
It depends whether you believe what Apple said or not. Apple has already explained that no user data is stored but only one inside the secure enclave (which is also used for neural training) that is not even accessible to Apple. From security point of view, that is nothing more secure than that. Now, it's up to you to believe Apple or not, the ball is on you.
I personally think what they said makes sense, and there is no reason not to believe Apple.
Given TouchID was the same stored on device system and has been around 4 years now. If Apple was misleading people about that I'd think there would be some evidence by now. I mean the cudos (and cash) a grey hat could earn busting that information wide open it wouldn't stay quiet for all if untrue.
My problem with FaceID is that it further degrades our individual privacy and makes us more vulnerable to both over-officious government and predatory marketing.
TouchID is my physical finger on this phone. FaceID is my face on a potentially global database. Coming from the UK, one of the most surveilled societies in the western world, I find this worrying.
I'm not interested in being reduced to a target for near-field / face-recognition ads or constant surveilance.
An old fart? For sure - I actually like being an individual.
You’re not ann old fart - just an ignorant one. There is no “database” for Face ID, much less a global one. Just like Touch ID, a mathematical representation of your face is kept on the secure enclave on the phone. That’s it. Stop spreading ignorant FUD. Or are you a politician? In that case, you’re just acting as expected (this was a reference to an equally ignorant senator asking Apple similar questions, making it clear that neither he - nor you - have bothered to watch/read about it first)
I'm happy to be called ignorant when I am.
My point was that TouchID is local, here, with my finger, secure enclave - but do you believe that nothing is sent to the iCloud in this interaction? If my TouchID is sent to the iCloud then someone has to get my finger before they do harm. If anything is sent to iCloud regarding my face, then all bets are off - it's a prudent policy to think that anything you send over the net (phone, text, email . . .) will be intercepted and catalogued.
Like I said, I'm happy to be called ignorant, so just try to enlighten me rather than getting into all the ad hominem wanking (FUD. politician, blah, blah) nonsence.
Talk to me.
Even if the information get sent to iCloud, they still have no idea what you look like or your fingerprint look like. It's all garbled. They cannot reconstruct at all.
I'd love to believe you, but can you be sure that NSA and all the other owners of super-computers and advance deep-learning AI can't figure it out?
Are you aware of the ramifications of Apple executives lying about this? The SEC and shareholders would have their heads. And so common sense alone should tell you that they are speaking truthfully when they state, which they have both verbally and in writing, that both TouchID data and FaceID data are stored ONLY in the secure Enclave of a user's phone. And the data is one-way encrypted, so that it cannot possibly be unencrypted back into its raw form. Period.
My problem with FaceID is that it further degrades our individual privacy and makes us more vulnerable to both over-officious government and predatory marketing.
TouchID is my physical finger on this phone. FaceID is my face on a potentially global database. Coming from the UK, one of the most surveilled societies in the western world, I find this worrying.
I'm not interested in being reduced to a target for near-field / face-recognition ads or constant surveilance.
An old fart? For sure - I actually like being an individual.
When a FaceID or TouchID is taken, it is saved into a set of complex numbers which cannot be reverse engineered at all. It has NO idea what you look like or what your fingerprint looks like. It is mathematically impossible. When it gets your picture of your face again, it converts the same thing to a set of hashes and compares them against previously hashed information and decides if it's close enough that it can safely unlock for you.
The keyword here is “close enough”. If Face ID relies on the “cognitive capabilities” of machine learning to determine that “closeness”, there may always exist some margin of error and it may happen that it does not recognize even the registered face of the true owner. If it always recognizes then it may be working with a large tolerance which may end up with being spoofed. The big difference between a face and fingerprint is that a face evolves, but a fingerprint remains constant the whole life of the person. I intuitively feel that a constant fingerprint pattern may be much easily and accurately modeled than an evolving face. How would you hash an evolving face? OK the location of the eyes, nose and mouth may remain constant but are these enough to develop an accurate and unique model of the face to be used as an encryption key? There are too many unknowns. I hope the white paper Apple is said preparing bring some answers to these unknowns.
There aren't "too many unknowns" -- otherwise they wouldn't have figured it out. But they did. You personally don't have to understand the code that does the job. Even if they were to tell you a high level summary (as Craig as done in the interviews) you still don't have access to or the ability to understand the implementation in the silicone unless you work with this stuff.
Your panic is the exact same panic people had over Touch ID. It's basically a panic over change, uncertainty, the unknown, etc. It has nothing to do with the reality of what is coded in Cupertino. Problem is the wetware, not the software.
You have no idea of what the knowledge is, what the code is. I am not under the obligation to understand and know their code. That implementation is their engineering secret and under protection. But the scientific knowledge behind that implementation is not protected and being such, may be harshly scrutinized by the professionals of that domain. If they can’t answer all of questions without revealing the implementation then they’ve just to register a patent. They said they’d publish a white paper, then let’s welcome that. You become boring with playing the psychologic profiler of those not sharing your emotions. Do you watch too much cop dramas?
My problem with FaceID is that it further degrades our individual privacy and makes us more vulnerable to both over-officious government and predatory marketing.
TouchID is my physical finger on this phone. FaceID is my face on a potentially global database. Coming from the UK, one of the most surveilled societies in the western world, I find this worrying.
I'm not interested in being reduced to a target for near-field / face-recognition ads or constant surveilance.
An old fart? For sure - I actually like being an individual.
Privacy and individuality are largely a thing of the past. "Social" media / tech hv brought on a paradigm so shift so quickly and so thoroughly, most people have yet to comprehend that it's happened.
We are the wrong species. 250,000 year old, hunter-gatherer brains, grappling with nuclear technology & always-on, instant communications. It must be clear that we don't see to be able to handle this complexity ;-(
From the Chicago Tribune article: Kaczynski cannot be surprised. “Once a technical innovation has been introduced,” he noted, “people usually become dependent on it, so that they can never again do without it, unless it is replaced by some still more advanced innovation. Not only do people become dependent as individuals on a new item of technology, but, even more, the system as a whole becomes dependent on it. (Imagine what would happen to the system today if computers, for example, were eliminated.)”
Kaczynski was a perfect example of a luddite. Here's where all such arguments break down. The fact that such people utilize written language, or language in any form, implies they are willing to accept some forms of progress, but not others. The evolution of complex language, the opposable thumb, culture, are all advances we cannot support modern society without.
Not to mention money, an imagined reality we all agree upon. Every time you spend money you re-affirm humanity's believe in the value of little slips of paper, which on their own have little utility value, as exchangeble for real goods and services. Money is an imagined reality and this shared imagined reality is what keeps our entire society functioning. But they are merely slips of paper or pieces of metal (e.g. gold). A hungry bear intent upon eating you cannot be bought off even with a pile of money or gold representing a million dollars (it's just a pile of paper or metal he can easily go around on his way to tackle you). Bears and lions and rabbits deal only with objective reality. Only humans deal in the imagined realities that allow us to build societies, transportation networks, corporations, churches, etc, to think about how the universe functions, travel into space, etc. Without all of this we would live as animals do, and that's a choice any individual can make, but you'd then be subject, as the natural world around us is, to humans who utilize the evolved capabilities and technologies at our disposal. Be a Luddite if you please, but know that it's a strictly human advancement that even allows you to grok that concept.
My problem with FaceID is that it further degrades our individual privacy and makes us more vulnerable to both over-officious government and predatory marketing.
TouchID is my physical finger on this phone. FaceID is my face on a potentially global database. Coming from the UK, one of the most surveilled societies in the western world, I find this worrying.
I'm not interested in being reduced to a target for near-field / face-recognition ads or constant surveilance.
An old fart? For sure - I actually like being an individual.
When a FaceID or TouchID is taken, it is saved into a set of complex numbers which cannot be reverse engineered at all. It has NO idea what you look like or what your fingerprint looks like. It is mathematically impossible. When it gets your picture of your face again, it converts the same thing to a set of hashes and compares them against previously hashed information and decides if it's close enough that it can safely unlock for you.
The keyword here is “close enough”. If Face ID relies on the “cognitive capabilities” of machine learning to determine that “closeness”, there may always exist some margin of error and it may happen that it does not recognize even the registered face of the true owner. If it always recognizes then it may be working with a large tolerance which may end up with being spoofed. The big difference between a face and fingerprint is that a face evolves, but a fingerprint remains constant the whole life of the person. I intuitively feel that a constant fingerprint pattern may be much easily and accurately modeled than an evolving face. How would you hash an evolving face? OK the location of the eyes, nose and mouth may remain constant but are these enough to develop an accurate and unique model of the face to be used as an encryption key? There are too many unknowns. I hope the white paper Apple is said preparing brings some answers to these unknowns.
Regardless of how it's accomplished, the margin of error after all the development has been done and tested is what is critical. For TouchID the likelihood of a false positive is stated to be about 1 in 50,000. For FaceID it's 1 in 1,000,000. The false positive tolerance, therefore, is a bit tighter for FaceID, and that's the more critical of the two; false positive versus failure to recognize the user's face.
For some insight on how Apple might be resolving a face into raw data, and how this might be able to be evolved over time as a face changes, take a read about eigenfaces and how a stack of such can be used to describe any human face.
Excerpt: "A set of eigenfaces can be generated by performing a mathematical process called principal component analysis (PCA) on a large set of images depicting different human faces. Informally, eigenfaces can be considered a set of "standardized face ingredients", derived from statistical analysis of many pictures of faces. Any human face can be considered to be a combination of these standard faces. For example, one's face might be composed of the average face plus 10% from eigenface 1, 55% from eigenface 2, and even -3% from eigenface 3. Remarkably, it does not take many eigenfaces combined together to achieve a fair approximation of most faces. Also, because a person's face is not recorded by a digital photograph, but instead as just a list of values (one value for each eigenface in the database used), much less space is taken for each person's face."
My problem with FaceID is that it further degrades our individual privacy and makes us more vulnerable to both over-officious government and predatory marketing.
TouchID is my physical finger on this phone. FaceID is my face on a potentially global database. Coming from the UK, one of the most surveilled societies in the western world, I find this worrying.
I'm not interested in being reduced to a target for near-field / face-recognition ads or constant surveilance.
An old fart? For sure - I actually like being an individual.
Let's be realistic, people's faces are probably already in a global data base.
And the name of that database is... Facebook. Added voluntarily.
My problem with FaceID is that it further degrades our individual privacy and makes us more vulnerable to both over-officious government and predatory marketing.
TouchID is my physical finger on this phone. FaceID is my face on a potentially global database. Coming from the UK, one of the most surveilled societies in the western world, I find this worrying.
I'm not interested in being reduced to a target for near-field / face-recognition ads or constant surveilance.
An old fart? For sure - I actually like being an individual.
When a FaceID or TouchID is taken, it is saved into a set of complex numbers which cannot be reverse engineered at all. It has NO idea what you look like or what your fingerprint looks like. It is mathematically impossible. When it gets your picture of your face again, it converts the same thing to a set of hashes and compares them against previously hashed information and decides if it's close enough that it can safely unlock for you.
The keyword here is “close enough”. If Face ID relies on the “cognitive capabilities” of machine learning to determine that “closeness”, there may always exist some margin of error and it may happen that it does not recognize even the registered face of the true owner. If it always recognizes then it may be working with a large tolerance which may end up with being spoofed. The big difference between a face and fingerprint is that a face evolves, but a fingerprint remains constant the whole life of the person. I intuitively feel that a constant fingerprint pattern may be much easily and accurately modeled than an evolving face. How would you hash an evolving face? OK the location of the eyes, nose and mouth may remain constant but are these enough to develop an accurate and unique model of the face to be used as an encryption key? There are too many unknowns. I hope the white paper Apple is said preparing brings some answers to these unknowns.
Regardless of how it's accomplished, the margin of error after all the development has been done and tested is what is critical. For TouchID the likelihood of a false positive is stated to be about 1 in 50,000. For FaceID it's 1 in 1,000,000. The false positive tolerance, therefore, is a bit tighter for FaceID, and that's the more critical of the two; false positive versus failure to recognize the user's face.
For some insight on how Apple might be resolving a face into raw data, and how this might be able to be evolved over time as a face changes, take a read about eigenfaces and how a stack of such can be used to describe any human face.
Excerpt: "A set of eigenfaces can be generated by performing a mathematical process called principal component analysis (PCA) on a large set of images depicting different human faces. Informally, eigenfaces can be considered a set of "standardized face ingredients", derived from statistical analysis of many pictures of faces. Any human face can be considered to be a combination of these standard faces. For example, one's face might be composed of the average face plus 10% from eigenface 1, 55% from eigenface 2, and even -3% from eigenface 3. Remarkably, it does not take many eigenfaces combined together to achieve a fair approximation of most faces. Also, because a person's face is not recorded by a digital photograph, but instead as just a list of values (one value for each eigenface in the database used), much less space is taken for each person's face."
My problem with FaceID is that it further degrades our individual privacy and makes us more vulnerable to both over-officious government and predatory marketing.
TouchID is my physical finger on this phone. FaceID is my face on a potentially global database. Coming from the UK, one of the most surveilled societies in the western world, I find this worrying.
I'm not interested in being reduced to a target for near-field / face-recognition ads or constant surveilance.
An old fart? For sure - I actually like being an individual.
You’re not ann old fart - just an ignorant one. There is no “database” for Face ID, much less a global one. Just like Touch ID, a mathematical representation of your face is kept on the secure enclave on the phone. That’s it. Stop spreading ignorant FUD. Or are you a politician? In that case, you’re just acting as expected (this was a reference to an equally ignorant senator asking Apple similar questions, making it clear that neither he - nor you - have bothered to watch/read about it first)
I'm happy to be called ignorant when I am.
My point was that TouchID is local, here, with my finger, secure enclave - but do you believe that nothing is sent to the iCloud in this interaction? If my TouchID is sent to the iCloud then someone has to get my finger before they do harm. If anything is sent to iCloud regarding my face, then all bets are off - it's a prudent policy to think that anything you send over the net (phone, text, email . . .) will be intercepted and catalogued.
Like I said, I'm happy to be called ignorant, so just try to enlighten me rather than getting into all the ad hominem wanking (FUD. politician, blah, blah) nonsence.
Talk to me.
If you use Touch ID, then you should have no idea using Face ID, since they both use the same technological concepts, just with different inputs. If you use Touch ID and don't want to use Face ID, then you are being incredibly inconsistent in your paranoia.
If you don't trust Apple's explanation of the security measures, secure enclave, then you really shouldn't be using the phone at all, since theoretically all of your information could be sent to Apple without your knowledge.
In many ways, your face is more public than your fingeprint anyway, so you should be more comfortable with Face ID than Touch ID. If you're being rational, that is.
Ooops! Sorry to all "the experts" that I've offended with my thoughts on this topic. I'm sure you are right.
See you on the way down ;-)
You certainly didn't offend "experts". You did however upset the ideaf, the idumb and the iblind. Gotta jst tell the sheep to baaaaaa! baaaack off.
I can't speak for others, but I am certainly not offended by someone questioning security. What gets annoying is when rational explanations of the technology are given you refuse to believe them or attempt to counter them with something that doesn't apply. No one is forcing anyone to use Face ID, Touch ID or even a smart phone. Anyone is free to use a pass code or a password to unlock their phone, but like I said, if you don't trust Apple's explanation of the Face ID security, why do you trust them for anything?
Boogerman - Accusing people posting responses of being mindless idiots without actually contributing to the discussion simply clarifies your roll in life as a Troll and makes it easy to ignore what you say.
My problem with FaceID is that it further degrades our individual privacy and makes us more vulnerable to both over-officious government and predatory marketing.
TouchID is my physical finger on this phone. FaceID is my face on a potentially global database. Coming from the UK, one of the most surveilled societies in the western world, I find this worrying.
I'm not interested in being reduced to a target for near-field / face-recognition ads or constant surveilance.
An old fart? For sure - I actually like being an individual.
You’re not ann old fart - just an ignorant one. There is no “database” for Face ID, much less a global one. Just like Touch ID, a mathematical representation of your face is kept on the secure enclave on the phone. That’s it. Stop spreading ignorant FUD. Or are you a politician? In that case, you’re just acting as expected (this was a reference to an equally ignorant senator asking Apple similar questions, making it clear that neither he - nor you - have bothered to watch/read about it first)
I'm happy to be called ignorant when I am.
My point was that TouchID is local, here, with my finger, secure enclave - but do you believe that nothing is sent to the iCloud in this interaction? If my TouchID is sent to the iCloud then someone has to get my finger before they do harm. If anything is sent to iCloud regarding my face, then all bets are off - it's a prudent policy to think that anything you send over the net (phone, text, email . . .) will be intercepted and catalogued.
Like I said, I'm happy to be called ignorant, so just try to enlighten me rather than getting into all the ad hominem wanking (FUD. politician, blah, blah) nonsence.
Talk to me.
I think Apple (Frederighi?) said clearly during the presentation that NO information at all is sent to the cloud. It is only stored in a secure, enclaved, walled-off chip physically located in the phone.
This guy is a clown. Face ID in the X isn’t some experiment, it’s the future of biometrics on the iPhone and possibly other Apple products. Not one consumer has used an X with Face ID yet this clown is out with a research note saying Apple will abandon it if consumers don’t take to it. Seriously?!?
My problem with FaceID is that it further degrades our individual privacy and makes us more vulnerable to both over-officious government and predatory marketing.
TouchID is my physical finger on this phone. FaceID is my face on a potentially global database. Coming from the UK, one of the most surveilled societies in the western world, I find this worrying.
I'm not interested in being reduced to a target for near-field / face-recognition ads or constant surveilance.
An old fart? For sure - I actually like being an individual.
What "potentially global database"? Facebook? Instagram? LinkedIn? Google Picassa? Because last time I checked, we were just posting our faces all over social media like we didn't have a care in the world. But uh oh! Here comes iPhone, and it firewalls off the raw face data from the IR depth sensors from any apps, but you're worried about iPhone being part of a global conspiracy. Really?
My problem with FaceID is that it further degrades our individual privacy and makes us more vulnerable to both over-officious government and predatory marketing.
TouchID is my physical finger on this phone. FaceID is my face on a potentially global database. Coming from the UK, one of the most surveilled societies in the western world, I find this worrying.
I'm not interested in being reduced to a target for near-field / face-recognition ads or constant surveilance.
An old fart? For sure - I actually like being an individual.
You’re not ann old fart - just an ignorant one. There is no “database” for Face ID, much less a global one. Just like Touch ID, a mathematical representation of your face is kept on the secure enclave on the phone. That’s it. Stop spreading ignorant FUD. Or are you a politician? In that case, you’re just acting as expected (this was a reference to an equally ignorant senator asking Apple similar questions, making it clear that neither he - nor you - have bothered to watch/read about it first)
I'm happy to be called ignorant when I am.
My point was that TouchID is local, here, with my finger, secure enclave - but do you believe that nothing is sent to the iCloud in this interaction? If my TouchID is sent to the iCloud then someone has to get my finger before they do harm. If anything is sent to iCloud regarding my face, then all bets are off - it's a prudent policy to think that anything you send over the net (phone, text, email . . .) will be intercepted and catalogued.
Like I said, I'm happy to be called ignorant, so just try to enlighten me rather than getting into all the ad hominem wanking (FUD. politician, blah, blah) nonsence.
Talk to me.
I won't say you're ignorant, but I think it's fair to say that you're not particularly tech-savvy.
Your argument fails because FaceID works exactly the same as TouchID, so if Apple is sending your face id data (which researchers will be testing for as soon as the phone is released) then there is no reason why they couldn't send your fingerprint data.
Now, if take your tinfoil-hat theory to a little further into Wonderland, then if they can decode the data for your face then there is no reason to believe that they can't decode the data for your fingerprint.
And once they have decoded the data for your fingerprint then why would they need you to be there to use it? They'll simply use the fingerprint to make a mould and use that if they need to.
And of course they wouldn't need to do any of this because they already have your face and your fingerprint on file, along with details your physical movements around the UK along with your complete browsing history and everything you've downloaded over the past two years. So I'm afraid you're already screwed.
Face ID may come to all models next year but not to justify Kuo’s Samsung promotion. It may come to all Touch ID models not to replace Touch ID but to complement it. As Federighi pointed out according to MacRumors: "He confirmed that Apple believes Face ID is the future of biometric authentication, with the caveat that there are settings where different biometric techniques or combinations of biometrics could make sense.
This guy is a clown. Face ID in the X isn’t some experiment, it’s the future of biometrics on the iPhone and possibly other Apple products. Not one consumer has used an X with Face ID yet this clown is out with a research note saying Apple will abandon it if consumers don’t take to it. Seriously?!?
The X is an experimental model. Not all of its features will necessarily move down into other models. And Craig did say that there could be multiple biometric systems eventually.
Face ID may come to all models next year but not to justify Kuo’s Samsung promotion. It may come to all Touch ID models not to replace Touch ID but to complement it. As Federighi pointed out according to MacRumors: "He confirmed that Apple believes Face ID is the future of biometric authentication, with the caveat that there are settings where different biometric techniques or combinations of biometrics could make sense.
I suspect if they add it to the 8S, they'll get rid of Touch ID. They don't seem to want to put it on the back and apparently struggle to put it under the screen. That giant home button is forcing them to keep the bottom bezel. With Face ID they could have slim, symmetrical bezels at the top and bottom. This will only happen of course if, as they say, everything goes smoothly on the X
Face ID may come to all models next year but not to justify Kuo’s Samsung promotion. It may come to all Touch ID models not to replace Touch ID but to complement it. As Federighi pointed out according to MacRumors: "He confirmed that Apple believes Face ID is the future of biometric authentication, with the caveat that there are settings where different biometric techniques or combinations of biometrics could make sense.
I suspect if they add it to the 8S, they'll get rid of Touch ID. They don't seem to want to put it on the back and apparently struggle to put it under the screen. That giant home button is forcing them to keep the bottom bezel. With Face ID they could have slim, symmetrical bezels at the top and bottom. This will only happen of course if, as they say, everything goes smoothly on the X
That giant home button is a big convenience that the X switchers will sorely miss, at least a significant fraction of them. The Home button is a must for single handed use. In contrast the X requires the use of both hands since it doesn’t include the Reachability feature of the Plus neither. In almost all the hands-on videos of the X the Home gesture was performed with the other hand.
I have no objection against the use of both hands, this is default in the Android world. So the X may appeal to Android switchers. But it will be very difficult to convince existing iPhone users to abandon the convenience of the Home button, bezels and Touch ID and to learn new ways to use a smartphone to handle the X.
Comments
Anyway, your concerns may have sound reasons but you are in the wrong place to manifest activism against global surveillance. Apple doesn’t maintain a global database of faces nor does it surveil anyone.
And Face ID does work offline. It does not send any data over the cloud. Still doubtful? Here is the proof: Apple has developed a brand new neural engine chip for this offline processing. That shows how much Apple manifests a strong commitment to privacy. That is Google that would send your face to its AI servers, not Apple. Apple’s face recognition AI is totally imprisoned in your pocket, completely isolated from the world.
I'm sure you are right.
See you on the way down ;-)
If Apple was misleading people about that I'd think there would be some evidence by now.
I mean the cudos (and cash) a grey hat could earn busting that information wide open it wouldn't stay quiet for all if untrue.
Kaczynski was a perfect example of a luddite. Here's where all such arguments break down. The fact that such people utilize written language, or language in any form, implies they are willing to accept some forms of progress, but not others. The evolution of complex language, the opposable thumb, culture, are all advances we cannot support modern society without.
Not to mention money, an imagined reality we all agree upon. Every time you spend money you re-affirm humanity's believe in the value of little slips of paper, which on their own have little utility value, as exchangeble for real goods and services. Money is an imagined reality and this shared imagined reality is what keeps our entire society functioning. But they are merely slips of paper or pieces of metal (e.g. gold). A hungry bear intent upon eating you cannot be bought off even with a pile of money or gold representing a million dollars (it's just a pile of paper or metal he can easily go around on his way to tackle you). Bears and lions and rabbits deal only with objective reality. Only humans deal in the imagined realities that allow us to build societies, transportation networks, corporations, churches, etc, to think about how the universe functions, travel into space, etc. Without all of this we would live as animals do, and that's a choice any individual can make, but you'd then be subject, as the natural world around us is, to humans who utilize the evolved capabilities and technologies at our disposal. Be a Luddite if you please, but know that it's a strictly human advancement that even allows you to grok that concept.
For some insight on how Apple might be resolving a face into raw data, and how this might be able to be evolved over time as a face changes, take a read about eigenfaces and how a stack of such can be used to describe any human face.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eigenface
Excerpt: "A set of eigenfaces can be generated by performing a mathematical process called principal component analysis (PCA) on a large set of images depicting different human faces. Informally, eigenfaces can be considered a set of "standardized face ingredients", derived from statistical analysis of many pictures of faces. Any human face can be considered to be a combination of these standard faces. For example, one's face might be composed of the average face plus 10% from eigenface 1, 55% from eigenface 2, and even -3% from eigenface 3. Remarkably, it does not take many eigenfaces combined together to achieve a fair approximation of most faces. Also, because a person's face is not recorded by a digital photograph, but instead as just a list of values (one value for each eigenface in the database used), much less space is taken for each person's face."
http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2014/02/apple-advances-facial-and-feature-recognition-techniques.html
Basically, the patent introduces different detectors for each part of the face: left eye, right eye, mouth...
I can't speak for others, but I am certainly not offended by someone questioning security. What gets annoying is when rational explanations of the technology are given you refuse to believe them or attempt to counter them with something that doesn't apply. No one is forcing anyone to use Face ID, Touch ID or even a smart phone. Anyone is free to use a pass code or a password to unlock their phone, but like I said, if you don't trust Apple's explanation of the Face ID security, why do you trust them for anything?
Boogerman - Accusing people posting responses of being mindless idiots without actually contributing to the discussion simply clarifies your roll in life as a Troll and makes it easy to ignore what you say.
Are you suggesting that Apple is lying?
Meanwhile, the iPhone X jokes are flying fast and furious:
Lights go out:
Tom pulls his phone out and uses the Flashlight App.
Dick pulls out his phone and uses the Flashlight app.
Harry cries "guys, please point the flashlight at me so I can unlock my phone!"
AND
"You could buy an iPhone X, or you can buy these 3 bikes!"
I appreciate humour in all varieties but I find ignorant humour the most irritating of all.
I won't say you're ignorant, but I think it's fair to say that you're not particularly tech-savvy.
Your argument fails because FaceID works exactly the same as TouchID, so if Apple is sending your face id data (which researchers will be testing for as soon as the phone is released) then there is no reason why they couldn't send your fingerprint data.
Now, if take your tinfoil-hat theory to a little further into Wonderland, then if they can decode the data for your face then there is no reason to believe that they can't decode the data for your fingerprint.
And once they have decoded the data for your fingerprint then why would they need you to be there to use it? They'll simply use the fingerprint to make a mould and use that if they need to.
And of course they wouldn't need to do any of this because they already have your face and your fingerprint on file, along with details your physical movements around the UK along with your complete browsing history and everything you've downloaded over the past two years. So I'm afraid you're already screwed.
I can see what he's driving at.
FaceID would work for iPhones, iPads, iMacs and MacBooks, because they can build the camera array into the front of the screen.
But what about authenticating with Apple TV? If they ever needed to do that then it would have to be through the remote.
I have no objection against the use of both hands, this is default in the Android world. So the X may appeal to Android switchers. But it will be very difficult to convince existing iPhone users to abandon the convenience of the Home button, bezels and Touch ID and to learn new ways to use a smartphone to handle the X.