[HN Gopher] Eyechat
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Eyechat
        
       Author : seatac76
       Score  : 114 points
       Date   : 2024-08-05 23:23 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (neal.fun)
 (TXT) w3m dump (neal.fun)
        
       | cranberryturkey wrote:
       | ...probably make it top of the internet too.
        
       | MaxikCZ wrote:
       | This is actually pretty neat.
        
       | yesbut wrote:
       | You all are comfortable just enabling your camera for some random
       | site so it can capture your face?
        
         | colejhudson wrote:
         | yes
        
         | xandrius wrote:
         | As much as I enjoy neal's little games, I'm not going to be
         | trying this one, unfortunately.
        
           | thih9 wrote:
           | Perhaps that's an idea for a next game: match people by "how
           | much info are you willing to provide".
           | 
           | Present options to pick a username, email, social media, live
           | text, live audio stream, live video, health data from a smart
           | watch, teenage diary, ...
           | 
           | It already works in some way; e.g. even if one person has
           | both a HN account and a Snapchat account, they would use
           | these to talk to different people.
        
             | boesboes wrote:
             | Already exists, demo by some dutch(?) privacy expert on how
             | much info he can get out of you and just from your picture.
             | 
             | I showed it to a colleague from marketing as a 'look how
             | bad up this is!' They asked 'cool, can we do that too?'
             | sigh
        
             | fartsucker69 wrote:
             | my match will get tmi
        
         | vzaliva wrote:
         | You know, someone can also capture your face while you just
         | walking on the street?
         | 
         | Given, the different people require different levels of
         | privacy.
        
           | _the_inflator wrote:
           | Yes, inverse profiling works this way. A group with known
           | individuals communicates constantly with someone who ain't
           | using FB or Insta. You still know this person quite well,
           | easily identifiable, maybe lacking some information but more
           | than needed.
           | 
           | This is also why privacy has been a game over for decades.
           | Ten years ago or so, friends boasted that they don't use
           | Gmail due to privacy concerns but happily email folks with
           | Gmail accounts.
           | 
           | One group picture is sufficient, you can work from there.
        
           | aaroninsf wrote:
           | One pertinent difference is that a web property may correlate
           | your captured biometric data with whatever they get out of
           | your connection, making entity resolution much easier and
           | more valuable.
           | 
           | ELI5 when you visit online they have a handle on you.
        
         | _the_inflator wrote:
         | Yes, I had the same question popping up.
         | 
         | On a meta-level, this is the essence of social engineering:
         | creating a seemingly harmless and fun distraction to get what
         | you may really want.
         | 
         | "Consent to give me pictures of your face and movements" as a
         | pop-up would probably spoil the fun a bit.
        
         | archerx wrote:
         | This site wants to share your cookies to at least 662 "venders"
         | and they are being dishonest with the "legitimate interest"
         | scam. The creator clearly does not care about nor respect their
         | users/visitors.
        
           | mandmandam wrote:
           | It's so wild to me that people tolerate this. I just close
           | the tab or 'reader' whenever I see that type of thing, but I
           | know very few others who do the same.
        
             | snorremd wrote:
             | I mean, if a website claims to have tens if not close to a
             | hundred "legitimate interest" cookies I'm reasonably sure
             | they are living of wildly invasive ad tracking. I
             | immediately close these websites just as you do.
             | 
             | It would be swell if more of the web was made by passionate
             | people to share knowledge for free. I know this is a
             | privileged attitude as creating content takes time which is
             | not free. But some of the best web sites are the ones
             | without monetisation. We need a better monetisation system
             | for the web that is based on people paying for content
             | instead of people being sold as user data.
        
         | unsupp0rted wrote:
         | Why worry? It only captures the eyes.
        
           | ashkankiani wrote:
           | It has to capture everything first to figure out where the
           | eyes are...
        
             | gattr wrote:
             | One could wear a paper mask/visor to only show the eyes.
             | (Though the eye extraction feature might malfunction then?)
        
             | GaggiX wrote:
             | The extraction of the eyes is done client side.
        
           | PKop wrote:
           | False
        
         | darajava wrote:
         | Why do you care? You likely give your entire life story to
         | Google? What do you think he's going to do with your face data?
        
         | moralestapia wrote:
         | Yes, I am.
        
         | arendtio wrote:
         | No, I just went straight to the HN comments after seeing it
         | requires camera permissions ;-)
        
       | bun_terminator wrote:
       | Suure some random site that hijacks your back button, doesn't
       | talk at all what it is and wants my camera permissions
        
         | ferguu_ wrote:
         | exactly! a little explanation please? i dont turn my camera on
         | for just anything!!! who am i chatting with - the nsa?
        
           | archerx wrote:
           | Worst, advertising data miners if you look at the cookie
           | consent form.
        
       | umeshram wrote:
       | Funny
        
       | miguelxt wrote:
       | Another hit from Neal. I wonder (and envy, in a good way) where
       | does he gets the time to work and all this wonderful little
       | games.
        
         | amitlevy49 wrote:
         | Doesn't he do this full time?
        
           | ianbicking wrote:
           | But there's no attempt to monetize anything...
           | 
           | ... which is part of why everything seems so polished, they
           | each express an idea without compromise, and when he's done
           | he can just be done.
           | 
           | Someone could make a pretty good museum exhibit from his
           | site.
        
             | omoikane wrote:
             | > But there's no attempt to monetize anything...
             | 
             | Maybe for the pages you tried, but I see ads on these
             | pages:
             | 
             | https://neal.fun/infinite-craft/ (bottom)
             | 
             | https://neal.fun/perfect-circle/ (right)
             | 
             | https://neal.fun/days-since-incident/ (bottom, near the
             | end, above the "you may also like" section)
             | 
             | The last one occasionally fails to show ads due to some
             | javascript error (visible in the console). The same error
             | was also observed on a few other pages with the "you may
             | also like" footer, so my guess is that some ads were
             | supposed to be visible on many pages, but were accidentally
             | hidden due to some configuration issue.
        
         | namanyayg wrote:
         | Same. Not just the time, where does he gets the ideas for these
         | games.
         | 
         | Plus, his implementation in a few of them is really exhaustive
         | and polished. Are there any "interns" helping him?
        
       | lambdaba wrote:
       | Careful doing this as there's a risk of falling in love, as per
       | this article: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/11/style/modern-
       | love-to-fall...
        
         | latexr wrote:
         | https://archive.ph/20240808081029/https://www.nytimes.com/20...
        
       | petepete wrote:
       | The name took me back to a video chat programme I remember using
       | with my friends in the very early 2000s called Eyeball Chat.
        
       | petargyurov wrote:
       | I remember that someone posted a very similar project here some
       | time ago.
        
         | namanyayg wrote:
         | Yes, had a deja vu moment there. I guess it was a similar game
         | by someone else.
        
           | wonger_ wrote:
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38305787
        
       | diimdeep wrote:
       | I would love to read about tech details behind this.
        
       | YounoYouno wrote:
       | Nice try, aint' getting my biometrics this time!
        
       | hazn wrote:
       | after eyechatting with 5 people:
       | 
       | * all people had brown eyes
       | 
       | * all went for funny looks immediately
       | 
       | * 3 of them were shocked and left
        
       | kypro wrote:
       | How is this not a torture method? Do neurotypicals think this is
       | fun? I'm getting anxiety just thinking about it.
        
       | pcranaway wrote:
       | To the people worried about their data being sent to google or
       | whatever (I'm not sure what they're actually worried about) --
       | the extraction of your eyes is done client side, using a
       | seemingly very well made ML model running on Tensorflow which
       | fits in under 15mb.
       | 
       | The feed of your camera is transmitted "directly" to the person
       | you're looking at (well, no, not really directly, it uses WebRTC,
       | so your data passes through Neal's TURN server, but do you really
       | think Neal wants to take care of properly storing your data and
       | handing it off to advertisers?)
        
         | BossingAround wrote:
         | So even after this thought process, it comes down to "do you
         | trust the author" (just like before it)... Not unreasonable to
         | answer either way if you ask me.
        
       | namanyayg wrote:
       | It's not working for me at all, did it get hugged to death?
       | 
       | I just see a black screen with "Eyes from $LOCATION" under it.
        
         | bot0047 wrote:
         | Congrats! Your eyes are ours now. - them
        
         | zikduruqe wrote:
         | "Got Eem" - Worldcoin
         | 
         | *for those that aren't familiar with Worldcoin....
         | https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/07/technology/worldcoin-iris...
        
       | IncreasePosts wrote:
       | What we really need for this is on-screen cameras, so you can
       | actually look someone in the eye. Now, you only look them in the
       | eye when you look away from them at the camera. And when you look
       | them in the eye you're just looking at their mouth.
        
         | jbullock35 wrote:
         | We've needed this - easy, direct eye contact - for quite a long
         | time. I keep waiting for someone to develop it. I think that
         | Apple has a relevant patent, but I don't know how much content
         | is in the patent, and I've never heard that Apple has done
         | anything with it.
        
           | shepherdjerred wrote:
           | Apple uses it for its Eye Contact feature in FaceTime
        
         | qingcharles wrote:
         | They're slowly coming to market:
         | 
         | https://www.androidauthority.com/under-display-selfie-camera...
        
           | colordrops wrote:
           | The claim why these aren't adopted is that they aren't high
           | enough quality. Why not include both a standard and
           | undersceen front-facing camera and get the best of both
           | worlds? Could use the under-screen camera for video chat and
           | the standard one for everything else. Or even use some AI
           | algorithm to merge the data from the standard camera with the
           | under-screen one to increase quality.
        
             | filcuk wrote:
             | People want quality selfies more than eye to eye calls
        
         | bredren wrote:
         | Earliest expected release for an Under Display Camera (UDC)
         | iPhone right now is iPhone 18 in 2026:
         | 
         | >According to The Elec, LG Innotek has entered the preliminary
         | development of the UDC, which sits under the display and does
         | not result in a visible hole in the panel when the camera is
         | not in use...
         | 
         | >Apple will then adopt the UDC in 2027's "Pro" iPhone models,
         | according to respected analyst Ross Young of research firm
         | Display Supply Chain Consultant
         | 
         | https://www.macrumors.com/2023/12/06/iphone-under-display-ca...
        
       | brikym wrote:
       | So this is what it's like dating in the middle east.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-08-08 23:00 UTC)