frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Made with ♥ by @iamnishanth

Open Source @Github

fp.

Anthropic's open-source framework for AI-powered vulnerability discovery

https://github.com/anthropics/defending-code-reference-harness
101•binyu•1h ago•35 comments

VoidZero Is Joining Cloudflare

https://blog.cloudflare.com/voidzero-joins-cloudflare/
518•coloneltcb•8h ago•236 comments

When AI Builds Itself: Our progress toward recursive self-improvement

https://www.anthropic.com/institute/recursive-self-improvement
175•meetpateltech•5h ago•211 comments

Castor: CERN Advanced STORage Manager

https://castor.web.cern.ch/content/home.html
34•naves•1h ago•7 comments

Show HN: FFmpeg WebCLI – Full FFmpeg in Browser, Offline PWA, No Uploads(WASM)

https://github.com/tejaswigowda/ffmpeg-webCLI
23•tejaswigowda•57m ago•5 comments

Ian's Secure Shoelace Knot

https://www.fieggen.com/shoelace/secureknot.htm
426•mooreds•10h ago•161 comments

Retro-Tech Parenting

https://havenweb.org/2026/05/28/retro-tech.html
196•mawise•5h ago•130 comments

KVarN: Native vLLM backend for KV-cache quantization by Huawei

https://github.com/huawei-csl/KVarN
97•theanonymousone•6h ago•8 comments

JLink JTAG Access on the Pinecil

https://danielmangum.com/posts/jlink-jtag-pinecil/
23•hasheddan•2d ago•1 comments

They’re made out of weights

https://maxleiter.com/blog/weights
1358•MaxLeiter•21h ago•592 comments

Meta's ships facial recognition on smart glasses

https://www.buchodi.com/meta-glasses-facial-recognition/
129•buchodi•1h ago•111 comments

Samurai City

https://worksinprogress.co/issue/samurai-city/
53•zdw•2d ago•5 comments

Making Debian or Fedora persistent live images

https://sigwait.org/~alex/blog/2026/05/28/smdBC8.html
40•henry_flower•3d ago•3 comments

Failing grades soar with AI usage, dwindling math skills in Berkeley CS classes

https://www.dailycal.org/news/campus/academics/failing-grades-soar-as-professors-see-greater-ai-u...
699•littlexsparkee•21h ago•652 comments

Zettascale (YC S24) Is Hiring Founding FPGA Engineers

https://www.ycombinator.com/companies/zettascale/jobs/O9S1vqO-founding-engineer-fpga-rtl-asic-arc...
1•el_al•4h ago

Sum-product, unit distances, and number fields

https://www.erdosproblems.com/forum/thread/blog:6
45•robinhouston•3d ago•5 comments

NSA using Anthropic's Mythos for cyber attacks

https://www.ft.com/content/d02d91b3-2636-454e-9442-dc7e69f51815
30•jawiggins•56m ago•3 comments

Iran Shock Jolts Asia and Europe to Speed Up Energy Transition

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2026-energy-transition-iran-war/
30•toomuchtodo•1h ago•3 comments

AI, Ashby Engineering, and the future

https://www.ashbyhq.com/blog/engineering/ai-ashby-engineering-and-the-future
25•fredley•6h ago•15 comments

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Bay Model

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Army_Corps_of_Engineers_Bay_Model
196•tosh•2d ago•49 comments

Gaussian Point Splatting

https://momentsingraphics.de/Siggraph2026.html
166•ibobev•10h ago•61 comments

Show HN: Uruky (EU-based Kagi alternative) now has Image Search and URL Rewrites

https://uruky.com/?il=en
191•BrunoBernardino•12h ago•182 comments

Mornings and nights no longer exist at 47C: A day in the hottest place in India

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crmp0krp98ro
36•mellosouls•2d ago•5 comments

Elixir v1.20: Now a gradually typed language

https://elixir-lang.org/blog/2026/06/03/elixir-v1-20-0-released/
945•cloud8421•1d ago•377 comments

Show HN: Cost.dev (YC W21) – making agents cost-aware and cheaper to call

https://cost.dev/
16•akh•9h ago•6 comments

3D-printed book turns its own G-code into raised lettering

https://www.designboom.com/design/3d-printed-book-manual-darius-ou-benson-chong/
65•surprisetalk•2d ago•24 comments

Gemma 4 12B: A unified, encoder-free multimodal model

https://blog.google/innovation-and-ai/technology/developers-tools/introducing-gemma-4-12b/
1006•rvz•1d ago•377 comments

The desperation of NYTimes

https://rozumem.xyz/posts/16
266•rozumem•3h ago•253 comments

Artificial intelligence is not conscious – Ted Chiang

https://www.theatlantic.com/philosophy/2026/06/no-artificial-intelligence-is-not-conscious/687378/
713•lordleft•1d ago•1228 comments

I built a vulnerable app and spent $1,500 seeing if LLMs could hack it

https://kasra.blog/blog/i-spent-1500-seeing-if-llms-could-hack-my-app/
365•jc4p•20h ago•197 comments
Open in hackernews

Meta's ships facial recognition on smart glasses

https://www.buchodi.com/meta-glasses-facial-recognition/
126•buchodi•1h ago

Comments

gizajob•1h ago
This company is so beyond creepy and disgusting.
everdrive•1h ago
Disgusting. Meta does not care about the harm they do so long as they make money.
attila-lendvai•43m ago
i'm afraid it's about much more than just money... it's about retaining power/dominance over the very game that is being played.

(i.e. if you control the money printer, then all you care about is that your subjects continue playing. fb is just one cog in a big machine.)

gigel82•1h ago
Fudge... we can de-flock all we want but if naive people walk around with the portable surveillance cameras on their face, there's nothing we can do about that.

We need privacy regulation...

jondwillis•1h ago
I don’t think it’s reasonable to think that privacy regulation is coming with the current admin and weak “opposition”, and lack of capacity to care or understand the stakes by the populace. We need some very effective political organizing, yesterday. And normalized, cheap, scramble suits wouldn’t hurt either.
jimt1234•59m ago
The US courts have almost always held that anything in public can be recorded. The only expectations of privacy relevant to 'smart glasses' that the courts recognize, I think, are gonna be restrooms and your own home. I guess what I'm getting at is I don't expect regulation or the courts to do anything about the privacy and recording issues. IMHO, the only potential regulation might be around how the recorded data is handled, but honestly, I don't expect anything there, either. I mean, apparently, the US DHS wants to build their own 'smart glasses' to record and do facial recognition for ICE.
gigel82•33m ago
I think we need legislation. The "no expectations of privacy" probably was ok when little old ladies were spending time outside their home watching passerbys, but not when everyone's movements are tracked and saved by fully autonomous systems.
miltonlost•1h ago
Hope they get sued out of existence for this by Illinois. The biodata stored and used only serves authoritarians.
KaiserPro•1h ago
Former Facebook wanker, who worked in research.

1) we were always told and legal always pushed back hard on anything face detecting.(ie haar cascade "this is a face" let alone actual this is dave/sally)

2) the FTC would audit us to make sure we weren't doing that kind of stuff

3) all of the research prototypes had inbuilt/inline face removers up until 2024(I left after that so I don't know when/if that changed)

3.1) One of the very first things I worked on was face removal, it was a central core of the entire fucking project. Like if we didn;t have any of those constraints we'd have been 2 years ahead.

4) Stella is the name for v1 rayban stories, so its very odd that they get the update when they've not had any new features since for a long time(unless I am mistaken).

KaiserPro•1h ago
now, I will say that Boz was pushing to have facial recognition when I was were, and some of the early storyboards for XROS were pretty reilant on it (ie in an office having the sims like diamonds above your head that indicated who you were and if you were busy)

I assumed that Zuck said no because he'd had enough time with the lawyer and the FTC sniffing about to not bother.

However the glasses based AI lifelog stuff (which was basically a really effective personal assistant) would be a lot more effective if it could use facial recognition (we weren't allowed to use speaker diarization as that would allow us to record individual audio from users and recognise them like with facial recognition)

ninininino•1h ago
Pure speculation, probably they finally figured out the correct legal ToS and privacy policy and everything else that made them feel confident + some regulatory/lawmaker discussions reached a certain point that they finally decided they could do it? Does that add up?
vaylian•56m ago
micromacrofoot•1h ago
they finally wore down all the people internally who were against this
pesus•1h ago
Or they all left or were fired. It's safe to assume anyone still working there at this point in time after everything they've done is in favor of this.
kstrauser•1h ago
I'm in the position to make security policies at work, and one of them is that no smart glasses are allowed in the office. We will not be having workers aiming Facebook glasses at our screens showing confidential information. And along those lines, I can think of damn few scenarios where I'd be OK with someone using face recognition against me. Restaurants? It's not Facebook's business to know where I like to eat, presumably to sell ads to show to me. Music clubs? They don't need to know what I listen to. Anything vaguely resembling a public bathroom? Fuck right off with that. Public sidewalks? I don't want them tracking who I spend time talking to.

No, I can't really think of any situation where I'd be remotely OK with this being used. To be blunt, I kinda hope this quickly turns not into just a public shaming against people wearing public spyware, but a situation where people are physically afraid to be caught wearing them outside. I think the branch of future possibilities where it's called out as antisocial behavior to poison public spaces like this would be a happier world than one where it becomes common behavior.

Edit: In before the "do you ban cell phone cameras at work, too?" unclever gotcha: Yes. Yes, we'd definitely ban people spending the whole day holding their cell phone cameras up to their screens to record their work. We don't share confidential info with anyone other than vendors we've vetted and contracted with. If I walked by a desk and saw someone recording, I would pull them aside and explain why they're on thin ice.

monkpit•1h ago
To make matters worse, I’ve seen threads where people with these glasses discuss how to circumvent/disable the “now recording” light, so people won’t know when they’re active.
kstrauser•1h ago
I read an article on that this morning. That's totally a thing.

I do not advocate violence in such situations. If you find someone recording surreptitiously, do not harm the person when you remove the spyware and disable it.

j45•1h ago
I wonder if people held their phones in the face of people recording with glasses if they'd be ok with it.
footy•1h ago
_Careless People_ should be required reading for anyone buying this crap.
attila-lendvai•47m ago
i was hoping that it's a good book to suggest to the "i have nothing to hide" folk...

sadly, it's "only" about the sickos at fb. don't get me wrong, it's a good thing that it's written, but hardly anyone needs it who lived through the past few years with an open eye...

Cider9986•33m ago
I have a feeling people using these don't read many books.
ChicagoDave•1h ago
The number of times those get grabbed of someone’s face and stomped on will be greater than zero. And businesses will have signs for No guns/spyglasses.
hallway_monitor•58m ago
At what point does civil disobedience become justified? Expected even? Also let's be clear - this is not violence, not assault, it is simple destruction of property.
evilduck•50m ago
I don't think you could plausibly do this and only catch a property crime charge. If you're caught, forcefully removing worn objects from another person will almost certainly catch you a misdemeanor battery charge in most US jurisdictions.

I'm no lawyer and things vary by location, but clothing is generally considered an extension of the person and usually touching their worn objects constitutes physical contact with the person themselves. Doing so with intent of committing criminal mischief, vandalism, or felony property damage will get all of them thrown at you. If you hastily do so and happen to harm the person in the process (since you're naturally grabbing at someone's eyes, that seems like a serious risk), there's a good chance you'll be given an aggravated or felony battery charge instead.

1234letshaveatw•37m ago
The number of times the grabber gets a beatdown will be equivalent, signs will be ignored
pesus•1h ago
This is incredibly creepy and invasive, and should be outlawed, frankly. There is no legitimate reason for this to exist. My only hope is regular Wayfarers aren't completely tainted by these creep glasses having the same design, but it may be too late.
Morromist•45m ago
Smartglasses, NFTs, getting ai to write your emails, always talking to Alexa, taking photos of everything constantly for social media.

People who do these things must think the tech makes them more likable and interesting. But, in fact, I immediately deeply dislike these people and would never want to be friends with them. Its a paradox.

Its actually like watching a dude pissing themselves in public and thinking "Ah yeah, I'm covered in pee now! I'm so cool, look how jealous those non-pissers are!"

endemic•41m ago
I had the exact same thought about the brand crashing due to association with Facebook. Gotta juice them numbers, I guess.
bensyverson•1h ago
They seem determined to make Chicago lawyers rich. [0]

  [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biometric_Information_Privacy_Act
joe_mamba•48m ago
Lawyers operate on exciting laws. What happens when the laws change?
bobmcnamara•48m ago
$1k/per with no exponential horsepower? Barely a tax.
cbarrick•32m ago
> $5,000 per violation if the violation is intentional or reckless.
Manuel_D•45m ago
That pertains to collecting biometric info, not end users of facial recognition services. From your link:

> The BIPA requires companies doing business in Illinois to comply with a number of requirements pertaining to the collection and storage of biometric information. These include a requirement that companies:

> Obtain consent from individuals if the company intends to collect or disclose their personal biometric identifiers.

> Destroy biometric identifiers in a timely manner.

> Securely store biometric identifiers.[6]

> A key area of focus is that an entity must use a "reasonable standard of care"[7] in managing biometric information and identifiers.

free_bip•
GrinningFool•1h ago
Another case of really cool tech done badly.

Imagine a world in which you could use facial recognition, have an instant summary in front of you you reminding you of someone's birthday, the names of their kids ...

Then imagine that it wasn't tracked, recorded, saved, or tied into anything at all. Just a useful service, in service to only you.

Thanks Meta et al, for pushing forward with this broken (for people) model of business and ensuring we'll never be able to have that.

Terr_•59m ago
There's this degradation over the last ~30 years from "wow it's like a kind of capital-equipment anyone can own that'll empower them with agency and serve their own individual interests" to "you're renting this product from a supranational corporation so that it can exploit you".

The problem isn't that I'm being recorded by cameras everywhere, the problem is when those silos are broken down to create a panopticon.

Gooblebrai•55m ago
> have an instant summary in front of you you reminding you of someone's birthday, the names of their kids

"How much outsourcing of your mind do you want to give to technology?" "Yes"

If you really can't remember all the details of people that you want to remember, you can always write those details on your phone or trusty Rolodex after you meet them and then check them out before you meet them again if you must.

john_strinlai•46m ago
>If you really can't remember all the details of people that you want to remember, you can always write those details on your phone or trusty Rolodex after you meet them and then check them out before you meet them again if you must.

i do not see any practical difference between the hypothetical device the parent proposes and this, except that your suggestion is more cumbersome. you're just "outsourcing your mind" to paper or whatever.

(i will note that i agree with your general point. i try to make a concerted effort to remember those details, rather than rely on any type of note-taking)

airstrike•1h ago
What a huge surprise coming from the company that records its own employees.
teeray•59m ago
I fail to see how nonstop recording of every interaction with people in everyday life will pass muster in a two-party consent state.
senordevnyc•49m ago
My understanding is that those laws cover audio, not video.
wald3n•58m ago
Dystopian
altcognito•58m ago
If Zuck could ship a set of 1950 x-ray glasses, they would.

Never really grew up past middle school. I have dealt with high schoolers with better self control and moral compasses.

The rest of SV billionaire class is so abhorrent that you figure they either enjoy being the villains or they figure "it's ok if you get away with it." Sociopaths.

RobotToaster•57m ago
I wish something like this existed that was completely offline. I'm face blind (prosopagnosia) so being able to feed an offline database photos of friends so it can recognise them would be great.

Accessibility shouldn't require giving up privacy.

jjice•53m ago
Honestly, if any big tech would implement it this way, it's likely Apple. Their image face recognition in Photos currently is fully on device from what I understand and it is set by who you associate it with locally.
Gooblebrai•52m ago
Sorry that you have to deal with this condition. What method do you use currently to help with recognising them?
joshred•45m ago
Usually you talk to them and then you remember who they are or where you know them from.

It's not like you can't tell your wife apart from your orthodontist.

freedomben•43m ago
> It's not like you can't tell your wife apart from your orthodontist.

I got a personal kick out of that example, because one of my good friend's wife is his orthodontist :-D

PlunderBunny•37m ago
"open wide..."
filup•55m ago
I can't think of one single practical use case for this that would benefit my life, because, right behind the glasses I have my very own locally available facial recognition built in.
john_strinlai•53m ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosopagnosia

(not that i think meta is doing it for accessibility reasons...)

NewsaHackO•51m ago
A lot of people are face blind (including me), and it's extremely embarrassing, especially when I'm supposed to remember a person's name. Wouldn't wear survialiance tech to try to fix it though.
filup•34m ago
I didnt know this was a thing, how severe is it for you?

I have a similar thing with names when and I think it's just because my brain somehow decides that interaction meant nothing and the information was not important to save.

reaperducer•31m ago
A lot of people are face blind

3.08%, according to https://hms.harvard.edu/news/how-common-face-blindness

NewsaHackO
Bender•53m ago
Do these emit something unique that could be detected so that loud klaxon could let everyone know there is a glasshole approaching? Some unique bluetooth identifier perhaps?
devmor•41m ago
Yes actually. You can poll for nearby Bluetooth devices and cap the packets advertising the manufacturer.
supermdguy•18m ago
Someone posted a tool that does this recently: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47140042
wewewedxfgdf•50m ago
The company feels like the corporate embodiment of its founder.
joe_mamba•47m ago
Unscrupulous guy who stole the idea from other guys in university, then used tribal nepotism to make sure his fabric of society destructive platform is the one who gets big-finance VC funding in order to destroy society to make money?

Pretty common pattern in the business racket if you look at history.

guelo•37m ago
What does tribal nepotism mean here?
Cider9986•37m ago
HN was positive on him at one point.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2157445

>I really applaud Zuckerberg for positively embracing all the attention that's been shouldered on him, really. I think stuff like this SNL skit or him taking his core team at Facebook to watch "The Social Network" together at a movie theatre just shows tremendous inner strength and maturity on his part. It's great to see him be able to laugh it off and joke about it.

He's come a long way in his public speaking skills too, he was pretty natural and comedic during his talk at Startup School. I think he's only going to get better from this point on too.

NoImmatureAdHom•50m ago
Please God no
panzi•48m ago
How many ships does Meta have?
righthand•47m ago
Imagine being a POS that works for that company.
mrcwinn•41m ago
Please hurry Apple.
kylehotchkiss•36m ago
_Frantically Tattoos "Do Not Sell My Personal Information" message under my eyes so I can lawsuit meta for ignoring my data privacy preferences_
Havoc•35m ago
Maybe Meta, Flock and Palatir could team up? Create an evil combo stock similar to musky's
swader999•22m ago
I'd rather be face forgetting self than wear this nonsense.
Animats•20m ago
So why not turn it on?

At least in China, where face recognition is at building gates, subway gates, store checkouts...

threwrfaway•17m ago
Start up idea:

Ordinary glass (as in spectacles) frames that have a near IR LED on the bridge and on the side. PWM to be efficient, bright, but erratic clock of around 10Hz.

Want a picture of me? Ask, or use film.

emsign•6m ago
This. Projects like this already exist to blind surveillance cameras.
emsign•7m ago
Absence of consent is abuse. Smashing your spy glasses is self-defense.
Trump is POTUS. And Zuckerberg seems to be on good terms with Trump.
KaiserPro•25m ago
I think the ToS is lenient enough to get away with most things.

I suspect that its a two-fer,

1) zuckerberg has said "it must be done" as part of the AI push

1.1) it might be also that Wang has pushed to get that data, but thats a guess. I doubt he has that kind of sway

2) they've realised that the FTC isn't either capable, or they have bribed the right part of the government to avoid getting nailed.

The thing that gets me is the number of lawyers that are there, and the sheer amount of process that is there to stop this kind of thing happening requires Zuck to explicitly say "I WANT THIS" repeatedly.

michaelt•7m ago
> probably they finally figured out the correct legal ToS and privacy policy

Unlikely IMHO - the person who agreed to the TOS is the one person the glasses don’t record.

More likely they’ve decided to launch it and see what happens; they can always withdraw the feature later, and laws can be surprisingly flexible when you’re a large corporation.

johndough•36m ago
I recall that Facebook asked me to identify faces of my friends in order to "verify" myself about 15 years ago. Do you know whether Facebook still stores that data?
RobotToaster•55m ago
That's still common assault.
thrownthatway•54m ago
Good people break bad laws.
reaperducer•28m ago
That's still common assault.

So call a cop.

Where I live, one might get around to responding to you in six to 12 hours.

thrownthatway•55m ago
Gives a whole new meaning to the term spyware.

Spywear

kstrauser•38m ago
I'm stealing this, thanks.
Cider9986•34m ago
I am highly opposed to these glasses, but there's nothing you can do about it in public besides swearing at these people and not being friends with them.
flir•55m ago
The tech's there. The genie can't be put back in the bottle, and it will only get cheaper and more invasive. Only question we have any control over is... do we want everyone to have it, or only govs and corps?

There's a second-amendment-like argument here, imo, that is very hard to push back on - because at least this stuff doesn't kill people. I want every cop to be surrounded by five or six recording devices that they don't control at all times - it's the least worst option.

(Obviously I'm not a fan of the "everying goes to facebook" architecture. I'm hoping we get past that).

Forgeties79•52m ago
They haven’t even sold 10mill units. We can still say no.
yuliyp•51m ago
The tech's also been there to put cameras everywhere, and to wiretap every phone, etc. We put guardrails in place to control how that tech is deployed.
awesome_dude•48m ago
Very limited guard rails (WRT cameras) - they can't be in bathrooms is about all I am aware of as a universal restriction
senordevnyc•48m ago
Man, I can’t tell if this is sarcastic or not…
convolvatron•47m ago
you're implying there is some kind of symmetry here, that facial recognition will empower individuals in a way to counteract the power given to governments and corporations.

I should try to compile my own database of everyone's location? I fail to see how it helps me in any way

thereisnospork•29m ago
You as an individual? Probably not, but you could lobby your local government to, for instance, require any such dataset taken from information in the public be subject to the freedom of information act.
jimbokun•41m ago
If only people already had recording device in their pocket they take with them everywhere…
kstrauser•38m ago
How often you see someone taping a phone to their head and wearing it into a bathroom?

It's sociopathic to wear spywear in a public setting.

Cider9986•36m ago
This is more like putting hidden cameras in hotels. The difference is the discrete factor and the facial recognition. Both are disgusting imo.
NicuCalcea•40m ago
We can't put the genie back in the bottle, but we can control how we react to it. As far as I'm concerned, I will treat people wearing smart glasses the same way I would treat someone shoving a smartphone camera in my face. I'll just refuse to engage with them.
wizzwizz4•16m ago
Are you forgetting Google Glass? We put this genie back into the bottle once: we can do it again.
innerHTML•53m ago
while I agree with you I can definitely see women wearing it to "feel safe". during dark months women wear vests with lights on them. admittedly I have not seen any of them wear bodycams yet.
kstrauser•40m ago
I can definitely see women not wanting to be facially recognized as they're minding their own business and walking home from work and not wanting to be stalked.
footy•36m ago
I live in Canada (many dark months) and am a woman who knows many women and I've never known anyone to wear a vest with a light on them. I do own a hat with a light that I use when I'm walking to the gym in the dark so that drivers will see me, but so do many of my friends and it doesn't seem to be gendered.

I also fail to see how facial recognition would be analogous to lights in terms of safety or frankly anything else.

bryanlarsen•22m ago
The big difference is that if a woman wears a camera to make her feel safer, she'll do it in a way that it's obvious she's recording. The whole point is to make potential attackers aware that they're being recorded. A gopro or a cell phone camera body mount works a lot better for this than meta glasses.
25m ago
If you actually read the full text of the law, it states:

" "Biometric identifier” means a retina or iris scan, fingerprint, voiceprint, or scan of hand or face geometry. Biometric identifiers do not include writing samples, written signatures, photographs, human biological samples, [...] "

So if it's just pictures of faces, then it's okay. If, however, at any point in the pipeline the actual facial geometry is calculated or stored, that might be a violation.

Gooblebrai•7m ago
Fair point on the outsourcing. Although I'd argue that one practical difference is that one device doesn't distract you from being present when you have the person in front of you (presumably because you will have to read the details appearing in the glasses).

Also, I take it that the next logical (and worrisome) step to something like that is to record the conversations so the AI can summarise and extract the important data from the conversation for it to be later accessible, which is going to bring us into the ultimate performative scenario. Young people nowadays are already aware that anyone could be recording their most embarrassing moments; recording everything we say would be worse.

dwa3592•45m ago
>>Imagine a world in which you could use facial recognition, have an instant summary in front of you you reminding you of someone's birthday, the names of their kids

Here is some feedback for you: plain dumb and stupid

GrinningFool•24m ago
Sounds like I touched a nerve.
Atheros•45m ago
Remembering someone's birthday and the names of their kids signals that you care about them. If Meta short circuits that then the signal evaporates.
reaperducer•15m ago
Imagine a world in which you could use facial recognition, have an instant summary in front of you you reminding you of someone's birthday, the names of their kids ...

I already have that. It's called a memory. Came free with my brain.

NobodyNada•6m ago
I recently learned that I have some level of face-blindness (I took the CFMT online and scored 43).

It's something I've had my whole life but only recently realized wasn't "normal". It's not like I can't recognize people at all, but rather that faces aren't very distinctive to me compared to other identifying characteristics (such as hair color/style/length, clothing, skin tone, height, voice, gait, mannerisms, etc.) It takes me a while to learn to distinguish everyone in a group of people (especially people who are similar along all of those attributes), but once I know someone well I will usually recognize them without problems.

The only real issues are when someone changes their appearance (e.g. getting glasses or shaving a beard), or when I run into someone in an unexpected context (like randomly meeting someone I know on the street). A few months ago I ran into my cousin at an event in another city, and didn't recognize her until after 20 or 30 seconds of conversation.

It's also not usually too hard to mask. I realized I have a subconscious habit of never greeting people by name because I'm always afraid of getting it wrong, and it's easy enough to bluff through "oh hi, how are you, good to see you, how have you been up to" pleasantries until I figure out who I'm talking to. The most awkward situations are when I'm unsure whether or not I know someone and have to risk either mistaking a stranger for a friend, or accidentally ignoring/reintroducing myself to an acquaintance. Also, starting a new TV show sucks.

Now that I know it's an actual condition with a name, I'm not sure yet whether it makes things better or worse if I try to explain it to people to excuse my mistakes.

caturopath•32m ago
Like the poster, I'm faceblind. It isn't the worst thing: I'm not voice blind, height blind, age blind, hairstyle blind, gender blind, features associated with race and ethnicity blind, attractiveness blind, affect blind, context blind, etc., so I'm mostly good at figuring out who someone is. Within one encounter with a bunch of people, I try to note what someone is wearing.

Every once in a while I don't recognize someone and I go through this whole thing of bringing up every biographical detail about them I remember and all the things we've talked about to show that I'm not an asshole who wasn't paying attention in the past. Fortunately, I have a decent memory for such things.

ryandrake•31m ago
I find myself asking this every time a new software product is released. "Nice, but why can't this be usable without an account and a tether to the developer's cloud?"
majiy•26m ago
Literally my thoughts. That would be so helpful, but I will not give any data-hungy company access to people around me.

I recently heard the best way to explain faceblindness: Apples.

Can you tell apples apart? Yes, sure, if you put two apples next to each other, they look similar, but there are differences.

But could you recognize that specific apple among 50 similar ones?

If an apple addressed you on the street, could you remember where you've seen it before?

That is how it feels to be faceblind.

There are workarounds, but they are context-dependent and error-prone.

That apple with red hair and a beard? Sure, that's the colleague from the office next door. But was that the same apple that waved to you in the city yesterday?

The only green apple among red ones? Easy to recognize. But only after some awkward misunderstandings you realize that there are two of them.

And changes of hairstyle are a real problem. I once wondered who that new colleague was during lunchbreak. I was about to ask her, when she said something (unrelated) and I recognized her voice. I had worked with her for 10 years, she had colored her hair.

riffraff•10m ago
Thank you so much for sharing this, I had no idea this condition existed and you provided a perfect explanation.
•
8m ago
so 250 million people? Thats a good amount of people.