Cory Doctorow has a short story about this kind of surveillance hell, and the disproportionate damage it does to neurodivergent kids.
Audio version: https://craphound.com/littlebrother/2024/09/29/vigilant-a-little-brother-story/
That intro hooked me I’ll have to listen later.
Can relate maybe. At my work there was layoffs years back, so if somebody is sick there might be only one person in the manufacturing building with no supervision.
Not legal so they tried to make us use man down radios which alarm if they get tilted. Small grace window to reset. Otherwise it’ll blast an alarm across the site. Also have to push a button on it every hour, or, alarm. That happened twice until I refused to wear it and said they could fire me if it came down to it.
It was mental torture worrying about the fucking radio all the time.
I’m still here and nobody uses the radio anymore.
I have to check in with someone every hour if I’m working alone in the building. I actually like that requirement because my job can be dangerous.
Yeah thaaaat’s why I was feeling uneasy This would be funny if it triggered my ring doorbell cam. In this context it feels more like the woman who got an audio recording of her cab ride
AI is once again showing its skill level.
This has nothing to do with AI. Facial detection was there decades before the AI hype.
The difference a person would know that’s a poster in a frame on a wall and not an actual person.
haha isn’t it so funny how I’m in charge of the panopticon and you have no choice but to shut the fuck up and bear it?
I used to do a lot of interviewing of prospective hires at my last job (I’m a programmer). It was not at all uncommon to ask a candidate a question and then hear multiple voices whispering in the background along with frantic keyboard tapping sounds, and the candidate would take 5-10 seconds before answering. I just don’t understand what their thought process was for even attempting this - it earned them an immediate “no further action”.
I won’t say what country all of these candidates were from. It would be obvious to anyone in this field.
Was reading a resume, and at the bottom is said something along the Iines of “Does this one look better Mom? I added a few closed businesses like you recommended.”
It started kinda sweet but dumb, then quickly moved on to the “do not consider for future positions” list.
I added a few closed businesses like you recommended.
Lol. It’s funny, the college I went to went belly up a few years back, and it occurred to me that I could basically say I had whatever degree I wanted to have on my resume and there’d be no easy way for an employer to check it out. I don’t have a Computer Science degree, but I never found that to be the slightest hindrance to my career so I was never tempted to lie about my degree. With the way the CS field has gone tits up lately I would probably have to do something like that to even be considered for a job, but I’m a school bus driver now so I don’t give a shit.
We’ve had similar before. Interviewed multiple people and most of them were clearly in the same room.
These measures seem kind of pointless with how many undetectable options there are for cheating in an online exam.
There is more than that in these kind of exams.
When doing a Microsoft certification exam they require:- camera footage of you doing the exam
- screen recording while doing the exam
- microphone recording while doing the exam
- a 360 view/footage of the room youre doing the exam in.
This is so that they can catch any type of cheating you could do. The camera footage is only part of the checks.
And the powers that be keep scratching their heads about falling birth rates…
I have no idea what any of this means.
The students are spied on by their teachers using AI and webcams when they do exams online on their laptop.
This teacher is expressing amusement at the image on the wall fooling the AI into thinking the student had someone help them during the test. The teacher then goes on to comment that they can tell that the student kept looking to the left (the teacher assuming they are looking things up in a book or by using a second device) and that the student might want to remove the image from their wall to avoid the AI flagging them.
Good explanation, but I think you’re reading too much into “I can tell when you shift to the left.” The teacher just means that when the student shifts to their left, their head isn’t covering the poster so the AI flags the second face.
This is officially my most unnecessary comment, but I already typed it so it’s going up.
If that is your most unnecessary comment then you must not comment very much because it seems helpful and well placed.
AI system examines webcam footage for signs of cheating during an exam. AI thinks poster behind student is another person in the room that could be helping during a test. AI flags it for teacher to review as possible cheating. Teacher checks footage and sees that AI fucked up (sorta, I mean it did detect the face as trained to do).
Lets go! Music
He about to turn someone into a convertible
DaCheater
