ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings: Nov 21, Dec 19 – Details / Recordings

Emotional Support Group Meetings 2020 (Phone only)

General News

New Google Glass App Can Recognize Up to 450,000 Sex Offenders so You Know When to Run

Though Google has banned facial recognition from Google Glass, one company is throwing that to the wind and is doing their own, anyway—and it’s specializing in sex offenders.

NameTag, the Nevada-based company, has developed a Glass app that can recognize up to 450,000 sex offenders, and pulls its data from FacialNetwork.com. “I believe that this will make online dating and offline social interactions much safer and give us a far better understanding of the people around us,” said NameTag’s founder Kevin Tussy. “It’s much easier to meet interesting new people when we can simply look at someone, see their Facebook, review their LinkedIn page or maybe even see their dating site profile.” Full Article

Join the discussion

  1. Avig

    This thing will recognize sex offenders but, apparently, not people convicted of violence. Which is worse—–sex by mutual consent, or violence?

    This brings up memories of my student days at Berkeley, when we had various sex liberation groups. A common question was: is your sex orgasm approved by the government? I can only hope that the new technology will help us to screen out the possibility of having a non-government approved orgasm. ====at this stage of life I don’t need any more problems, so if such a thing approaches me, I will run like hell.

  2. C

    This has creeped me out since I first heard of Glass and hopefully it will go the way of Google+. People wearing Glass will get the stink eye from me, especially if I am with my kids as I’ll have a legit excuse to suspect them of taking inappropriate pictures. You throw that at someone in public “Are you taking pictures of my kids!?” and they’ll be instantaneously on the defensive and think twice about wearing those things whilst out and about. The trick, of course, is doing it w/out causing distress to my kids, or having the tables turned when several glass wearers ID me as the RSO. I always envision that scene from Invasion of the Body Snatchers when Donald Sutherland makes that hideous scream to let all the other aliens know that his former friend is still a human being.

    How does that money grubbing douche bag, Kevin Tussy of Name Tag (index that Google), indemnify his company against law suits when harm comes to people as a result of his stalker-ware? Hopefully the government will step in before this really becomes a problem, or someone else will make him an offer he can’t refuse.

    Finally, has anyone taken a look at facialnetwork.com’s web site? “this is just the beginning” is their tag line. Talk about ominous and Orwellian. Who needs crowd-funding when Satan himself provides 100% if the venture capital?

  3. Eric Knight

    Just saw one comment that epitomizes the danger. It was written by a nice person who goes by the name of “RSO Hunter.” Gee.

    “Google Glass +
    Sex Offender Realtime Facial Recognition +
    The Knockout Game =
    KARMA!”

    So basically the vigilante is condoning unprovoked, undefendable assaults. Geez.

  4. mch

    Always wear a hat low over your shades, sport a big, wooley beard, turn your collar up, maybe wear a Luchador mask in public, constantly change your appearance, wear long wigs and fake boobs…
    or, just leave this effing country. So out of control; everyone should be afraid, not just RSO’s.

    What we’ve allowed this government in moderation, they’ve taken to excess. It’s not going to stop.

  5. Tim

    The very premise of these recognition programs is false. You are overwhelmingly more likely to be harmed, sexually or otherwise, by someone you already know. They’re going to profit on the stranger danger myth. Again we are treated like commodities, not human beings, this time to sell product. Corrupt.

  6. Tim

    Which brings me to another thought. We should sue them for royalties for using our status, and get a share of the profits.

Leave a Reply

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  • We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

.