And much like flawed facial recognition technology, I'm sure the police will misuse this to convict innocent people of crimes to keep the for-profit prison system full.
this post was submitted on 23 Jul 2025
112 points (100.0% liked)
Privacy
40315 readers
599 users here now
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don't promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Time to add a tinfoil suit to the hat!
You will look like a disco ball on the scanner. Haha
Hmm. I need a suit that looks like a stealth bomber.
So is this for the safety of the children, right?
/s
These are only going to get more accurate as time goes on, and we begin to use higher and higher frequencies. This works at 2.4 GHz, but would work better at 5 GHz, and would work even better at 6 GHz. The reason for this is that the higher the frequency is, the smaller it is, and therefore the more accurate it can be, and it requires more access point devices, which would make the signal stronger in an area with an access point.
Excerpt from the article:
The researchers... call their approach “WhoFi”, as described in a preprint paper titled, "WhoFi: Deep Person Re-Identification via Wi-Fi Channel Signal Encoding."
Who are you, really?
Re-identification, the researchers explain, is a common challenge in video surveillance. It's not always clear when a subject captured on video is the same person recorded at another time and/or place.
Re-identification doesn't necessarily reveal a person's identity. Instead, it is just an assertion that the same surveilled subject appears in different settings. In video surveillance, this might be done by matching the subject's clothes or other distinct features in different recordings. But that's not always possible.
The author asserts that re-identification doesn't necessarily reveal a person's identity, although I suppose this is similar to how a single fingerprint or DNA sample doesn't necessarily reveal a person's identity, right up until somebody can connect your fingerprint to your identity, say, by correlating your location with other tracking methods or something.