“We developed a deep neural network that maps the phase and amplitude of WiFi signals to UV coordinates within 24 human regions. The results of the study reveal that our model can estimate the dense pose of multiple subjects, with comparable performance to image-based approaches, by utilizing WiFi signals as the only input.”

  • EatATaco@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    it became understood that merely because someone can get a photo of you they have the legal right to do so.

    What jurisdiction is this true? There are certainly times that there is an expectation of privacy and getting a photo of you would be illegal. Easy example: and owner of a store can’t photo you in the dressing room, the even tho they could put a camera in there. It’s the same thing here, there is an expectation of privacy in your home (or for many enclosed and private spaces), so this kind of “picture” would likely already be a violation.

    • atrielienz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Just about all of them where the government is spying on their residents. Unless you think it’s alright if the government does it?

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The poster made the claim:

        it became understood that merely because someone can get a photo of you they have the legal right to do so.

        And now you’re talking about the government spying. Total non sequitur that has nothing to do with what I was discussing.