[firediamond]

I had that thought when I heard about gait recognition too, and I'm still curious if the general counterpoint is the same as the next thought I had, or unrelated:

It seems surprisingly hard to spoof a limp (or any other biomechanic change, like randomly swapping shoe inserts or some prosthesis to change arm movement patterns or something), consistently, for an extended period. Also, painful. Also, noticeable to humans, like most MV-dodging techniques are.

[EdwardDiego]

An artificially induced limp is classic fieldwork from the "good ol days" of the Cold War.

What I've read of gait recognition though is that it's not so much about identifying you, as identifying someone walking "suspiciously" in a given area.

Or tracking a person where you can't see their face, based on their gait once recorded.

However, I haven't yet been able to find any papers that describe gait recognition with a subject consciously modifying their gait.

For example, when I'm stressed I tend to walk fast, but when I catch myself doing so, I will actively slow my pace down, and change the distance of my steps - like the old adage of "smiling makes you feel happy when you're not", I find deliberately slowing down my pace, and not taking such long strides, helps me calm myself - especially when combined with a focus on breathing.

What I can't find is any discussion of how existing gait analysis algorithms handle an observed subject deliberately varying their gait.

And what papers I can find on this are largely written by Chinese academics who don't find a 94% identification rate (leaving 6% false positive or negative) to be an issue, which I guess works in a totalitarian collectivist regime where an arrest on a false positive isn't considered a violation of human rights because, lol, human rights.

Which brings me, verbosely, to the academics researching this. How do they incorporate improving the surveillance capabilities of an oppressive government into their personal mores?

Do they take the stance that those doing nothing wrong have to nothing to be afraid of?

[xioxox]

A stone or insert in your shoe would probably work (albeit painfully). I don't think people would think you were actively dodging ML if you had a limp, unlike strange face painting or haircuts.

[EdwardDiego]

I've been looking into anti facial-recognition make up, and I wonder how much you'd have to apply to defeat the algorithm - like, would a line of make-up breaking up the contrast pit of an eye be sufficient?

And then there's reflectacles - glasses designed to reflect IR and visible light. I presume they'd mess with an algorithm, but could you code that algorithm to recognise them and raise a flag requiring human input?

Ah man, I love how the cyberpunk dystopian future of my youth has slowly arrived, sadly with less magic and orks, and last I checked, no shady street samurai in bars looking to hire me for my leet decker skills.

But you know, I live in CV beDazzled[1] hope.

[1]https://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2010-03/designer-a...

[peteretep]

Do you want to consistently change it for an extended period? You'd be better off changing it for small periods of time when you don't want to be recognized, and you can stick a stone in your shoe for that.