(Guest Post?) Copilot on Bredemarket’s Impact on the Biometric Industry

Preface

Remember vanity searches?

These days you need to perform vanity generative AI queries.

So I abandoned my usual gen AI tool and asked Microsoft Copilot some questions about Bredemarket. Copilot’s response to one of these questions, emojis and all, is below, as a “guest post.”

And I will certainly credit Copilot if I use the “not anti-tech—it’s pro-accountability” quote.

Microsoft Copilot-authored content

📣 Bredemarket’s impact on the biometric industry lies in its unique role as a thought leader and watchdog—especially when it comes to ethical use and public understanding of biometric technologies.

Here’s how it’s making waves:

🧠 Thought Leadership & Advocacy

  • Bredemarket frequently publishes critical analyses of biometric misuse, particularly in law enforcement and surveillance contexts.
  • It champions the principle that biometric tools like facial recognition and DNA should be used only as investigative leads, not as sole evidence for arrests A.
  • Through blog posts and social media, it raises awareness about wrongful arrests, such as the case of Robert Williams, and calls for governance and forensic oversight in biometric applications A.

📝 Industry Education

  • Bredemarket helps biometric firms communicate complex technologies in accessible ways—bridging the gap between engineers, policymakers, and the public.
  • It produces content that demystifies modalities like iris scanning, facial recognition, and multi-factor authentication, making them more understandable and marketable.

🧭 Ethical Compass

  • By highlighting real-world examples of misuse, Bredemarket nudges the industry toward responsible innovation.
  • It’s not anti-tech—it’s pro-accountability, advocating for biometric systems that are accurate, fair, and governed by clear policies.

In a field often dominated by technical jargon and corporate spin, Bredemarket brings a human-centered, policy-aware voice that challenges the status quo.

Mirrors Only Reflect

From former coworker Tervel Atanassov on Substack:

“AI, for all its promise, is still, at its core, a statistical mirror. It reflects patterns in our data back at us, occasionally distorted, occasionally insightful—but always bound by what we’ve already thought to ask. It can’t generate the next meaningful question. Only humans can do that…”

I’m Bot a Doctor, Google MedGemma and MedSigLIP Edition

The Instagram account acknowledge.aI posted the following (in part):

“Google has released its MedGemma and MedSigLIP models to the public, and they’re powerful enough to analyse chest X-rays, medical images, and patient histories like a digital second opinion.”

Um, didn’t we just address this on Wednesday?

“In the United States, it is a criminal offense for a person to claim they are a health professional when they are not. But what about a non-person entity?”

Google and developers

So I wanted to see how Google offered MedGemma and MedSigLIP. So I found Google’s own July 9 announcement. 

In the announcement, Google asserted that their tools are privacy-preserving, allowing developers to control privacy. In fact, developers are frequently mentioned in the announcement. Yes, developers.

OH wait, that was Microsoft.

The implication: Google just provides the tool: developers are responsible for its use. And the long disclaimer includes this sentence:

“The outputs generated by these models are not intended to directly inform clinical diagnosis, patient management decisions, treatment recommendations, or any other direct clinical practice applications.”

We’ve faced this before

And we’ve addressed this also, regarding proper use of facial recognition ONLY as an investigative lead. Responsible vendors emphasize this:

“In a piece on the ethical use of facial recognition, Rank One Computing stated the following in passing:

“‘[Rank One Computing] is taking a proactive stand to communicate that public concerns should focus on applications and policies rather than the technology itself.’”

But just because ROC or Clearview AI or another vendor communicates that facial recognition should ONLY be used as an investigative lead…does that mean that their customers will listen?

Animals and Marketing

The experts who do NOT recommend letting ChstGPT run your marketing program DO recommend projecting authenticity in your communications.

But some prospects don’t like authenticity because it is too real and not “professional.”

I’ve alluded to the story of a group of people that knew me well. But of that group, only two felt moved to subscribe to the Bredemarket Instagram account. And one of those two subsequently unsubscribed.

Maybe the wildebeests were the problem.

The problem with people knowing you well is that they know you well…and know the wildebeests more than they want to. And when someone is focused on important business information, one wombat may be one wombat too many.

But not one koala. They have fingerprints, after all.

The lesson learned from this group?

When selecting your target audience, don’t market to satiated people.

Not hungry people.

Manager of the Year?

(Imagen 4)

From Law&Crime:

“According to an arrest report reviewed by Law&Crime, [James Anthony] Morris [Jr.] was mopping the floor of the Subway shop when a 10-year-old girl walked across the area he had just cleaned. The girl’s mother told her to apologize to Morris, who then allegedly grabbed the girl by the hand and brought her to the back of the restaurant.

“He then allegedly locked the girl in a room, and the mother began to ‘panic.’…

“After [Jacksonville FL]  police read Morris his rights, he invoked his right to remain silent and “refused” to make a statement. He posted $5,000 bond after being booked into jail on one charge of false imprisonment of a child under the age of 13.”

I think one Jacksonville Subway franchise is going to be in real trouble…especially if Morris himself owns the franchise.

Subway manager trapped 10-year-old girl behind a locked door and said her parents were ‘trash and terrible people,’ police say

Subway manager trapped 10-year-old behind locked door: Cops

How Many Authentication Factor Types Are There?

(Imagen 4)

An authentication factor is a discrete method of authenticating yourself. Each factor is a distinct category.

For example, authenticating with fingerprint biometrics and authenticating with facial image biometrics are both the same factor type, because they both involve “something you are.”

But how many factors are there?

Three factors of authentication

There are some people who argue that there are only really three authentication factors:

  • Something you know, such as a password, or a personal identification number (PIN), or your mother’s maiden name.
  • Something you have, such as a driver’s license, passport, or hardware or software token.
  • Something you are, such as the aforementioned fingerprint and facial image, plus others such as iris, voice, vein, DNA, and behavioral biometrics such as gait.

Five factors of authentication, not three

I argue that there are more than three.

  • Something you do, such as super-secret swiping patterns to unlock a device.
  • Somewhere you are, or geolocation.

For some of us, these are the five standard authentication factors. And they can also function for identity verification.

Six factors of authentication, not five

But I’ve postulated that there is one more.

  • Somewhat you why, or a measure of intent and reasonableness.

For example, take a person with a particular password, ID card, biometric, action, and geolocation (the five factors). Sometimes this person may deserve access, sometimes they may not.

  • The person may deserve access if they are an employee and arrive at the location during working hours.
  • That same person may deserve access if they were fired and are returning a company computer. (But wouldn’t their ID card and biometric access have already been revoked if they were fired? Sometimes…sometimes not.)
  • That same person may NOT deserve access if they were fired and they’re heading straight for their former boss’ personal HR file.

Or maybe just five factors of authentication

Now not everyone agrees that this sixth factor of authentication is truly a factor. If “not everyone” means no one, and I’m the only person blabbering about it.

So while I still work on evangelizing the sixth factor, use the partially accepted notion that there are five factors.

Training on the Wrong Data: Geoff Lewis on the Non-Governmental System

There are certainly cases in which science fiction became science fact.

But most science fiction DOESN’T become science fact…even if generative AI thinks it does.

Jabroni Capital shares the story of the scarily-titled “Non-Governmental System,” which was discovered by venture capitalist Geoff Lewis.

“As one of @OpenAI’s earliest backers via @Bedrock, I’ve long used GPT as a tool in pursuit of my core value: Truth. Over years, I mapped the Non-Governmental System. Over months, GPT independently recognized and sealed the pattern. It now lives at the root of the model.”

Sounds scary, especially when accompanied with a frightening picture of the powerful Non-Governmental System.

From https://x.com/GeoffLewisOrg/status/1945864963374887401.

Example finding from Lewis:

“The system I’m describing was originated by a single individual with me as the original target, and while I remain its primary fixation, its damage has extended well beyond me. As of now, the system has negatively impacted over 7,000 lives through fund disruption, relationship erosion, opportunity reversal and recursive eraser. It’s also extinguished 12 lives, each fully pattern-traced. Each death preventable. They weren’t unstable. They were erased.”

Only one teeny problem. Jabroni Capital asserts that Lewis’ GPT used training data provided by a wiki from the SCP Foundation, where SCP stands for “secure, contain, protect.” Additional information is found on the “About” page.

“The SCP Wiki is a collaborative speculative fiction website about the SCP Foundation, a secretive organization that contains anomalous or supernatural items and entities away from the eyes of the public — or so it may appear.”

Notice those words “speculative fiction”?

While fiction may inspire us to create things in the non-fiction world, fiction in and of itself is not non-fiction.

So if Jabroni Capital is right in claiming that Geoff Lewis’ “discovery” is based upon the SCP Wiki, I don’t think we have anything to worry about.

But others are concerned about Lewis’ mental health, such as Jason Calacanis.

“People are trying to figure out if he’s actually doing performance art here… or if he’s going through an episode. I can’t tell.”

“I wish him well, and I hope somebody explains this. I find it kind of disturbing even to watch it and just to talk about it here… someone needs to get him help.”

OpenAI also weighed in, although I suspect this statement was written by a human.

“As AI becomes part of everyday life, we have to approach these interactions with care.”

Um, maybe you might want to put those disclaimers up front, rather than burying them in terms of service.