Some airport travelers, including a U.S. senator, are having trouble saying no to security technology that’s supposed to be voluntary.
I assumed your face gets scanned as soon as you walk into any airport
The Algorithmic Justice League, which opposes the TSA’s use of facial recognition[…]
the wat? lmao
Saying no I’ll bet increases the scrutiny that you’re going to get.
I go for the massage over the scanner and I’ve never been overly scrutinized.
These are TSA employees, not CBP.
You can also say no to a mugger. Giving them your wallet is entirely voluntary.
You can probably deduct it as a charitable donation on your taxes.
“Even a Senator had trouble saying no!”
The article says he said no, showed his ID (which is the standard) and went through as smoothly as usual. What’s the problem?
That he was lied to, that opting out would result in a significant delay before he made a decision.
So… Basically the same shit TSA has been doing since its inception?
Why would that matter? Your walking all the way through the airport, passing dozens of cameras.
Your ID has your picture on it. Do you refuse to have an ID? Honestly using facial recognition is better for security because it’s really hard to fake a face. Way harder than getting a SSN.
Once your face is scanned it is disseminated to several databases both Federal and State, which can be leaky. It can be passed around law enforcement circles, used on mesh camera networks to record movements in public (China is an example) and potentially used against you in ways you might not be aware of yet. The Chinese via tiktok and other sources such as hacking, are building dossiers on every American citizen they can get their hands on. The “it’s easy and I’ve got nothing to hide” rationale is what they’re banking on, makes their job really simple. Hell, people take fucking selfies and post them along with their name in the clear on the internet all time, those posts are scraped for security data and identity.
Ok you were doing good until younthre tik tok in. Wtf. Stay on target. And you picture is on your driver’s license, mandatory, it’s on your passport, mandatory, where do you think they get the facial recognition i.ages from. The government already has your face. Since 9/11, the government has thrown so many previously held privacy rules out the window it’s ridiculous, and you’re trying to make the correct argument. You need to step back and think deeper before you start fighting again. And yes people post more on Facebook than they give to the government, and that was voluntary so it’s all fair game. Make your argument more concise and you have the correct fight.
You can fuck aallll the way off with that condescending bullshit.
Ignore these dorm room philosophers. You are 100% correct. State and Federal agencies already have access to every photo ID.
It doesn’t matter that they can identify you slightly easier. Do you vote based on limiting police access to law enforcement databases? If you don’t vote based on this, your minor refusal to be photographed doesn’t mean anything.
It’s possible and often easy to make a counterpoint, especially a good one, without being an arsehole.
Your face in a billion person database as an identification factor is crap.
Scanning your face to Get in your iPhone is a no-brainer. The chances of someone having a false positive match against the people who might get your phone are slim. But when *they’re searching your face against a billion people for no fly targets… Let’s just say *there are profiling problems even in digital AI.
Then there’s the fact that very dark-skinned people end up having a lot of false positives and face recognition.
You might have walked past 100 cameras to get to the TSA but none of those cameras were wired up directly to a task force that wants to handcuff you to a chair if you maybe look kind of like someone who did something bad once.
edit: voice dictate corrections
Yeah, low contrast is a bitch for ai. Darker skin folks are going to have problems with AI as it is currently. Hopefully, devs will figure it out soon.
Jepp, cameras in general are optimised to take pictures of light skinned people.
Jepp?
Also not just light skinned people, pretty much anything with high contrast. Goes for actual eyes too, thats why text is often black on white, or white on black.
It’s it’s optional, what’s the problem if I decline?
If it’s not optional, don’t we deserve to know more information about how this data is used and stored? It’s clearly not just taking a picture.
Because giving them the ability to do so is inherently dangerous. When a government or corporation asks “can we further our ability to track your every move? We pinky promise not to use it for evil”, they are invariably lying.
It’s happened every single time. Expecting tjat to change is the literal definition of insanity
and yet facial recognition misidentifies a lot of people every year and turns their lives upside down. To much trust it put into the system and not enough oversight on what the system kicks out. Until that is fixed it’s a flawed system that has no place in society.
