141–150 of 241 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s not about catching visa overstays on their way out. It’s about identifying who’s still here. Take the set of people who entered, subtract the set who exited, and anyone who remains who entered too long ago is an overstay.
You're math is fantastic.
https://medium.com/matter/how-i-requested-my-photographs-fro...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it really that useful to identify someone who has overstayed their visa when they are leaving the country ? Sure, you then know not to let them in next time. But it seems like a lot of effort when there are so many people overstaying their visa and not leaving out of the airports. That said, even as a libertarian, privacy-conscious person, I'm not sure I have a problem with exit controls like this. It's important…
> It's important to know who is crossing the border, in both directions. Why? And if there exists an important reason to know that someone is exiting the country does that same criterion not also apply to exiting a state or city or neighborhood? I am not being sarcastic; I am genuinely unable to come up with a reason it's important to track who leaves almost any place, except in highly unusual cases (e.g. "OK guys, c…
It is of course legitimate for a democracy to check things like which plants are coming across the border and to deny access or apprehend war criminals and the like. However, the USG does not have a current record of using its powers for good recently. Example: the muslim ban. Anyone who managed to get around that is a hero even if it was illegal because it's an immoral policy.
Tighter control means tighter control of dissent. Want to find that soldier with those leaked documents? Want to locate that journalist with news of unseemly interventions in central America? Want to find those people of the wrong race or religion that are the convenient scapegoat of the moment? Sure, let's make border control more precise. Most people are actually decent and should have default global freedom to move and work by birthright. US border control is about denying people entry, but the main effect is denying ordinary people with a minor effect of deterring crime.
Most relevant details, from the last link [1]: > It took her photo, comparing her picture to a preloaded photo databased of all the passengers with tickets on this flight, and then she got a check mark, indicating she was cleared to board. The whole process took about five to six seconds. > The Aruba experiment is expected to last somewhere between 45 and 90 days. > "We're basically capturing that picture at the boar…
I am not sure if passport photo is good enough for this. The mimimum requirement for face recognition is about 50 pixels between the eyes, and for reliable recognition it probably should be more. So the photo must come from somewhere else. For example, it could be taken when she passed the gates previous time.
My guess is the app probably just approved anyone or nearly anyone. It's unlikely someone without a boarding pass would try to get on and it's likely that anyone with a boarding pass who got disapproved would be pissed.
Or who knows, maybe homeland security did a mechanical Turk and had someone at the other end looking at faces and checking off names.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems to me that being opposed to someone breaking the law is not equivalent to being a sadistic xenophobe. Finding people who rob banks at some point and punishing them is of great interest to people fearful of robbers who like disrupting robbers’ lives for no practical purpose because they gain sadistic satisfaction from cruelly exercising power over other people.
I think the robbers argument isn't directly applicable because mere physical presence without committing a crime doesn't hurt anyone -- does it? I think Congress for all its flaws agrees, as simply being present and out of status in the US isn't a criminal matter, it's civil, and congress has repeatedly, and even recently, refused to change that classification. You punish a robber ostensibly to stop them from robbing…
There is nothing unique about the US in that regard. Most countries have a limit on how long you can visit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it really that useful to identify someone who has overstayed their visa when they are leaving the country ? Sure, you then know not to let them in next time. But it seems like a lot of effort when there are so many people overstaying their visa and not leaving out of the airports. That said, even as a libertarian, privacy-conscious person, I'm not sure I have a problem with exit controls like this. It's important…
> It's important to know who is crossing the border, in both directions. Why? And if there exists an important reason to know that someone is exiting the country does that same criterion not also apply to exiting a state or city or neighborhood? I am not being sarcastic; I am genuinely unable to come up with a reason it's important to track who leaves almost any place, except in highly unusual cases (e.g. "OK guys, c…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it really that useful to identify someone who has overstayed their visa when they are leaving the country ? Sure, you then know not to let them in next time. But it seems like a lot of effort when there are so many people overstaying their visa and not leaving out of the airports. That said, even as a libertarian, privacy-conscious person, I'm not sure I have a problem with exit controls like this. It's important…
Also, you need photo ID to fly and pass customs.
Most relevant details, from the last link [1]: > It took her photo, comparing her picture to a preloaded photo databased of all the passengers with tickets on this flight, and then she got a check mark, indicating she was cleared to board. The whole process took about five to six seconds. > The Aruba experiment is expected to last somewhere between 45 and 90 days. > "We're basically capturing that picture at the boar…
I am not sure if passport photo is good enough for this. The mimimum requirement for face recognition is about 50 pixels between the eyes, and for reliable recognition it probably should be more. So the photo must come from somewhere else. For example, it could be taken when she passed the gates previous time.
According to quick search there’s no specific resolution requirement for the image in biometric passport, but size should be min 12kB to have recognizable image.