Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Senators say TSA's facial recognition program is out of control

gizmodo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 236 posts

Re: Senators say TSA's facial recognition program is out of control

#161

Post by shiroiushi »

godelski wrote: post #159
refurb wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is basically the intent of the structure of the US government. High degree of separation of powers (unlike most other democracies, the executive is separate from the legislative and there are two independent legislative bodies). High level of agreement across multiple bodies before a law can be passed (House, Senate and President). I thought Scalia's explanation was a good one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gg…

I agree, that its the intent. The downside of the US is that it moves slow. But the upside is that it’s the oldest country in the world if you measure by (codified) constitution. You might think European countries are older but Germany didn’t exist till the late 1940’s. If you really want to stretch it you can argue early 1800’s but that’s facetious. The point is to be highly distributed. Many keys to power. It makes…

>it’s the oldest country in the world if you measure by (codified) constitution

I think a better way of phrasing it might be "a continuous system of government". Germany certainly existed before the late 1940s, but the system of government was obviously very, very different.

Re: Senators say TSA's facial recognition program is out of control

#162

Post by shiroiushi »

bastardoperator wrote: post #95
xyst wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The selfie normalized public photography. Travel by plane/DMV applications normalized fingerprinting. What’s next? Semen and blood samples as well? The terrorists have won. Fear has ruled the major powers of the world. And the current major power of the free world is a puppet and an all around idiot.

Too late, I already gave the US government my DNA/reference via blood sample. The military has been doing that since the early 90's.

All Americans have DNA samples stored at an abandoned mine in West Virginia. The code to open the door is the first 5 digits of Euler's number: 27828.

Re: Senators say TSA's facial recognition program is out of control

#163

Post by bilekas »

godelski wrote: post #159
refurb wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is basically the intent of the structure of the US government. High degree of separation of powers (unlike most other democracies, the executive is separate from the legislative and there are two independent legislative bodies). High level of agreement across multiple bodies before a law can be passed (House, Senate and President). I thought Scalia's explanation was a good one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gg…

I agree, that its the intent. The downside of the US is that it moves slow. But the upside is that it’s the oldest country in the world if you measure by (codified) constitution. You might think European countries are older but Germany didn’t exist till the late 1940’s. If you really want to stretch it you can argue early 1800’s but that’s facetious. The point is to be highly distributed. Many keys to power. It makes…

> But the upside is that it’s the oldest country in the world if you measure by (codified) constitution.

Iceland would very much like a word about this. But your point in fair, maybe phrased a bit wrong.

Re: Senators say TSA's facial recognition program is out of control

#164

Post by shiroiushi »

abdullahkhalids wrote: post #107
aaomidi wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I’ve heard this a lot, but how can we actually test this? The only realistic test I can imagine here is that the TSA shuts down for a decade and we see what happens?

Because other forms of mass travel such as trains and buses, which barely have any security checks, rarely get blown up by bombs smuggled on to them, or hijacked by guns smuggled onto them.

That's because you can't really drive trains into buildings, and while you could technically do it with a bus, it's not that feasible nor that damaging. Flying a huge intercontinental airliner fully loaded with fuel into a building is quite different.

There's very good practical reasons the terrorists chose airplanes and not trains or buses.

Re: Senators say TSA's facial recognition program is out of control

#165

Post by shiroiushi »

sneak wrote: post #65
aaomidi wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I’ve heard this a lot, but how can we actually test this? The only realistic test I can imagine here is that the TSA shuts down for a decade and we see what happens?

They test the TSA with weapons and most get through. This means people don't wish to use weapons to hijack planes, or it would happen way more often and it doesn't.

It doesn't happen now, after 9/11. 9/11 was a one-time thing, and basically ruined airliner hijacking forever for other would-be hijackers. Before 9/11, people were taught to comply with hijackers because it was just a political stunt and people generally didn't get hurt. After 9/11, passengers will now fight for their lives because they'll assume the hijackers are religious kooks who intend to murder them all by flying them into a building. A few hijackers with razor blades today will be torn limb from limb by the other passengers.

Re: Senators say TSA's facial recognition program is out of control

#166

Post by eesmith »

chao- wrote: post #148
eesmith wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where is the line where you say "stop"? People started complaining about cameras, and airport id checks, and facial recognition, and REAL ID, and incentives like PreCheck to support mass fingerprinting for a decade or three. At some point the rubber band breaks, or at least one of the ropes snap.

For those of us that don't follow your train of logic, can you explain what it means for "the rubber band to break" or for "one of the ropes to snap"? Is there something specific you have in mind? Or is this a vague foreboding sense that something, somewhere will eventually go wrong?

These are metaphors for common events.

You're working for a client who wants some changes, and more changes, and more changes, and is difficult to work with. At some point you may have to fire the client. As a simile, this is like a rubber band being stretched to the breaking point.

Or, the new boss is a very bad manager. Some people quit to move to another job. Each one is a rope snapping. If enough ropes snap - if enough people quit and are not replaced fast enough - then that department can no longer function.

To clarify further, "rubber band to break" is because a rubber band can be stretched and stretched, but not without limit. Once it has reached its limit, it breaks with a snap, and cannot easily be fixed.

For the metaphor "one of the ropes to snap", think of a cargo net carrying a heavy load. Each rope has a different tensile strength, and the load is not perfectly balanced. It's possible for a heavy load to break one rope, but the net still hold because the load shifts onto the other ropes, which have reserve strength. However, this should be a warning, because as more ropes break the less reserve there is, until the net is no longer able to hold the cargo.

I don't know what you mean by "eventually will go wrong" in this context where several senators say that things have already gone wrong.

Re: Senators say TSA's facial recognition program is out of control

#167

Post by smolder »

refurb wrote: post #150
godelski wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For people unfamiliar with this topic, it is commonly referred to as "Turnkey Tyranny". It is about the belief that you "don't give Mr Rogers any power you wouldn't give to Hitler." Basically no matter how great you think your current leader is, you recognize that they will not be in power forever (or that they may not be good forever). Democracy, autocracy, oligarchy, whatever your system of government, there is a s…

This is basically the intent of the structure of the US government. High degree of separation of powers (unlike most other democracies, the executive is separate from the legislative and there are two independent legislative bodies). High level of agreement across multiple bodies before a law can be passed (House, Senate and President). I thought Scalia's explanation was a good one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gg…

That's the intent, but evidently, (and sadly,) it doesn't work how it should. There's too much influence from moneyed interests and just too much bad faith participation and gaming of the various processes. It was bad when I was born and it's gotten ever more corrupt and dysfunctional since.

Re: Senators say TSA's facial recognition program is out of control

#168

Post by raxxorraxor »

morpheuskafka wrote: post #69

I don't like TSA or the US security state, but I really find it hard to see why this has attracted so much attention. When you enter the airport, you're surrounded by cameras from numerous government and commercial entities, no doubt performing facial recognition. When you get to your destination, your photo will be taken by the destination country plus countless other surveillance cameras along the way. And unless y…

I don't fly anymore if I don't have to because of this security theatre, so the one thing it has a positive effect on is perhaps ecological. Otherwise it is completely hysterical, a remnant of some US lawmakers that wanted to look though at some point. It has grown and grown and just is a caricature of sensible security policies.

That autocratic states readily pick up on it should give you pause, but instead of questioning the efficiency of a security apparatus, it is excused because the status quo is already shitty.

Re: Senators say TSA's facial recognition program is out of control

#169

Post by numeri »

ibejoeb wrote: post #132
MarkMarine wrote: post #4

For this to work they must have already done facial recognition on everyone’s ID photos, so I fail to see what opting out even does for me from a privacy perspective. Seems like shutting the barn door after the horse is already out.

Sure, but I'm not going to help them by volunteering additional visual data. It's also political. I'm not participating. And then letter is correct. I had a guy retaliate for declining. He said I was making his job harder and that he'd make my life harder in return. I'm still waiting. Surely, as a TSA employee, he's got lots of connections in government. A lot of these people are unstable.

I've declined several times now, and have gotten harassed about it about 3/4 times. Whoever designed the program really did a good job getting buy-in from the lower-level employees.

Re: Senators say TSA's facial recognition program is out of control

#170

Post by numeri »

snakeyjake wrote: post #10
blackeyeblitzar wrote: post #2

I was shocked to see this program arrive in my local airport. I opt out every time, but the horrifying thing is that almost everyone simply complies with whatever is asked of them. The TSA agents use phrasing that make it seem like you are supposed to go through the facial recognition process and don’t have a choice. Yes, there are tiny signs scattered around that say you can opt out. But when the officer says “step…

Generally speaking you present ID to pass through security. The facial recognition is based on the biometric data collected when you got your ID, the ID you presented to pass through security. The ID with your name, address, date of birth, and uniquely identifying number on it. The ID which is associated with your boarding pass. The ID they scan (or they scan the boarding pass which is associated with your ID) prior…

The point of this program isn't that it makes things substantially quicker at the checkpoint – it is a minor speed-up at best. The goal is to normalize the collection of biometric data, to shift the Overton window of surveillance.
Post reply on HN