111–120 of 283 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why should they be publicly available and easily obtainable?
1. Most people already share this data in the form of photos posted online. 2. So people don't treat it as a "secure secret," because we've been down this road more than once before.
I think it's an interesting visual to compare the Stasi's rows of scent jars to data centers filled with banks of flash memory storing biometric data.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It'll be treated just as stupidly as Social Security numbers, and soon we'll have biometric data breaches. >sigh Aside: Social Security numbers should be public now, too. That ship sailed a long time ago and it should be recognized.
Hey now, at least I'm able to change my social security number and passwords. Good luck changing eyes.
One thing that i would prefer in biometrics would be that the iris/fingerprints get treated as what they are publicly available and easily obtainable data. At worst using it a a secret key is similar to using your name as a hidden variable for authorisation, whent it sshould strictly be a identification token.And once leaked you cant revoke it . Back on topic , a Gattaca type system is unbelievably bleak and when(not…
Why should they be publicly available and easily obtainable?
https://constella.ai/verifying-the-national-public-data-brea...
Did you know that the State of California has a DNA sample from every person born in the state since 1983? It's required by law for the hospital to collect it and give it to the state.
This is a particularly incendiary way of putting this information out there. What is collected and stored is a small blood-spot sample from a heel prick on a newborn. This is used to test for various kinds of conditions that affect newborns. This isn't a full DNA genome sequence or even any data at all, just the blood-spot specimen. Law enforcement does not have automatic access to this sample, but individual samples…
Then no, it wasn't an incendiary claim.
Did you know that the State of California has a DNA sample from every person born in the state since 1983? It's required by law for the hospital to collect it and give it to the state.
This is a particularly incendiary way of putting this information out there. What is collected and stored is a small blood-spot sample from a heel prick on a newborn. This is used to test for various kinds of conditions that affect newborns. This isn't a full DNA genome sequence or even any data at all, just the blood-spot specimen. Law enforcement does not have automatic access to this sample, but individual samples…
Then why do they keep the samples?
You can submit a public comment on the proposal to DHS at the link below: https://www.regulations.gov/document/USCIS-2025-0205-0002/co...
I suspect this government isn’t receptive to commentary from anyone other than only one person. While I’d never discourage anyone from advocating their beliefs this feels like at best a waste of energy. They are going to do it because they decided to do it - the solicitation of comments is performative and required. The only way to stop it is via the courts and by voting next November.
Name one government of the past 60 years that was.
Did you know that the State of California has a DNA sample from every person born in the state since 1983? It's required by law for the hospital to collect it and give it to the state.
This is a particularly incendiary way of putting this information out there. What is collected and stored is a small blood-spot sample from a heel prick on a newborn. This is used to test for various kinds of conditions that affect newborns. This isn't a full DNA genome sequence or even any data at all, just the blood-spot specimen. Law enforcement does not have automatic access to this sample, but individual samples…
Then I can easily guarantee you that individual samples have been given to law enforcement _without_ orders or warrants.
> There isn't a clear SOP for how law enforcement typically gets this information
Which means there is zero oversight, logging, or auditing.
One thing that i would prefer in biometrics would be that the iris/fingerprints get treated as what they are publicly available and easily obtainable data. At worst using it a a secret key is similar to using your name as a hidden variable for authorisation, whent it sshould strictly be a identification token.And once leaked you cant revoke it . Back on topic , a Gattaca type system is unbelievably bleak and when(not…
It'll be treated just as stupidly as Social Security numbers, and soon we'll have biometric data breaches. >sigh Aside: Social Security numbers should be public now, too. That ship sailed a long time ago and it should be recognized.