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

Federal civil rights watchdog sounds alarm over Feds use of facial recognition

therecord.media

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 151 posts

Re: Federal civil rights watchdog sounds alarm over Feds use of facial recognition

#31

Post by AlbertCory »

The issue with governments implementing mass warrantless surveillance is not training or standards, NIST or otherwise.

It should be straight-out illegal. Governments do not have "free speech" rights.

As for private citizens doing it: I think there are already sufficient laws about recording people without their consent. You can hire someone to stand on a corner and watch for a specific person to walk by, but a law prohibiting you from recording everyone who walks by is most likely going to withstand a court review. It's a question of scale.

Re: Federal civil rights watchdog sounds alarm over Feds use of facial recognition

#32

Post by whimsicalism »

curiouscavalier wrote: post #13
BadHumans wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I flew recently and didn't opt out. If you have a passport or a state ID, any federal agency has you in the system already. What good would avoiding this particular picture do?

Are they basic RGB cameras or do they collect depth as well? Would even know if they decided to change the system to start collecting depth data, even if comparisons are to flat images? Honest questions, as that’s where my concerns are. Boil the frog. If they start to collect more, it’s not as simple as “they already have my picture.” Should there be a breach, I can’t easily change my face. I’m generally of the opini…

the ones i’ve seen claim they aren’t storing the data after verifying the identity

Re: Federal civil rights watchdog sounds alarm over Feds use of facial recognition

#33

Post by mncharity »

mmooss wrote: post #4
blackeyeblitzar wrote: post #3

I was appalled to see TSA facial recognition scanners at airports recently, where instead of checking your ID and boarding pass they scan your face. Almost everyone simply accepted the new process instead of opting out. I’m not sure how the eventual forced violation of biometrics can be stopped when most people don’t care.

They don't understand and also they despair - both in part because the people who should help them (people like us) also buy into despair.

I wonder if there's a "missing infrastructure opportunity" here. An isolated individual opt-out has the uninspiring cost/risk-vs-benefit/principle tradeoff others have mentioned. But what if that equation could be shifted?

Perhaps "I'll do the scan just now, but also, while it has my motivation and attention, I'll press the easy button to donate $N to some org effectively fighting it". Or "I'll opt out, and press the easy button to encourage others with a somewhat-anonymized "I/someone at airline-or-city-or-region-or-occupation-or... just opted-out! N+1! - Yay future!" tweet/counter"?

Re: Federal civil rights watchdog sounds alarm over Feds use of facial recognition

#34

Post by vik0 »

AlbertCory wrote: post #31

The issue with governments implementing mass warrantless surveillance is not training or standards, NIST or otherwise. It should be straight-out illegal. Governments do not have "free speech" rights. As for private citizens doing it: I think there are already sufficient laws about recording people without their consent. You can hire someone to stand on a corner and watch for a specific person to walk by, but a law pr…

[flagged]

Re: Federal civil rights watchdog sounds alarm over Feds use of facial recognition

#35

Post by infamouscow »

beaglesss wrote: post #7

You have no right to privacy in public. If you make this illegal private companies will do it instead, and the first amendment makes that impossible to stop.

The fundamental flaw of cynicism is that it invariably opts for the path of least resistance—a facile dismissal rather than a constructive lens for genuine improvement. If an overwhelming majority—say, 80% of the populace—were deeply invested in this issue, they would elect representatives committed to outlawing it, and thus it would indeed become illegal.

The cynic might retort that such laws are perpetually vulnerable to subversion under the guise of national security. While there's a kernel of truth in that, it's equally undeniable that if 80% of the citizenry truly felt impassioned, any rogue elements within the government would face severe repercussions. Acts of retribution against such actors would not only be tolerated but perhaps even tacitly endorsed by the public.

Re: Federal civil rights watchdog sounds alarm over Feds use of facial recognition

#36

Post by frickinLasers »

rty32 wrote: post #17
blackeyeblitzar wrote: post #3

I was appalled to see TSA facial recognition scanners at airports recently, where instead of checking your ID and boarding pass they scan your face. Almost everyone simply accepted the new process instead of opting out. I’m not sure how the eventual forced violation of biometrics can be stopped when most people don’t care.

I wasn't "appalled" but definitely felt uneasy about it. I am aware I could opt out and read all the discussions about it here on HN. I didn't do anything about it, despite being a very privacy conscious person (using firefox, use max adblocking/anti tracking etc). Why? I don't want to be an asshole, hold the queue and cause trouble for a TSA agent who is just doing the job and likely have no idea what "opt out" mean…

I had a perfectly pleasant experience opting out. The agent simply smiled at me, asked a question to verify that I was the person on the ID I had handed him, and off I went.

It was much easier and less gropey than opting out of the mm wave scans.

Re: Federal civil rights watchdog sounds alarm over Feds use of facial recognition

#37

Post by beaglesss »

vik0 wrote: post #34
AlbertCory wrote: post #31

The issue with governments implementing mass warrantless surveillance is not training or standards, NIST or otherwise. It should be straight-out illegal. Governments do not have "free speech" rights. As for private citizens doing it: I think there are already sufficient laws about recording people without their consent. You can hire someone to stand on a corner and watch for a specific person to walk by, but a law pr…

[flagged]

Rights are 'god given.' IMO.

> Although it's a good thing that a good deal of Americans have plenty of guns to defend themselves (unlike us, who reside outside of the US)

Getting a gun is trivial about anywhere, btw, and in EU or latam ammunition enough for self defense is little trouble either. The fgc-9 and 'but what about ammo' are excellent education for curious Europeans.

In practice I assure you people don't notice one concealing a gun (especially in gun naive places) and for anyone who isn't a moron, it isn't pulled out unless they're trading a casket for a court docket.

Re: Federal civil rights watchdog sounds alarm over Feds use of facial recognition

#38

Post by beaglesss »

infamouscow wrote: post #35
beaglesss wrote: post #7

You have no right to privacy in public. If you make this illegal private companies will do it instead, and the first amendment makes that impossible to stop.

The fundamental flaw of cynicism is that it invariably opts for the path of least resistance—a facile dismissal rather than a constructive lens for genuine improvement. If an overwhelming majority—say, 80% of the populace—were deeply invested in this issue, they would elect representatives committed to outlawing it, and thus it would indeed become illegal. The cynic might retort that such laws are perpetually vulnera…

I'm of the opposite opinion,that recording is a liberty and the right to mass record and identify people is a healthy sign of private free speech rights. I feel banning it would be dystopic. Where I disagree is the use of government at all in many of the capacities taking advantage of this such as TSA, DHS, CBP etc as they are essentially unhinged violent pirates.

Re: Federal civil rights watchdog sounds alarm over Feds use of facial recognition

#39

Post by [deleted] »

vik0 wrote: post #34
AlbertCory wrote: post #31

The issue with governments implementing mass warrantless surveillance is not training or standards, NIST or otherwise. It should be straight-out illegal. Governments do not have "free speech" rights. As for private citizens doing it: I think there are already sufficient laws about recording people without their consent. You can hire someone to stand on a corner and watch for a specific person to walk by, but a law pr…

[flagged]

[deleted]

Re: Federal civil rights watchdog sounds alarm over Feds use of facial recognition

#40

Post by singleshot_ »

vik0 wrote: post #34
AlbertCory wrote: post #31

The issue with governments implementing mass warrantless surveillance is not training or standards, NIST or otherwise. It should be straight-out illegal. Governments do not have "free speech" rights. As for private citizens doing it: I think there are already sufficient laws about recording people without their consent. You can hire someone to stand on a corner and watch for a specific person to walk by, but a law pr…

[flagged]

When you laughed at the idea that the government has no speech rights, I almost thought you were about to say something coherent.
Post reply on HN