this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2024
629 points (97.6% liked)

Technology

58092 readers
3147 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
  • Travelers can opt out of facial recognition at US airports by requesting manual ID verification, though resistance or intimidation may occur.
  • Facial recognition poses privacy risks, including potential data breaches, misidentification, and normalization of surveillance.
  • The Algorithmic Justice League's "Freedom Flyers" campaign aims to raise awareness of these issues and encourage passengers to exercise their right to opt out.
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] player2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You're already on hundreds of cameras by walking into any airport in the world. Do they need your consent to run facial recognition software on the security footage?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MajorHavoc@programming.dev 11 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Facial recognition poses privacy risks, including potential data breaches,

I know you're using the acceptable legal term.

As a Cybersecurity person, the "potential" data breaches we talk about, today, are really pretty certain, at this point, in history.

We may work towards a collective genuine 'potential', where the breach might never happen, someday, with effort.

Turns chair around and sits straddling it like a cool youth mentor.

Y'alls faces at airports are definitely getting leaked on the dark web.

The good news is it might take enough years to leak that your appearance might happen to change in between.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 month ago (6 children)
[–] Kolrami@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Hour vs. hour it's the best form of transportation

You get more space, there's no TSA, you don't get charged for bringing luggage, you can carry on liquids, you get leg room, the wifi is decent.

But if I'm traveling a really far distance... For example, if I'm going from California to New York I'd rather go by plane. Going by train for that seems to be pretty horrible. America is in desperate need of a ground transportation that can get from California to New York quickly.

[–] Liz@midwest.social 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If we put in a mag-lev system that averages 250 mph from station to station, an overnight sleeper train across the country becomes extremely attractive.

[–] Chee_Koala@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

There is a sleeper train from Amsterdam to Vienna, last 2 / 3 years I checked it was sold out almost everyday. It seems like the perfect mode of transport

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Fades@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

They are very much incomparable more so than they are comparable. Try taking a train over a sea or across a country like the US.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] NewAgeOldPerson@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I went thru naturalization process. They have everything already. Including DNA, retina scan, etc. So I opted for Clear. Global Entry as well. They have it all already. May as well fast track going thru customs.

[–] WolfLink@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Clear is run by a 3rd party company. TSA pre-check is run by the government. TSA pre-check comes free with Global Entry, you just need to sign up for it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ealoe@ani.social 8 points 1 month ago (5 children)

Dumbass article, if you go to an airport your face is all over the security cameras and the checkpoints delete your image immediately after scanning so they are the least of your worries.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 7 points 1 month ago (6 children)

Poison pill their data instead.

  1. Go to www.thispersondoesnotexist.com

  2. Generate a person

  3. Print it

  4. Scan it when asked for facial data

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Simply stand away from the camera or keep your face covered with a mask, present your ID, and say, “I opt out of biometrics. I want the standard verification process.”

This sounds like a great way for a SovCit to get a full ass inspection from a sausage-fingered security guard.

The best you're going to get is redirected to a very long queue of people who's passports don't have biometrics.

[–] BetterDev@programming.dev 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (6 children)

Actually no, they look at your face and your ID, make sure the information matches, and move you along. No secondary inspection, no difference except you didn't get scanned with facial recognition. It's the same process as before facial recognition was implemented.

Why even write that comment?

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago (6 children)

Reflectacles are a really good idea if you're going this route. They can ID you with just an eye scan, and this interferes with that.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] King3d@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I refuse to go through the body scanners, but the last time I went through the airport there wasn’t anyone trying to opt-out. I seriously doubt if the radiation perv scanner doesn’t get people to do anything, this won’t either.

[–] Aganim@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

I seriously doubt if the radiation perv scanner doesn’t get people to do anything

You mean the backscatter X-ray units that have already been phased out 10 years ago?

The modern milimeter-wave scanners both do not reveal anything and do not use ionising radiation. If radiation is a concern to you, you really shouldn't be flying at all to be honest. The dose you get up there is much higher than you'd get from an X-ray scanner, although it is still negligible.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›