You Can Say No To a TSA Face Scan. But Even a Senator Had Trouble. (washingtonpost.com) 127
An anonymous reader shares a report: On his way to catch a flight, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) was asked to have his photo taken by a facial recognition machine at airport security. The Transportation Security Administration has been testing use of facial recognition software to verify travelers' identification at some airports. Use of the technology is voluntary, the TSA has told the public and Congress. If you decline, a TSA agent is supposed to verify your identification, as we have done at airport security for years. When Merkley said no to the face scan at Washington's Reagan National Airport, he was told it would cause a significant delay, a spokeswoman for the senator said. There was no delay. The spokeswoman said the senator showed his photo ID to the TSA agent and cleared security.
Is facial recognition technology really voluntary if a United States senator has trouble saying no? The TSA is using facial recognition technology for a limited purpose that the agency says is accurate. As flying reaches record highs again this summer, the technology could improve safety and efficiency with fewer risks than controversial uses of facial recognition such as police trying to identify crime suspects from vast numbers of images. But problems encountered by Merkley and others raise questions about whether the technology can be used fairly and how far it might spread in American life without true oversight.
Is facial recognition technology really voluntary if a United States senator has trouble saying no? The TSA is using facial recognition technology for a limited purpose that the agency says is accurate. As flying reaches record highs again this summer, the technology could improve safety and efficiency with fewer risks than controversial uses of facial recognition such as police trying to identify crime suspects from vast numbers of images. But problems encountered by Merkley and others raise questions about whether the technology can be used fairly and how far it might spread in American life without true oversight.
Ha! (Score:2)
TFS/A used the words TSA and oversight.
Just Another Form (Score:5, Insightful)
Just another form of that old line Your papers PLEASE.
And the summary and the news report are trying to create a problem where that was no problem for the Senator. The process worked as designed...
...but I am not saying this process and this technology are good things. Quite the contrary. This entire concept is Orwellian in nature.
Re: (Score:2)
Just another form of that old line Your papers PLEASE.
To be fair, you're legally required to prove your identity to get on a commercial flight.
This entire concept is Orwellian in nature.
No argument here.
Re:Just Another Form (Score:5, Insightful)
"To be fair, you're legally required to prove your identity to get on a commercial flight."
This is already a broken security concept built on a trust model. They are already confirming you aren't a threat to the flight so it really shouldn't matter who you are. The real reason they do this is to track the movements of the population without warrants.
Re:Just Another Form (Score:4, Insightful)
Given that airline ticket information is available to the government (in fact, available from the point you buy that airline ticket with a credit/debit card, so way before travel), I don't think they really need to check ids to track anyone.
Re: (Score:3)
"Given that airline ticket information is available to the government (in fact, available from the point you buy that airline ticket with a credit/debit card, so way before travel), I don't think they really need to check ids to track anyone."
No offense but you obviously don't think about systems in terms of security and exploitation. If they don't check ID's then they don't know if the person who purchased the ticket is the one who traveled or if the owner of the credit/debit card is even the one who actua
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Just Another Form (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Not to mention that people buy tickets for other people all the time, especially in a business.
Re: (Score:2)
Just because they know who bought the ticket doesn't mean that they know who's boarding the flight. I could buy a ticket, showing my ID, and hand it off to somebody on the No Fly List. From a security standpoint, just knowing who bought the ticket isn't enough.
I have never, anywhere in the world, been asked for ID to board a domestic flight... besides that it would be the airline asking airport security. AFAIK, DCA is entirely domestic. Last time I flew a cheap carrier (EasyJet) I didn't even speak to a single person until I arrived in Germany. Checked in online, scanned my boarding card to get airside, scanned it again to board... Didn't really need anything from the cabin crew on the short flight, first person I had to speak to was the nice German at the EU bo
Re: (Score:3)
They still need to verify that the person boarding the aircraft is the person who actually purchased the ticket, due to any number of scenarios where a person disallowed from flying (no-fly list, banned from an airline for violating FAA rules, etc.) doesn't have someone else buy the ticket and hand it to them.
It's the old authentication != authorization chestnut. Authorization comes from having the valid ticket, and authentication comes from matching the name on the ticket to a valid photo ID presented by
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe people shouldn't be disallowed from flying in the first place, as long as they can pass the usual checks for weapons and dangerous items.
Have you seen stories like this [independent.co.uk]? Or about the guy on the flight to South Korea that opened the emergency exit door while the plane was on approach? Airlines and passengers have a vested interest in preventing some people from flying, even if they don't have a weapon on them.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes and I don't give a rat's ass.
Neither incident risked causing a catastrophe. Opening an emergency exit at altitude wouldn't have worked. If he had got it open on landing and fallen out, he'd have just killed himself - no big deal.
Should we also have "no ride lists" for commuter trains because people can get drunk and unruly?
Re: (Score:2)
Should we also have "no ride lists" for commuter trains because people can get drunk and unruly?
If you get drunk and inappropriately pull the emergency stop on a train, yeah, I'd be alright with the operator banning you from future travel. Actions have consequences.
Re: (Score:2)
Funny, all of the replies missed my point :) I am not advocating for not checking ids here. I am merely stating that the government can track travelers without the need to check ids, and therefore it is unlikely that that is the purpose of TSA.
As far as checking ids goes, the airlines would do it regardless, due to simple commercial requirements, because if they did not - indeed a wrong person could fly, resulting in various commercial losses (stolen ticket, theft of services such as elite benefits, etc).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Funny, all of the replies missed my point :) I am not advocating for not checking ids here. I am merely stating that the government can track travelers without the need to check ids, and therefore it is unlikely that that is the purpose of TSA.
No, you missed their point, which is that knowing who bought the ticket doesn't tell you much about who is traveling. You can't track people if you don't know who actually gets on the plane.
But the TSA didn't create the ID requirement anyway. Airlines did that themselves a couple of decades before 9/11. They did it so they could more effectively price-discriminate. Charging different prices to different people is hard if there's a secondary market in airline tickets, which there was. It was common for peo
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Just Another Form (Score:4, Insightful)
Unless the person on bail is a danger to the aircraft (in which case, they probably shouldn't be out on bail), I say let them fly domestically ... the purpose of the TSA is to prevent damage to aircraft and hijacking, not to enforce bail laws.
Should we also require ID checks to take buses or trains between states because someone MIGHT use them to jump bail?
Re: (Score:3)
The real reason they do this is to track the movements of the population without warrants.
Possibly, but the real reason is enforcement of the "no-fly list" - if you've done something that gets your name on the list, then they need to actually make sure you're not flying and the only way to do that is to be checking everyone's identification.
Now, there can be a robust debate over whether the "no-fly list" should exist or not; but it does exist and there is funding for enforcement, so enforcement there will be. And there can be debate over whether there are un-stated "out-of-band goals" to collec
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if you want to believe that the TSA is looking out for your best interests, then that is probably the case. For the rest of us realists that have seen how the US government actually operates, there can be secondary uses for the data being collected while fulfilling the publicly stated primary purpose.
I didn't say that's the only thing they're doing with it. I said that's the reason for it. The government is really good at having one legitimate purpose for doing a thing, and then a whole lot of ques
Re: (Score:2)
You can fly without ID. It means they pat you down and go through your bags.
Re: (Score:2)
You can fly without ID. It means they pat you down and go through your bags.
Not really. Various sources say you will not be allowed to fly if your identity cannot be verified. According to Google US fly without ID [google.com] and the TSA [tsa.gov]: (Lists various acceptable IDs.):
Adult passengers 18 and older must show valid identification at the airport checkpoint in order to travel. ... In coordination with its DHS counterparts, TSA has identified acceptable alternate identification for use in special circumstances at the checkpoint.
Also Can You Fly If Your Driver’s License or ID Card Was Lost or Stolen? [corporatet...safety.com] and How to fly without an ID [skyscanner.com] (from the latter):
Can you fly domestically without an ID?
The short answer is yes.
If you’re catching a domestic flight within the US and your ID is lost, stolen, or you left it at home, you might be in luck. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has other ways of confirming your identity using publicly available databases, so there’s a good chance you’ll be allowed on your flight.
First, though, you’ll need to complete an identity verification process with a TSA officer—so arrive at the airport well ahead of your flight’s scheduled departure time for the best chance of making it for take-off. (We’d recommend at least two hours ahead.) The TSA officer will ask for info, including your name, current address and other personal details that can be used to confirm that you are who you say you are. The process could take a while.
If they’re able to confirm your identity against a database, you’ll be allowed through to the security screening. (You’ll get a boarding pass with a note on it explaining that you don’t have an ID).
If, however, your identity can’t be verified, they’ll have no choice but to turn you away.
Re: (Score:2)
I thought you just have to have access to a private, non-commercial plane.
Re: (Score:2)
"To be fair, you're legally required to prove your identity to get on a commercial flight."
Not really. Otherwise if you ever lost your ID in a far away city, you'd never be able to return home. You have to go through extra interrogation to get through security, but you CAN travel without ID in the US, even via commercial airlines.
Re: (Score:2)
"To be fair, you're legally required to prove your identity to get on a commercial flight."
Not really. Otherwise if you ever lost your ID in a far away city, you'd never be able to return home. You have to go through extra interrogation to get through security, but you CAN travel without ID in the US, even via commercial airlines.
As I noted here [slashdot.org] you have to be able to verify your identity to fly domestically. The TSA will accept various forms of identification and can try to otherwise verify your identity (after you fill out a form, get there really early), but if they can't, you can't fly (according to the TSA website).
Re: (Score:2)
Correct. As usual, everyone is wrong, except maybe the senator. Then again, he voted for all that crap.
Re: (Score:3)
Just another form of that old line Your papers PLEASE.
And the summary and the news report are trying to create a problem where that was no problem for the Senator. The process worked as designed...
...but I am not saying this process and this technology are good things. Quite the contrary. This entire concept is Orwellian in nature.
The thing is, this stuff can be used to easily automate what has traditionally been a terrible burden. In many countries, the UK and Australia included we now have automated immigration gates (A.K.A. Smartgates) where I just scan my passport, it takes my picture and fingerprints then lets me through. I can land at Heathrow (that's in London) from anywhere in the world and be kurbside in just 30 mins... And I'm not even on a UK passport, I'm one of the 12 nations and customs unions that can also use these ga
Eternal vigilance is the price we pay for liberty (Score:5, Insightful)
Good on the Senator for sayin' no.
Obvious that "it will cause a significant delay" is a bullshit, scare tactic. Every time I've gone through the line, it takes on the close order of 10-15 seconds for the agent to scan my ID (they don't use the boarding passes anymore), and do a peek check (mask down for a moment, if wearing one).
So either TSA has to admint that the manual ID to face veritication is not effective, or they have to admint that the primary goal of facial recognition is NOT security.
Or they can continue to bullshit us. I'm betting on this one.
We all need to keep our bullshit smeller in peak condition, maintain it regularly. Otherwise we're doomed.
Re: (Score:2)
TSA agents are the greatest threat to airport security insofar as weapons, drug smuggling and theft and does absolutely nothing [politico.com] to stop the threats it was intended to combat.
The primary goal of the TSA isn't security, it's money for the "security" industrial complex mixed with control of the populace. So many encroachments on our 4th amendment rights just in the name of money.
Re: (Score:3)
I did not argue that TSA is (or should be) the ones to be vigilant. Quite the opposite. Every person subject to their actions are the ones who should be vigilant.
Re:Eternal vigilance is the price we pay for liber (Score:5, Insightful)
This isn't even close to sufficient level of protest. The government isn't supposed to know where we travel especially within our own borders. It does not take knowing who someone is to confirm they have no weapons or explosives or otherwise. Also, the entire premise is security theater and their current method makes the carnage even worse (human toll wise). If someone wants to wear an explosive vest and detonate on a plane, they take out the planes passengers and the plane. This stupid security theater just moves that point to the security line. Now someone can just detonate and line and take out MULTIPLE PLANE worth of travelers waiting in the security line to be groped and personally identified. Fuck that and them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
You didn't read (and heed) my sig. I never said nor implied that they would have. My comment was only in response to:
Again, that's completely true and objectively worse. However, again (and this is my only point) having a plane used as a projectile weapon is emotionally worse fo
Re: (Score:2)
You mean they're violating my 2nd Amendment rights too?!
Re: Eternal vigilance is the price we pay for libe (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The government isn't supposed to know where we travel especially within our own borders.
That ship sailed long ago. Ever noticed a growing array of cameras atop your stop lights in the USA? One of those is called an "ALPR" or Automated License Plate Reader. Between those and your cell phone, the government, and a number of other parties, have a pretty detailed view of where you were at any given time.
Re:Eternal vigilance is the price we pay for liber (Score:4, Insightful)
Can you cite either legislative or judicial law which supports this?
How about the United States Constitution, specifically the Ninth and Tenth Amendments?
9th: https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/amendment-9/ [congress.gov]
10th: https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/amendment-10/ [congress.gov]
Re: (Score:3)
Don't forget the first Amendment!
Someone really needs to push a case based on our explicit right to peaceably to assemble. Arguably the *government* should not without due process of law be able to restrict anyone from at-the-very-list domestic travel. Given you can find yourself on the no-fly list without any convictions, or warrants issued, its unclear how it can be Constitutional. What if I want to go to an event in Washington DC, the at 8am day and I am in Phoenix AZ currently and its 6pm?
Only way I
Re: (Score:2)
OP's original quote: The government isn't supposed to know where we travel especially within our own borders
OK, then. Assuming that the federal government (assuming this is what the OP meant) doesn't stop me from travelling within the US, they just know where I'm going, what right of mine does that infringe upon?
I'm not trolling, I'm genuinely asking. For the sake of discourse.
Re: (Score:3)
Courts have rules in the past that the 4th Amendment carries an implicit right to privacy.
Sadly, in the "Land of the Free", legislators haven't enshrined an EXPLICIT right to privacy into law -- the EU is actually much better than the US in this respect.
Re: (Score:2)
Can you cite either legislative or judicial law which supports this?
How about the United States Constitution, specifically the Ninth and Tenth Amendments?
"The Constitution is just an outdated and antiquated piece of paper written by slave owners and it currently inhibits efficient government. It actually allows people to own weapons (2nd Amenmendment)! What an ancient concept."
Re: (Score:2)
Good on the Senator for sayin' no.
Obvious that "it will cause a significant delay" is a bullshit, scare tactic.
Old man yells at airport screen. Someone mumbles "OK, Boomer" and checks his ID. How in the hell is this a "news" story?
"Is facial recognition technology really voluntary if a United States senator has trouble saying no?"
Give me a fucking break. The senator had "trouble" in an airport about as much as a porn star has "trouble" getting laid. Hell, who needs facial recognition when the brainwashing works this well.
Re: Eternal vigilance is the price we pay for libe (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So either TSA has to admint that the manual ID to face veritication is not effective, or they have to admint that the primary goal of facial recognition is NOT security.
That doesn't follow.
If we assume that manual face verification has a significant and useful level of effectiveness, there are still reasons why they might want to deploy automated systems. The most obvious is the reason for nearly all automation: It's cheaper. It may be just as good, or it may even be slightly worse, if it's much cheaper it may still make sense.
Another one is that perhaps the automated system is better. This isn't as inconceivable as it might sound. While the human brain is crazy good a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I appear to have been partially quoted, thus leading to a diminuation of context. Care to try again without the cherry-picking?
Can't see the forest, for the trees? (Score:5, Insightful)
Abolish the TSA. That's the correct solution.
Seriously, I can board a train, a subway or a local bus full of (often kind of sketchy looking) passengers, or get on a cruise ship and nobody's making me go through these long lines where they want to x-ray my things, have me step through body scanners, get my ID verified against some secret "no fly" list, etc. etc. Never felt particularly unsafe doing any of these things, and I wouldn't for boarding a plane either.
When you look at the tests run where people purposely tried to get past airport security with weapons and other "can't take on board" items, they were successful in the vast majority of cases. The TSA utterly failed to catch this in any meaningful way.
We're wasting all these tax dollars on the charade and we've normalized it to the point most people just accept the madness as "the way it has to work", at this point.
Re: (Score:2)
Abolish the TSA. That's the correct solution.
I 100% agree. It's going to be an uphill battle, but I agree, and will continue to do what I can to help make this happen.
In the mean time, those who want/need to fly have to deal with it. I encourage everyone to evaluate for themselves how best that's done. However that is, everyone should understand their rights, and stand up for themselves if those rights are being infringed upon.
Re: (Score:2)
I 100% agree. It's going to be an uphill battle
I agree, too, but it's not just an uphill battle, it's a lost cause. Not only will approximately all voters think that abolishing the TSA is a bad idea, even if you could convince enough of them (and you can't), no politician is going to take the political risk associated with an action like that.
Security measures basically never go away, because if they're left in place the harm (some money spent) is fairly invisible and doesn't generate much negative attention, but if they're taken away and then somethi
Re: (Score:2)
they were successful in the vast majority of cases
That you've been told about. These "we tried to take a gun on a plane, you'll never guess what happened" shock stories don't paint a complete picture. The TSA in America stops upwards of 6000 weapons being brought incorrectly on planes every year.
But really the problem here is one made from convenience. Your ID used to get checked when a ticket was issued. You can now do that yourself, so you've bypassed a check that has existed since long before the TSA was introduced.
I mean still fuck the TSA and the enti
Re:Can't see the forest, for the trees? (Score:4, Insightful)
The TSA in America stops upwards of 6000 weapons being brought incorrectly on planes every year.
Does that include granny's knitting needles? In any case, this could be like law enforcement intercepting and confiscating "X tons" of drugs every year - Never mind that the actual amount smuggled in every year is 10X.
There are millions of flights a year. 853 million passengers in the USA alone, apparently. And they're only catching 6k or so?
The real change that increased security wasn't the TSA. It was the change that the passengers on a flight will kick the shit out of anybody who causes trouble now, along with reinforced cockpit doors.
Re:Can't see the forest, for the trees? (Score:5, Funny)
Does that include granny's knitting needles?
What if she's trying to knit an afghan? :-)
Re: (Score:3)
It used to be, when you got printed tickets from the ticket counter or the travel agent, they would only check your ticket at the boarding gate. The ticket counter might verify your ID for the credit card if you bought it at the airport. When I started flying for work in the 80s, you already had to walk through a metal detector and show your ticket to get in, and they also x-rayed your checked and carry-on luggage. There was no checking ID when the ti
Re: (Score:2)
The TSA in America stops upwards of 6000 weapons being brought incorrectly on planes every year.
6000+ based on what numbers? Self-reported numbers by the TSA who says "trust me"?
Also, in this context, define "weapons".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When you look at the tests run where people purposely tried to get past airport security with weapons and other "can't take on board" items, they were successful in the vast majority of cases. The TSA utterly failed to catch this in any meaningful way.
For example, I did this completely accidentally. I few no less than 3 times with 3 throwing knives in my carryon.
Okay, the story: Deployed military, packing up for returning home. I had managed to get a set of engraved throwing knives as a souvenir. I'm going home on a military flight, so no care at all about weapons in my "carryon". I mean, it's not like I don't have a M-4 assault rifle, M-9 handgun, etc... So I find a pocket in my backpack that the knives slide right into.
Que getting home exhausted
Re: (Score:2)
That just illustrates the futility of banning knives on airplanes. Shit, they can't even keep shanks out of American prisons, even with far tighter security than airports have.
Keep them in jobs (Score:2)
We're wasting all these tax dollars on the charade.
This is an important point. I had a friend who didn't like using the E-passport gates. When he went to the border agent to get his passport manually checked, the agent asked him why he wouldn't use the gates and he responded with 'to keep you guys in work'. The agent didn't ask him any more questions.
I know the TSA don't have a sense of humour, but I wonder if such a response might smooth your path through the manual check.
Re: (Score:2)
Just to be pedantic, Cruise ships do have security. Everyone goes through a WTMD when they board, and then again when they return at all ports of call.
The luggage is also scanned (when they take it from you at check in, before it is delivered to your cabin).
*Some* security is definitely needed on public transportation. The question is how much is enough.
Personally, I have a lot less issues with face recognition (my photo is already on the ID I present) than I do with "nudoscopes" used to scan travelers. The
Re: (Score:2)
Just to be pedantic, Cruise ships do have security. Everyone goes through a WTMD when they board, and then again when they return at all ports of call.
Yeah, but cruise ships are really looking for people smuggling *alcohol* aboard.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No body scanners involved, but last time I rode Amtrack, they did check my ID against the ticket and x-ray my things as I was boarding.
There were also long lines, but that was because of late
Re: (Score:2)
Out of curiosity, which station had bag x-rays? I've never seen this in any station in the Northeast, which are the busiest parts of the system. The only ID check I've had was a passport check for the Toronto train.
Also, many stations have a way to bypass the Kindergarten lines - if you're in Penn Station NY, you just board from the middle level or use the same track number on the NJ Transit side.
Re: Can't see the forest, for the trees? (Score:2)
All of this, and more. TSA is, as you say, incompetent. They have prevented me from having a blunt letter-opener, however, I have inadvertently carried my 8cm pocketknife through a TSA checkpoint without them noticing.
Worse, they are counterproductive. I once read an estimate of the total time they add to people's travel time. You are talking hundreds or perhaps thousands of *lifetimes* of wasted time every single year.
Abolish TSA and indeed the entire Dept. of Homeland Security.
Re:Can't see the forest, for the trees? (Score:5, Insightful)
I like to extrapolate things into "Human lifetimes" to create interesting viewpoints
Assuming:
853 million travellers annually
72 year life expectancy
30 minutes to clear security on average
That works out to the TSA consuming the equivalent of 676 human lifetimes per year; about two entire human lifetimes every single day.
2,996 people dead in the 9/11 attack
14,876 human lifetimes wasted by TSA since 2001
Re: (Score:3)
Abolish the TSA. That's the correct solution.
Totally agreed, but I can't help but wonder if this senator had trouble because he's a Democrat.
Re:Can't see the forest, for the trees? (Score:4, Informative)
You'd have about as much success at that as trying to hijack a plane and crash it into the WTC post 9/11. Every hijacking attempt since then has ended in pain and humiliation for the would-be hijacker.
Re: (Score:3)
Bingo. Locked/reinforced flight deck doors and passengers/flight crew being willing to tell hijacker(s) to go fuck themselves are the real reason why another 9/11 hasn't happened.
Prior to 9/11, airline/FAA policy was actually to cooperate with hijackers to minimize loss of life, since the worst that generally happened was a vacation to Cuba.
Re: (Score:2)
You could easily blow up a train as a terrorist act, the same as a plane, or a bus
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Commuter trains = no ID check, no ticket check for boarding.
Amtrak used to check tickets in major stations before boarding, but that seems to have gotten sporadic since COVID. They still reserve the right to check ID (once people are on the train already), but it isn't common. If you leave NYC for Boston, you get on the train, and 30-40 minutes later (i.e. somewhere in CT), the conductor will go around checking tickets.
No x-rays either, though I've seen dogs sniffing bags in large stations before.
re: different target (Score:2)
Eh... I thought of that, but I'm not sure I really buy it as that relevant? I mean, if you claim most hijackings happen on airplanes because they have that "go anywhere" capability? Ok - but now you're talking about people who really just want free transportation to a distant destination. They're not trying to kill everyone on board, crashing the plane into targets.
I'd feel just as "fragile" stuck in the middle of an ocean on some cruise ship as I would in the air on a plane, though.
And as a few people alre
Makes sense (Score:5, Funny)
To be fair, given the high percentage of criminality in their demographic, a senator needs to be subject to more profiling and scrutiny than an average person.
Re: (Score:2)
LOL!
Oh, to have mod points...
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, given the high percentage of criminality in their demographic, a senator needs to be subject to more profiling and scrutiny than an average person.
Mandatory body cavity searches for all Congressional members?
Oh, how we'd love to find that shit on page 4,273 of the next Bill they need to pass in order to read what's in it.
Waste of money (Score:3)
The thing I find amusing about this stupid "trial" is that they have it in the Precheck line. The line where you actually sit for an interview to get cleared... the line where customs has already decided that a regular photo is actually plenty of information to uniquely identify you for entering the country. It is also a 3rd party commercial solution that is also essentially competing with the precheck/global entry solution for identification confirmation.
The TSA needs some serious streamlining.
Re: (Score:2)
The thing I find amusing about this stupid "trial" is that they have it in the Precheck line.
That makes sense. The precheck line has lighter security. So it is more important to verify the identity of the people in that line.
I signed up for precheck to save time. If this tech saves time, it's ok with me. They will check my identity with or without the face-recognition. The only difference is that the machine is faster and more accurate than a human.
Re: (Score:2)
The thing I find amusing about this stupid "trial" is that they have it in the Precheck line.
This actually makes some sense to me, in that in theory this is as you say just using data you've already given up to be in the program, however the benefit of using this is in theory improved throughput and more accurate ID check to use the line.
However that portion of the process really does not need more efficiency, almost always the backup is in the luggage scanning portion (even with reduced requirements for pr
he was told it would cause a significant delay (Score:2)
Had this on JetBlue: boarding hack (Score:5, Interesting)
Was going on a JetBlue flight some months ago and they had the facial recognition for boarding the flight. Everyone lined up, and very slowly, one would step up, wait a long time for the machine to recognize them, then they'd get to board.
I walked up to the flight attendant on the side and said I'd like to opt out of the facial scan. So they looked at my boarding pass and ID and I skipped the entire line.
I have never felt so self-satisfied and smug in my life.
Not so voluntary. (Score:5, Insightful)
If they are Delaying people significantly or telling them that there will be a Delay (Beyond the few minutes it takes to have a human manually review the ID and compare it to them), Then they are coercing them. This is Not scanning people voluntarily - This is coercing people to agree to face scanning.
If you don't agree to the scan, then you will be punished by making you wait longer.
Admittedly it's a softer stick than detaining someone or forcing them to undergo something more intrusive in response, but it's still a kind of coercion.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Speaking as a Canadian... (Score:3)
This is just one more example of why people like my wife and me plan never to go the the US again. I've noticed that this is a growing sentiment among Canadians. I don't think it's anywhere near a critical mass yet, but I've been surprised to find that we're far from the only ones who have decided that the US if off-limits.
We're disappointed that we won't get to do some of the Stateside exploring we had planned on in retirement, and we're very sad that we'll never visit New Orleans again. But even with that strong pull, we're still no longer willing to cross the border. I can't say that the US is a fascist country, but I see a lot of behaviour and policies there that call fascism to mind.
Let the flaming begin...
Re: (Score:2)
As much as I'd like to flame you, you are basically right. The definition of fascism is the merger of State and Corporation. The US is basically there.
However, Socialism is where the State takes over the Corporations, so it's a merger in the opposite direction. The end result is the same.
And sadly as Trudeau proved during the trucker's protest, Canada is just as bad. "Nice bank account you have there, too bad you had to object to a WEF approved policy."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Why are so many Christians God fearing instead of God loving?"
Off topic, but the answer is that the god-fearing Christians actually read the Old Testament. Including but not limited to Leviticus 20 and 25, and Numbers 25 and 32.
The words of a mild-mannered faith healer (Book of Mark) are comforting, but is he really correct? Given the consequences could you really be sure?
Now I'm off to see what I can see about the economy of Franco's Spain.
Re: (Score:3)
This is just one more example of why people like my wife and me plan never to go the the US again. I've noticed that this is a growing sentiment among Canadians. I don't think it's anywhere near a critical mass yet, but I've been surprised to find that we're far from the only ones who have decided that the US if off-limits.
We're disappointed that we won't get to do some of the Stateside exploring we had planned on in retirement, and we're very sad that we'll never visit New Orleans again. But even with that strong pull, we're still no longer willing to cross the border. I can't say that the US is a fascist country, but I see a lot of behaviour and policies there that call fascism to mind.
Let the flaming begin...
Don't worry. We're working on that. Our entire government is one more good tantrum away from full-blown fascism. If we had a "Intelligent and Coordinated" Trump-alike take office? It'd be a done deal within their first term.
How do you think it feels to those of us stuck living here with no easy way out? I look at how far away I am from retirement and wonder if I'll even make it before the clamps come down. I'm more doubtful every day.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The US scares you from visiting? Not Mexico? Venezula? Cuba? China? Saudi Arabia?
Re: (Score:3)
The US scares you from visiting? Not Mexico? Venezula? Cuba? China? Saudi Arabia?
TBH, between Mexico and the US it's a toss-up, in spite of drug cartels and some high-profile deaths of Canadian tourists in Mexico a bunch of years ago. I suspect Mexico would probably feel a bit safer, because on the whole it would be obvious that we're not locals and it seems less likely we'd get caught up in local bullshit. In America, it's not immediately obvious that we're foreigners, so over-zealous cops are always a concern.
As for the others, we've been to Cuba - mostly kept to the resort, spent a l
Re: (Score:2)
Do you mind if us Americans visit you?
I live in NY with an enhanced driver's liceince(sp) which counts as a passport for Canada.
I've always wanted to visit Toronto on July 4th so I can see if the fireworks in Rochester are visible over Lake Ontario.
Ripe for abuse (Score:2)
That which can be abused most assuredly will be abused.
A student of history (Score:2)