• 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.
  • Infinite@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    5 months ago

    Just for example, that’s an easy way to save just the biometric signature and have very few people question it.

    • jet@hackertalks.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Also, bureaucratic lies can be technically true. They copy the photo from the original device to a database, then delete the photo on the device. So it’s technically true the photo was immediately deleted, it’s just also copied and persisted forever. And a bureaucrat will proudly stand in front of you all day and tell you they deleted the photo, and they will sleep well that night with not any concern

      • ✺roguetrick✺@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Judge would declare that unlawful on the spot but without malicious intent whoever did it would have qualified immunity since a judge hasn’t already ruled on that specific case so it’s a wash.

        • jet@hackertalks.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Unlawful to tell the truth? it was deleted, it’s true. What else may or may not exist is not part of this statement, we deleted the photo from the device within seconds of scanning it. 100% no perjury required.

          Your point about qualified immunity is so good, it’s a joke. No police officer from east side of Wichita has ever run someone over, back and forth until their spin was broken, using BF GoodRich KO3 tries before, so it was impossible for the officer to know that it was violating the law. The closet case law we have is when Officer Daniels ran over his ex-wifes lover in using his duty vehicle using BF GoodRich KO2 tires, and on the West side of Wichita - but that is such a different situation no reasonable peace officer could have known it was illegal using the KO3 tires.