Doubt so. There is a very strong Trump faction now dominating Republican house. Pelosi waning and Diane dead. We now have AOC faction. It is going to be very dysfunctional 2024-2026.
What Diane did was an embarrassing endcap to such a long and distinguished career. She should have retired years ago, not die clinging to power, barely able to function as a Senator.
I don't see this being stopped any time soon. The gain from the government's point of view is too much (you need to capture someone's fingerprints to be able to check them at cbp's desk on arrival) but facial recognition can be captured anytime and cross checked against a large database.
The only way i see facial recognition being stopped if with some mass outcry of average joes (and not just the richard m stallman types) being against it.
> only way i see facial recognition being stopped if with some mass outcry of average joes
Privacy has never been an average-Joe issue. Average Joe isn't invoking the full wrath of the state. That's reserved for minority elite.
Those are also the people privacy protects most socially usefully. Dissidents, unpopular scientists and change agents: this is from whom privacy reforms come because this is who it usefully protects.
It may yet return (probably will when the fuss dies down) but Bunnings (Hardware), K-Mart, Woolworths, Coles, Aldi, Target, Big W, Myer, David Jones, Dan Murphy’s, BWS, Vintage Cellars, Liquorland, Rebel and Officeworks in Australia have all pledged "no facials".
Real IDs don’t have any other photo requirement than drivers licenses have previously. Their additional validation is in terms of proving residence and identity with additional documents.
The Real ID Act was passed in 2005. The original deadline was 2008. Then it was 2011, then it was 2013, then it was 2020, then it was 2021. Now it’s 2025? I’ll believe it when I see it!
I mean at this point, who needs to talk about deeply theoretical risks.
"Do we want these capabilities if Trump has a 50% chance of being the next president and is on record for installing a fundamentalist dictatorship with persecution for it's opponents?"
I can somewhat understand when it comes to domestic flights, but international it can be quite useful to alert security on people who are flagged by interpol/europol/whatever.
Japan and Thailand takes face scans and your fingerprints when entering their countries, and I am certain they are not alone.
Regardless of my thoughts on general privacy, the only people I can see being opposed to this are terrorists and money launderers and the politicians who support same as well as unchecked mass immigration and abuse of undocumented workers
It's not a constitutionally-protected right to privacy or legislation extending that right to privacy to interactions with private parties, so what's the point?
The reason I contacted both of my state senators is this: We will never get a constitutionally-protected right to privacy. What we will get is federal entities, state entities, international entities and private entities consistently eroding our expectation of privacy every way they can, each for their own reasons. This bill is a small push in the opposite direction, helping to hold the line on where we expect to be surveilled. IOW the only way we will get a right to privacy in the U.S. is piecemeal.
The wealthy must want this bill-- since flying is the only way to get to places... they probably don't want to be tracked so easily when they go visit Epstein's island.
31 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 88.4 ms ] threadLooks like it does exactly what’s claimed. Amazing!
Soon it will be filled with horse shit, by clowns, that will make it unpassable.
The only way i see facial recognition being stopped if with some mass outcry of average joes (and not just the richard m stallman types) being against it.
Privacy has never been an average-Joe issue. Average Joe isn't invoking the full wrath of the state. That's reserved for minority elite.
Those are also the people privacy protects most socially usefully. Dissidents, unpopular scientists and change agents: this is from whom privacy reforms come because this is who it usefully protects.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/jul/25/bunnings-...
It may yet return (probably will when the fuss dies down) but Bunnings (Hardware), K-Mart, Woolworths, Coles, Aldi, Target, Big W, Myer, David Jones, Dan Murphy’s, BWS, Vintage Cellars, Liquorland, Rebel and Officeworks in Australia have all pledged "no facials".
Real IDs don’t have any other photo requirement than drivers licenses have previously. Their additional validation is in terms of proving residence and identity with additional documents.
"Do we want these capabilities if Trump has a 50% chance of being the next president and is on record for installing a fundamentalist dictatorship with persecution for it's opponents?"
Japan and Thailand takes face scans and your fingerprints when entering their countries, and I am certain they are not alone.
They are allowed if you voluntarily consent. When did border and immigration photo opt-out change for Americans?
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/local-media-release/cbp-introdu...
"It is not mandatory for U.S. citizens to have their photo taken."