4 ms·
If you think about it, there's an argument to be made that face scanning is the most invasive because it can easily be done at a distance without your knowledge
by tsaoutourpants 10y ago
If you think about it, there's an argument to be made that face scanning is the most invasive because it can easily be done at a distance without your knowledge. The depths of your eyes may feel more personal, but facial recognition is insidious.
Another reason I'm nearly certain this was face recognition is that DHS already has a database of faces -- your passport photos -- and thus they have something to compare to. They don't have an iris or retina database for U.S. citizens.
- gcr 10y agoThere's "invasive" in terms of "ability to identify you, times ease of capture." Irises (and maybe faces) are very invasive by this metric. Or there's "invasive" in terms of how much cooperation it requires to match you. I think that's what parent meant. A biopsy DNA sample or interrogation would be most invasive, followed by maybe something like a cheek swab, then palmprint, then willing fingerprint (ignoring latent fingerprints), then iris, then faces being the least invasive.