5 ms·

This isn’t about security, it’s about speed. They’re trying to speed up the boarding process.

fzeroracer 8y ago
Can you at least read the article before claiming it's about speed? This was a move pushed by the CBP to 'crack down on those who overstay their visas', this data will obviously be collected and stored by the government which should start firing off alarms in anyone's head.
- dvirsky 8y ago
  How is that different than the current situation? You still have to present your passport at the airport. It will only change things for people flying with fake passports I guess.
- zo1 8y ago
  Ok, genuine question. Why should this start firing off alarms in anyone's head? Because here I am, as a Libertarian/AnCap, and all I can think is: "What, they haven't already been doing this at secure locations for at least a decade?!" With the amount of corruption I've seen in Africa/third-world, I would not trust any sort of official documentation coming from them. Biometric data allows an entity/government to tie down or verify a person's identity beyond the limitations of human-corruptible identification documents. And the only way to do that is to build a database to cross-reference and detect fraud.
  - eesmith 8y ago
    You question why "they haven't already been doing this at secure locations for at least a decade." What is a "secure area", and what is required to make it secure? I ask because I think it's an overly broad characterization which doesn't distinguish between the different types of security under discussion. If you think the secure area is the flights, and the level of security you need is the ability to prevent certain types of weapons and explosives from entering the airplane, then what is the need for yet another layer of physical identity checking? Why is there any need for identity checking? If you are known to have malign intent (but not enough to arrest you), and you don't have any guns, knives, explosives, etc. that can cause problem then why does it matter that we also have automated facial recognition combined with long-term record storage? Bear in mind too that some countries do not require any id for domestic travel, though still do require security checks. On the other hand, if you think the "secure area" is the US border, then as a libertarian, what is the amount of intrusion that the government should be allowed to do on a US citizen in order to allow that citizen to traverse the border? As the article points out, last year the TSA's views were 'if you don't like it, don't travel internationally by air.' Can not any border check be justified in the name of security? DNA analysis? Scanning of all data sources you have? Release of your passwords to any servers? Which "secure area" do you mean, how might it be helped by having this sort of system, and what are the potential downsides? As a libertarian, how does that change your views with respect to someone who is, say, a Nordic-style democratic socialist and decidedly not not a libertarian?
  - sneak 8y ago
    You’re not an AnCap if you think that third parties have the right to demand my identification by force before allowing me to receive services for which I have already paid.
    - zo1 8y ago
      If requiring identification to the airport "third-party" is part of the terms agreed to by both parties prior to the sale, then I see no problem with it as no force is necessary and everything is done according to what you agreed to initially. Don't want to do that? Fine, don't agree to the sale and then consequently don't fly. That's how it would work if all these entities were fully free-market and not a semi-right granted by government. Further, it's not "by force" if it's a pre-requisite for being on private property, which would be the proper analogy if you want to discuss this in an AnCap context.
  - Ballantara 8y ago
    The expanded scale raises concerns - avoiding secure locations that scan your face is less burdensome than refraining from public air travel, and a homeland security-curated traveller face db would have a wider reach than a secure site's records.
- village-idiot 8y ago
  The article says this is about speed in the very first paragraph. > The airline said the biometric facial scanning is optional — a move that will shave off a few minutes off each flight

Can you at least read the article before claiming it's about speed? This was a move pushed by the CBP to 'crack down on those who overstay their visas', this data will obviously be collected and stored by the government which should start firing off alarms in anyone's head.

dvirsky 8y ago
How is that different than the current situation? You still have to present your passport at the airport. It will only change things for people flying with fake passports I guess.
zo1 8y ago
Ok, genuine question. Why should this start firing off alarms in anyone's head? Because here I am, as a Libertarian/AnCap, and all I can think is: "What, they haven't already been doing this at secure locations for at least a decade?!" With the amount of corruption I've seen in Africa/third-world, I would not trust any sort of official documentation coming from them. Biometric data allows an entity/government to tie down or verify a person's identity beyond the limitations of human-corruptible identification documents. And the only way to do that is to build a database to cross-reference and detect fraud.
- eesmith 8y ago
  You question why "they haven't already been doing this at secure locations for at least a decade." What is a "secure area", and what is required to make it secure? I ask because I think it's an overly broad characterization which doesn't distinguish between the different types of security under discussion. If you think the secure area is the flights, and the level of security you need is the ability to prevent certain types of weapons and explosives from entering the airplane, then what is the need for yet another layer of physical identity checking? Why is there any need for identity checking? If you are known to have malign intent (but not enough to arrest you), and you don't have any guns, knives, explosives, etc. that can cause problem then why does it matter that we also have automated facial recognition combined with long-term record storage? Bear in mind too that some countries do not require any id for domestic travel, though still do require security checks. On the other hand, if you think the "secure area" is the US border, then as a libertarian, what is the amount of intrusion that the government should be allowed to do on a US citizen in order to allow that citizen to traverse the border? As the article points out, last year the TSA's views were 'if you don't like it, don't travel internationally by air.' Can not any border check be justified in the name of security? DNA analysis? Scanning of all data sources you have? Release of your passwords to any servers? Which "secure area" do you mean, how might it be helped by having this sort of system, and what are the potential downsides? As a libertarian, how does that change your views with respect to someone who is, say, a Nordic-style democratic socialist and decidedly not not a libertarian?
- sneak 8y ago
  You’re not an AnCap if you think that third parties have the right to demand my identification by force before allowing me to receive services for which I have already paid.
  - zo1 8y ago
    If requiring identification to the airport "third-party" is part of the terms agreed to by both parties prior to the sale, then I see no problem with it as no force is necessary and everything is done according to what you agreed to initially. Don't want to do that? Fine, don't agree to the sale and then consequently don't fly. That's how it would work if all these entities were fully free-market and not a semi-right granted by government. Further, it's not "by force" if it's a pre-requisite for being on private property, which would be the proper analogy if you want to discuss this in an AnCap context.
- Ballantara 8y ago
  The expanded scale raises concerns - avoiding secure locations that scan your face is less burdensome than refraining from public air travel, and a homeland security-curated traveller face db would have a wider reach than a secure site's records.
village-idiot 8y ago
The article says this is about speed in the very first paragraph. > The airline said the biometric facial scanning is optional — a move that will shave off a few minutes off each flight