7 ms·

And we will complain about this here on Hacker News and the American public still won't give a flying fuck...I wonder if our "democracy" will stop being such a

by jrs95 7y ago

And we will complain about this here on Hacker News and the American public still won't give a flying fuck...I wonder if our "democracy" will stop being such a disappointment in our lifetimes. And I say it in quotes not because I have any opposition to democracy but because our "representatives" and unelected members of government regularly act against our interests. The system is broken.

kilo_bravo_3 7y ago
There is no difference between a cop pressing a finger against a fingerprint reader to unlock a phone to gather evidence, and a cop pressing a finger against an inkpad (or scanner) to collect a fingerprint to compare to one found on an object or surface found at a crime scene. If law enforcement suspects your fingerprints are on a crowbar found at the scene of a bank robbery, they tell a judge, present their evidence, and get a court order for you to press your finger on a fingerprint scanner. If law enforcement suspects your fingerprint will unlock your phone and your phone as evidence of a crime on it, they tell a judge, present their evidence, and get a court order for you to press your finger on a fingerprint reader. Nothing is broken.
- jrs95 7y ago
  It’s not just your phone, and a warrant isn’t always needed thanks to this precedent. Police are able to search without a warrant under many circumstances. For example, they could pull you over, give their dog a command to “hit” on your car, claim the dog smells drugs to search your vehicle, and force anyone in the vehicle to unlock their phones if they’re using biometric security.
  - kofejnik 7y ago
    I don't think it works like that in a traffic stop without a warrant
- ameister14 7y ago
  The difference is in scope. So if you open a person's phone, you can potentially access their correspondence, browsing history, banking history, location history, etc. If you take someone's fingerprint to match against a fingerprint you already have, all you get is confirmation of something you suspect.
thelasthuman 7y ago
Governments in capitalist societies are committees of the rich. The system is working as intended.

by jrs95 7y ago

kilo_bravo_3 7y ago

There is no difference between a cop pressing a finger against a fingerprint reader to unlock a phone to gather evidence, and a cop pressing a finger against an inkpad (or scanner) to collect a fingerprint to compare to one found on an object or surface found at a crime scene. If law enforcement suspects your fingerprints are on a crowbar found at the scene of a bank robbery, they tell a judge, present their evidence, and get a court order for you to press your finger on a fingerprint scanner. If law enforcement suspects your fingerprint will unlock your phone and your phone as evidence of a crime on it, they tell a judge, present their evidence, and get a court order for you to press your finger on a fingerprint reader. Nothing is broken.

jrs95 7y ago
It’s not just your phone, and a warrant isn’t always needed thanks to this precedent. Police are able to search without a warrant under many circumstances. For example, they could pull you over, give their dog a command to “hit” on your car, claim the dog smells drugs to search your vehicle, and force anyone in the vehicle to unlock their phones if they’re using biometric security.
- kofejnik 7y ago
  I don't think it works like that in a traffic stop without a warrant
ameister14 7y ago
The difference is in scope. So if you open a person's phone, you can potentially access their correspondence, browsing history, banking history, location history, etc. If you take someone's fingerprint to match against a fingerprint you already have, all you get is confirmation of something you suspect.

thelasthuman 7y ago

Governments in capitalist societies are committees of the rich. The system is working as intended.