3 ms·
I'd argue not, since a single photography contains much, much less information than a full DNA fingerprint.
by phoe-krk 6y ago
I'd argue not, since a single photography contains much, much less information than a full DNA fingerprint.
- Ultimatt 6y agoNot for identifying or incriminating you it doesn't given the practical risk of how the information can be used.
- i_cannot_hack 6y agoThat's a fair point. However, I'm not entirely sure I buy the premise. With the advent of deepfakes and internet scraping facial recognition, I think a public photo collection of your entire likeness could be considered least somewhat at risk for abuse, when compared to the risk that a confidential fingerprint with ~25% of your genes is leaked and then used against you.