10 ms·
Reading through the slides, it appears that what has been discussed is sharing signature and fingerprints for travel into the USA. There is a lot of weasel word
by InTheArena 4y ago
Reading through the slides, it appears that what has been discussed is sharing signature and fingerprints for travel into the USA. There is a lot of weasel words, but it's probably worth nothing that the USA currently collects this information for foreign nationals coming into the USA (as the EU does for Americans traveling into the EU). This is being done in the context of a DB query as part of the e VISA application.
It's worth noting that almost all of this is still the output of the 9/11, where US and Saudi systems did not communicate and resulted in known terrorists in Saudi Arabia being able to travel at will into the USA.
I don't like biometrics, but the hyperbole needs to be tuned down a bit here.
- bombolo 4y agoYou mean USA won't misuse this data?
- EGreg 4y agoWe have had the Five Eyes and ECHELON for decades. Since before the Snowden revelations. How is this different? They don’t spy on their own citizens but they exchange info with the other spy agencies, so…
- IncRnd 4y agoIt's different in that it doesn't require misuse to get certain data about citizens.
- MonkeyClub 4y ago> They don’t spy on their own citizens They sure do; whatever gave you the impression they don’t?
- EGreg 4y agoTheir mandate doesnt allow it https://www.aclu.org/other/nsa-spying-americans-illegal https://www.aclu.org/other/nsa-spying-americans-illegal
- LarryMullins 4y agoFunniest thing I've read all week.
- IncRnd 4y agoI know that wasn't a serious comment, saying that federal government agencies follow their mandates and never break the law. PS I see that you have edited your comment to add a link, https://www.aclu.org/other/nsa-spying-americans-illegal https://www.aclu.org/other/nsa-spying-americans-illegal. That link shows that the government illegally spys on citizens, which is the opposite of what you meant to show.
- bee_rider 4y agoWhy break the law to spy on Americans? We give all our private information out to any website that asks and shout out political opinions out into the void on Twitter. Just buy the list of people really interested in fertilizer and not farming from some data broker. Totally legal private sector transaction!
- IncRnd 4y agoI'm not sure what you are asking or why. See the start of this thread, where the Snowden revelations were mentioned.
- EGreg 4y agoYou’re right! I meant to say they can’t legally do it but Five Eyes helps them do it legally: In other words, the NSA can only spy where it is explicitly granted permission to do so by statute. Citizens concerned about surveillance do not have to answer the question, "what law restricts the NSA's spying?" Rather, the government is required to supply an answer to the question "what law permits the NSA to spy?"
- IncRnd 4y agoThanks so much for the clarification!
- aatd86 4y agoFrom what I get, countries ask friendly countries to spy on their behalf.
- still_grokking 4y agoThat's the parallel construction.
- filiphorvat 4y ago>We have had the Five Eyes and ECHELON for decades. Since before the Snowden revelations. How is this different? Because the EU is not part of either?
- filoleg 4y agoWell one of the countries in the Five Eyes (UK) used to be a part of the EU, until fairly recently. Note for those in the thread who haven't heard of ECHELON until now (just like me) - it is the exact same list of countries as for the Five Eyes. > [...] Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States, also known as the Five Eyes. [0] 0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON
- Gasp0de 4y agoMaybe this is the reason they started demanding this now, that before they could just ask Britain but because of Brexit, Britain has lost access to European biometric data?
- ClumsyPilot 4y ago> They don’t spy on their own citizens Correct, that would be illegal. When NSA need to spy on an american, they ask GCHQ to do it for them and buy the data. Or buy it off a private company.
- EGreg 4y agoThat’s what I meant. But the sibling thread somehow devolved into making fun of this idea!
- petre 4y agoWhat difference does it make? They already lost it and it fell into the hands of not-so-nice people like the Taliban.
- Slava_Propanei 4y ago[dead]
- pessimizer 4y agoI'm not sure that hyperbole is possible when you're discussing the necessity of having worldwide biometric "terrorist" lists that countries like Saudi Arabia would participate in. ----- edit: How would you code "terrorism through public demonstrations of driving while female" or "terrorism through being Yemen?" "Terrorism though applying for a marriage license after being mildly critical in the WaPo."
- kanzenryu2 4y agoIn Saudi Arabia atheists are terrorists. And they also have the death penalty for terrorism.
- cbsmith 4y agoThis is misinformation. Saudi Arabia is not well regarded when it comes to religious freedom, and it has a law against apostasy (when a Muslim renounces their beliefs), which is a capital offense, but they don't classify atheists as terrorists.
- Guthur 4y agoI suppose on the plus side at least they actually sentence them, some countries just lock them up in extra judicial camps or orders a drone strike and never says a word.
- jongjong 4y agoIt's so horrible. They probably think that they're helping atheists by sending them to the afterlife early. But what if the atheist is right and when you die, your last moment alive becomes frozen in your consciousness forever.
- moate 4y ago>> what if the atheist is right and when you die, your last moment alive becomes frozen in your consciousness forever. I’m sorry what? Is this the predominant/common belief among other atheists? Pretty much everyone I’ve spoken with is more likely to think you just turn off, everything goes black, back to the void of unlife.
- wolfi1 4y agothe problem with such treaties is they are very shady in their wording and if there is a possibility to interpret it in this direction it will be interpreted in this direction
- still_grokking 4y agoThat's the purpose of the shady wording in the first place. Or does anybody really think things get formulated those ways "by chance" or "by incompetence"? Never blame on stupidity what you can be blamed on malice, in case of institutions…
- vinay427 4y ago> (as the EU does for Americans traveling into the EU) This doesn't seem true unless the US citizen is resident in a Schengen area country or (as a technicality) is also an EU/Schengen area citizen, as the EU seems slightly more in favor of government collection of biometric data for automated immigration purposes. I'm not sure about the reverse, as even the CBP seems to be moving towards facial recognition in place of fingerprint data, but it seems like most non-US/Canadian visitors are required to provide fingerprints.
- ubercore 4y agoI didn't have to provide a fingerprint or signature to travel to Europe, only when I applied for residence in a Schengen country.
- vixen99 4y agoThat's changing from May 2023 with 'ETIAS'. "non-EU visitors to the block, including UK nationals since Brexit, will need to register information about themselves prior to travel. As well as passport details, automated barriers at borders will eventually gather biometric information such as facial image data and fingerprints. ETIAS will be mandatory for citizens of such countries as the UK, United States, Australia, New Zealand and Canada".
- petre 4y agoYeah, we should 'trust' them after they lost the biometric data for all of the Afghanis they fingerprinted. I was going to have my visa application but I guess I'll defer it.
- 77pt77 4y ago> where US and Saudi systems did not communicate and resulted in known terrorists in Saudi Arabia being able to travel at will into the USA. I'm not even sure how to classify this sentence...
- hammock 4y agoConsidering that 9/11 was in part a Saudi kingdom operation, I’m not convinced having more US-Saudi cooperation would have helped Edit: what’s with the downvotes?
- 650REDHAIR 4y agoIt might have helped the Saudi terrorists. I am thankful that the EU is standing up against this threat.
- peekopop 4y agoIsrael also.
- keewee7 4y ago>Edit: what’s with the downvotes? You're pushing a baseless conspiracy theory. There is no evidence that Saudi authorities were involved in 9/11.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- RagnarD 4y agohttps://www.npr.org/2021/09/12/1036389448/biden-declassifies-secret-fbi-report-detailing-saudi-nationals-connections-to-9- https://www.npr.org/2021/09/12/1036389448/biden-declassifies...
- akamaozu 4y agoYou're a better person than myself. Would have suggested the Saudis are behind the downvotes.
- choward 4y ago> It's worth noting that almost all of this is still the output of the 9/11, where US and Saudi systems did not communicate and resulted in known terrorists in Saudi Arabia being able to travel at will into the USA. The intelligence community missed a lot of clues right at their finger tips that could have prevented 9/11. Do you think biometric tracking would have prevented 9/11? Because it sure sounds like it.
- moloch-hai 4y agoYou can miss anything you want to miss, when it suits you.
- kevin_b_er 4y agoYou think the US is going to limit itself to travelers? They're going to read a lot more entries than just travelers.
- oloid 4y ago[flagged]
- PYTHONDJANGO 4y agoYour thinking seems to be based on the idea that "the government" are the good guys. This is extremely naive - and you even mention an example of a government that does not respect basic human rights. These tools will be abused and must be rolled backed to save freedom and democracy. Authoritarian states working together on a techno-based total control vision is a very bad development. Thinking about it, I do not understand how any neutral person would take your position - it reads like astroturfing propaganda work.
- still_grokking 4y ago> it reads like astroturfing propaganda work The "but we just do what the others do" claim (which is afaik false) also made this seem fishy to me. Especially as every hacker knows: When there is data, this data will be abused, sooner or later. There hasn't been any recorded exception to this rule. Anywhere. Ever. It's like a law of nature. That's why the zeroes rule of data protection reads: Do not produce data. Only not existing data can't be abused.
- still_grokking 4y ago> […] but it's probably worth nothing that the USA currently collects this information for foreign nationals coming into the USA (as the EU does for Americans traveling into the EU). The EU does? That's news. Can someone bake this claim by some source?
- data_maan 4y agoNope, hyperbole needs to be strengthened. Such legislation would basically allow syphoning off all the data of everyone from the EU databases. They could (and would) just go through all possible name combination an see if it's a hit (I'm sure there will be no safeguards in place for that; oh, whoops, the British did this already when Brexit happened). The precious data will then be stored in a "commercial cloud" service. What could possibly go wrong here?...
- ls15 4y ago> It's worth noting that almost all of this is still the output of the 9/11, where US and Saudi systems did not communicate and resulted in known terrorists in Saudi Arabia being able to travel at will into the USA. > I don't like biometrics, but the hyperbole needs to be tuned down a bit here. The entire official response to 9/11 is the hyperbole, not the criticism of those measures.