4 ms·

> already have your photo > biometrics they already have > obviously already being constantly recorded by surveillance cameras The whole “boiling the frog” m

> already have your photo > biometrics they already have > obviously already being constantly recorded by surveillance cameras The whole “boiling the frog” meme is that nobody notices the rights being curtailed over time. I understand the whole “not in public” thing but there’s still got to be a point where the depth and/or breadth of information gathered is too much.

cjbgkagh 2y ago
It’s less of boiling the frog and instead a deliberate salami slicing tactics coined by Hungarian communists. It’s more apt in that we are aware of what is being done but unable to resist because each small change is ‘trivial’ until they have the whole salami and by then it’s too late. It should be noted the frogs regulate their body temperature by jumping in and out of water and thus do react to even slow increases of temperature.
- chii 2y ago
  > until they have the whole salami and by then it’s too late. so what is the whole salami? It's not unreasonable to know exactly who is on which flight imho. It is slightly worse to have face recognition in public spaces, but your identity is not a secret. As long as this information is not available for private uses (aka, it is only used by law enforcement), i don't see the privacy implications of public facial recognition.
  - cjbgkagh 2y ago
    I’m old enough to remember a time when it didn’t really matter, the wrong person getting on the wrong flight was more of an issue for that person and maybe the airline. Governments, like many other institutions, tend to find ways to generate demand for their services. By the time it happens the response is; ‘of course we need these things’, and in time that will be replaced by ‘that’s the way it has always been’ by people who don’t know any better. Just because it’s normal now doesn’t mean it always had to be this way. I’m not going to summarize everything the whole salami encompasses - that’s a rather big topic that’s probably best left as an exercise for the reader.
    - sofixa 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - simoncion 2y ago
        > When was that? Mass (as in common, not the initial one off ones) airplane hijackings started in the 1940s. IIRC, in the US up to the 1980s or so. Perhaps even into the 1990s. Hell, there didn't even used to be metal detectors in airports until a "large" number of plane bombings happened in the 1980s. IIRC, the excuse for installing them was to detect metal-based explosives smuggled in one's person. > Are you implying that governments are behind terrorist acts or suicidal ones... I'll note that the cumulative delays from TSA "security" have had a much, much larger human cost than the destruction of the WTC towers. Relatedly, the financial cost has been staggering. Tragically, the process creating both of these costs are ongoing. Two things (and only two things) ensured that there will never be another attack like that, ever: 1) Hardening and locking the cockpit doors. Pilots screamed about this for an assload of years before 9/11, but penny-pinching airlines refused to do anything about it. 2) The fact that air passengers now know that a hijacking is not an inconvenience (or maybe a stop at an exotic destination), but is a death sentence. With any plausible armament that a team of hijackers could get into the cabin with even 1970's-era security screening, they absolutely cannot win against a planeload of people who are supremely disinterested in dying in a plane crash today.
        sofixa 2y ago
        > I'll note that the cumulative delays from TSA "security" have had a much, much larger human cost than the destruction of the WTC towers. Relatedly, the financial cost has been staggering. Tragically, the process creating both of these costs are ongoing. People die because of the TSA? Like die immediately, in the aftermath, and a decade later from cancer? Any sources on this? Your two things fall apart with a (not even that big to trigger an explosive decompression in a bad part of the aircraft and cause a near certain crash) bomb. Or a grenade to blow up the cabin door. Or hell, a deranged pilot who decides to end it all and crash the plane.

cjbgkagh 2y ago

It’s less of boiling the frog and instead a deliberate salami slicing tactics coined by Hungarian communists. It’s more apt in that we are aware of what is being done but unable to resist because each small change is ‘trivial’ until they have the whole salami and by then it’s too late. It should be noted the frogs regulate their body temperature by jumping in and out of water and thus do react to even slow increases of temperature.

chii 2y ago
> until they have the whole salami and by then it’s too late. so what is the whole salami? It's not unreasonable to know exactly who is on which flight imho. It is slightly worse to have face recognition in public spaces, but your identity is not a secret. As long as this information is not available for private uses (aka, it is only used by law enforcement), i don't see the privacy implications of public facial recognition.
- cjbgkagh 2y ago
  I’m old enough to remember a time when it didn’t really matter, the wrong person getting on the wrong flight was more of an issue for that person and maybe the airline. Governments, like many other institutions, tend to find ways to generate demand for their services. By the time it happens the response is; ‘of course we need these things’, and in time that will be replaced by ‘that’s the way it has always been’ by people who don’t know any better. Just because it’s normal now doesn’t mean it always had to be this way. I’m not going to summarize everything the whole salami encompasses - that’s a rather big topic that’s probably best left as an exercise for the reader.
  - sofixa 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - simoncion 2y ago
      > When was that? Mass (as in common, not the initial one off ones) airplane hijackings started in the 1940s. IIRC, in the US up to the 1980s or so. Perhaps even into the 1990s. Hell, there didn't even used to be metal detectors in airports until a "large" number of plane bombings happened in the 1980s. IIRC, the excuse for installing them was to detect metal-based explosives smuggled in one's person. > Are you implying that governments are behind terrorist acts or suicidal ones... I'll note that the cumulative delays from TSA "security" have had a much, much larger human cost than the destruction of the WTC towers. Relatedly, the financial cost has been staggering. Tragically, the process creating both of these costs are ongoing. Two things (and only two things) ensured that there will never be another attack like that, ever: 1) Hardening and locking the cockpit doors. Pilots screamed about this for an assload of years before 9/11, but penny-pinching airlines refused to do anything about it. 2) The fact that air passengers now know that a hijacking is not an inconvenience (or maybe a stop at an exotic destination), but is a death sentence. With any plausible armament that a team of hijackers could get into the cabin with even 1970's-era security screening, they absolutely cannot win against a planeload of people who are supremely disinterested in dying in a plane crash today.
      - sofixa 2y ago
        > I'll note that the cumulative delays from TSA "security" have had a much, much larger human cost than the destruction of the WTC towers. Relatedly, the financial cost has been staggering. Tragically, the process creating both of these costs are ongoing. People die because of the TSA? Like die immediately, in the aftermath, and a decade later from cancer? Any sources on this? Your two things fall apart with a (not even that big to trigger an explosive decompression in a bad part of the aircraft and cause a near certain crash) bomb. Or a grenade to blow up the cabin door. Or hell, a deranged pilot who decides to end it all and crash the plane.