> Yes, every, because being significantly faster makes for pervasively frequent instead of convenient. You are already subjected to a paperwork cavity search t

> Yes, every, because being significantly faster makes for pervasively frequent instead of convenient. You are already subjected to a paperwork cavity search to get a passport, let alone use it. > I also envision that this checkpoint frequency will eventually reach the level when people are required to emit constant _streams_ of authentication tokens, which will of course imply it must be done remotely and without any manual consent. An ePassport does not increase the frequency at which it's scanned. It's still only used in the classic situations: ports, hotels, other expensive tourist stuff where they want an ID on file. > That's a perfect use case for the proverbial implanted RFID chips or continuous and ubiquitous biometric scanning, and rejecting that is the absolute hill to die on for people who have any remaining human dignity and love for freedom. Using an RFID chip in an identity document is not a slippery slope to implanted tracking chips and it is ridiculous to suggest that it is.