• Travelers can opt out of facial recognition at US airports by requesting manual ID verification, though resistance or intimidation may occur.
  • Facial recognition poses privacy risks, including potential data breaches, misidentification, and normalization of surveillance.
  • The Algorithmic Justice League’s “Freedom Flyers” campaign aims to raise awareness of these issues and encourage passengers to exercise their right to opt out.
  • Imhotep@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    For international flights, US citizens can opt out but foreign nationals have to participate in face scanning, [with some exceptions]

    I had no idea we were already at that point.

    always wanted to visit the US. I guess that won’t happen then.

    I refuse to participate in this dystopia. But I’m a little worried this will make me a recluse

    • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      Trust me you’re already a recluse relative to most by being on here. If you observe what passes for a “normal” “person” these days, they will endlessly scroll algorithmic ai-generated incomprehensible horrors on Tiktok, then purchase something through an ad from temu, they do not think. They are gone.

      But once you stop worrying that you may be saying no to experiences too much purely on principle, then you’re free to go even further and eradicate surveillance capitalism influence from your life altogether. One day you can ascend to even go smartphone-free.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        One day you can ascend to even go smartphone-free.

        Ascended to that in late 2014 because using a smartphone was a trigger for my anxiety.

        Back to using those since 2020 because of WhatsApp calls, apps for every shit and such being needed in life.

        • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          I have two these days, one Google™️ Pixel™️ for all government and job bullshit, and one crappy old riced to hell and back Sony for everything else. No Google play, no SIM, rooted and ROM’d, no problems, just a neat multi tool in a pinch.

      • JackbyDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        If you observe what passes for a “normal” “person” these days, they will endlessly scroll algorithmic ai-generated incomprehensible horrors on Tiktok, then purchase something through an ad from temu, they do not think.

        Can you just like, not be so damn condescending and elitist? Literally saying people who use TikTok and purchase stuff from Temu are sub-human

        • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Yeah I’m sorry, I just feel pretty strongly about this I guess and Lemmy is one of the few safe places to vent to like-minded folks.

          To explain myself a little: It’s not the “normies” that the techy people hate, it’s the perverted messed up world those less savvy in technology live in and everything about it, and with how much we’ve learned to circumvent corporate control it’s often a culture shock to see that people just take it, even stuff like online ads or algorithmic content feeds, stuff I haven’t experienced in probably a decade, like as if that’s just normal, and the sad part is it is for so many.

          Imagine if most of the world population was just falling for pyramid schemes or other blatant financial scams constantly. That’s how it feels.

          It becomes all too easy to blame the people rather than the systems that led to this, and sometimes it just feels like nobody outside of the hacker (classic definition) circles really gives enough of a shit to take control of the few things they can, and this is late stage capitalism, so I can’t really blame them, we’re all so tired just trying to survive.

      • Emerald@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        they will endlessly scroll algorithmic ai-generated incomprehensible horrors on Tiktok

        How is that much different from scrolling Lemmy? They are both social media

        • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Because Lemmy is Free, as in Libre and as in free beer, it is open source, and on top of all that, it’s not run for-profit by a single large corporate entity, it’s decentralised structure precludes that by design.

          There is nothing actually wrong with websites or forums like this or “social media”, not anymore than there is anything wrong with atoms even if humans found a way to make a weapon of it.

          In this case technology is weaponized by capitalism, and they’ll do anything to make you think it’s anything but the corporations who are to blame, misinformation on top of misinformation.

          The “mental health effects” of social media or smartphones are all just corporate distractions from the fact all those are really effects of capitalism. Even cryptocurrency isn’t actually bad inherently, I use monero all the time, it’s a great idea actually, especially where power consumption is addressed, but capitalism made it a speculative assets and state backed players wrestle for control. AI too. Open source LLMs benefit everyone, but the lack of tech literacy turned progressives against it and the played right into OpenAI and the rest of those scumbags’ hands.

          The fact that those who aren’t immersed in tech don’t know this is why all is lost. For the common man - they won, and it’s all black box products made to exploit people to the last drop.

  • King3d@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I refuse to go through the body scanners, but the last time I went through the airport there wasn’t anyone trying to opt-out. I seriously doubt if the radiation perv scanner doesn’t get people to do anything, this won’t either.

  • TragicNotCute@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    2 months ago

    Like I get it, it’s scary and I don’t want them to have my data, but my picture is being taken ALL the time basically everywhere I go. Is putting my foot down for this specific type really making a difference?

    • techt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Put your foot down everywhere then – it’s a fallacy to think that it’s not worth it to resist data harvesting because it already gets collected “everywhere” anyway, take one step at a time to make it harder and harder. Opting out of this is just one step.

    • themadcodger@kbin.earth
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I have global entry, so they already have my biometric data. I’d love to not here scanned, but this point it wouldn’t be anything they didn’t already have.

    • NOPper@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      It’s the only real way to push back that other folks will notice if enough of us do it.

      Last time I went through DC a few weeks ago they were using these. I saw a sign saying you’re welcome to opt out. Nobody even questioned what they were doing and were just going along. When it was my turn I politely said I’d rather not do the scan. Dude just glanced at my ID and waved me through. The next few folks behind me blinked and said they didn’t want the scan either. If enough people push back it can at least maybe slow down the normalization of constant surveillance.

  • slickgoat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    The game was lost for me when I started getting fingerprinted at certain airports. This privilege used to be reserved for suspected criminals. Now we’re are all suspected criminals on a default setting.

  • NewAgeOldPerson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    I went thru naturalization process. They have everything already. Including DNA, retina scan, etc. So I opted for Clear. Global Entry as well. They have it all already. May as well fast track going thru customs.

    • WolfLink@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 months ago

      Clear is run by a 3rd party company. TSA pre-check is run by the government. TSA pre-check comes free with Global Entry, you just need to sign up for it.

      • NewAgeOldPerson@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yeah I have pre because I have had global entry for a while (8 years now I think). Got clear because where I am, it changes wait time from 30 minutes to 5.

  • Wilzax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I figure that by being in the airport there’s enough footage of my face from security cameras that I didn’t consent to (other than by being in public) that the scan of my face while boarding is moot.

    Opting out of this face scan in particular is like using Chrome to browse the web, but searching with DuckDuckGo “for privacy reasons”

    • TonyOstrich@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      There is a reason I wear a large hat and a mask when walking through the airport and generally keep my head tilted down. I also wear large sunglasses, but that’s as much because every airport has at least one giant wall that is nothing but glass and inevitably I will walk around a corner and get face fucked by the sun. The privacy is just a bonus 😅

      • Wilzax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        Sure, but what’s stopping them from just adding whatever high res cameras they want in their terminals and jet bridges anyway? How can we be sure they aren’t already doing that? The only thing the face scan does that those cameras can’t is require you to lower your mask.

        • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2 months ago

          Sure, but what’s stopping them from just adding whatever high res cameras they want in their terminals and jet bridges anyway?

          Budget probably.

          • ulterno@lemmy.kde.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Yeah, because just adding high-res cameras is not good enough.
            They will need a good quality data transfer network with it and also have to use higher powered computers for data processing, to get whatever they want out of those videos.

            They might even have to pay *shriek* C++ devs to rewrite their Python prototype into a more efficient production code (and considering how hard it is to find devs that actually know what they are doing…).

        • Spedwell@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          2 months ago

          As the article points out, TSA is using this tech to improve efficiency. Every request for manual verification breaks their flow, requires an agent to come address you, and eats more time. At the very least, you ought not to scan in the hopes that TSA metrics look poor enough they decide this tech isn’t practical to use.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    Simply stand away from the camera or keep your face covered with a mask, present your ID, and say, “I opt out of biometrics. I want the standard verification process.”

    This sounds like a great way for a SovCit to get a full ass inspection from a sausage-fingered security guard.

    The best you’re going to get is redirected to a very long queue of people who’s passports don’t have biometrics.

    • BetterDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Actually no, they look at your face and your ID, make sure the information matches, and move you along. No secondary inspection, no difference except you didn’t get scanned with facial recognition. It’s the same process as before facial recognition was implemented.

      Why even write that comment?

      • Squizzy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Because to get to the guy in the kiosk you have to queue up and that is likely to be long. That is what was stated.

        • BetterDev@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          I’ve been in and out of DFW, BOS, and JFK since these facial recognition scanners went in and I can tell you with a great deal of confidence that there’s no additional wait time, or queue, or anything else if you opt out. There’s a TSA agent right next to the scanner who collects your ID whether you get scanned or not. That’s the same person who otherwise just checks it if you opt out. What are you even on about? Maybe its different at some airports, but I’ve been opting out every time I fly and it’s no big deal.

          • Squizzy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            I never said it was a big deal at all, it isnt.

            But there is an increased likelihood of a queue when opting for the non automated route. It is the reason automation is implemented.

            I too have been throuhh airports, it has never bothered me but if you dont go through the automated queue you might face a longer queue because a lot of previously manual customs real estate is given over to automation now.

            • BetterDev@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              ¯\(ツ)/¯ maybe, but as long as I have the option and it’s not tedious to do so (which is the case), I’m gonna opt out and encourage others to do so. Fair enough if your perspective is you want to accept whatever new security theater data collection is implemented in exchange for some perceived convenience. Making your case here with me in this conversation has taken more effort on your part than opting out of facial recognition at the security checkpoint in an airport would have, and I find that fact amusingly ironic.

              • Squizzy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                I also I never said I prefer the convenience over the privacy. Here is a tip, just because you hold a viewpoint does not mean it is infallible. There ae trade offs. While personally I am scurity and privacy conscious, I was pointing out the barrier for people to opt out, that is all. There is no two ways about it, unless there are a ratoo of 1:1 staff to passengers who opt out there will be a queue. The machines were put in in massive volume far exceeding the number of staff that would ever be checking people through in order to speed up the experience and due to them costing less to run.

                I agree with you. You can still be objective and recognise the situation for what it is. A barrier to opting out is the likelihood that the manual check through takes more time. It doesnt have to be significantly more time.

                • BetterDev@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  And what I’m saying is it doesn’t take more time to opt out in my experience. Its just as quick to get manually verified as to be biometrically scanned.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Get clear ones. Most (all?) of those security cameras use IR illumination to ID you, so you can have lenses that allow visible light through, but mess up IR scanning. I think you can get them w/ prescription lenses if you email the creator, so you can legitimately tell them you need your glasses to see (if you need a prescription, that is).

            • csm10495@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Then just ask to not be facial scanned. Last airport I went to had signs saying you could opt out.

              Then you don’t need weird glasses either.

              • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                I’m less worried about the face scanning (you can opt-out, as you said), I’m more worried about the camera scanning in other parts of the airport. The glasses combat the most common form of face scanning, which uses IR illumination. It also works at grocery stores and whatnot, which is especially important if you’re a POC and likely to be racially profiled as a shoplifter (I’ve read some horror stories).

                It does paint a bright red target on my chest since they show up as a massive bright light source on IR feeds (if a security guard happens to watch), so it’s more a form of protest than anything.

    • pewter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 months ago

      Hour vs. hour it’s the best form of transportation

      You get more space, there’s no TSA, you don’t get charged for bringing luggage, you can carry on liquids, you get leg room, the wifi is decent.

      But if I’m traveling a really far distance… For example, if I’m going from California to New York I’d rather go by plane. Going by train for that seems to be pretty horrible. America is in desperate need of a ground transportation that can get from California to New York quickly.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        if I’m going from California to New York

        Yup, that’s like 70-80 hours, depending on where in CA you’re leaving from. So you’ll be on that train for 3 days, and have to change trains 2-4 times. The plus side is that it’s cost-competitive w/ flying ($400-ish, vs $200-ish flying), but that’s for coach, so you’d spend those 3 days sleeping in a chair. If you want a sleeper room, that’s like $2k.

        A direct flight would take 5-ish hours and cost $200-ish.

        There’s a reason nobody rides trains in the US, and it’s because it takes way too long and it’s too expensive. It would be a fun experience, but not great if you’re using it for transportation.

      • Liz@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        If we put in a mag-lev system that averages 250 mph from station to station, an overnight sleeper train across the country becomes extremely attractive.

        • Chee_Koala@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          There is a sleeper train from Amsterdam to Vienna, last 2 / 3 years I checked it was sold out almost everyday. It seems like the perfect mode of transport

    • al4s@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      For distances >600km, flying is usually 4x-10x faster at a similar price. At least in and around Germany. I assume in the US trains compare way worse, also because the distances are way larger.

      Examples: “Normal” example: Stuttgart (Germany) -> Amsterdam (Netherlands) Train: 11h 10min - 241€ Plane: 1h 20min - 225€

      Best case scenario for train in Germany at around that distance (because there’s a direct connection): München -> Berlin Train: 3h 54min - 167€ Plane: 1h 5min - 226€

      • TechNerdWizard42@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 months ago

        I’d actually love to take some sort of sea train, underground tunnel or floating death wave train one day. It wouldn’t be relaxing, peaceful, or cheap. But it would be an adventure.

    • Fades@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      They are very much incomparable more so than they are comparable. Try taking a train over a sea or across a country like the US.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Exactly. I live near SLC, and to get to SF would take:

        • ~19 hours by train and cost $92 in coach
        • ~11 hours by car - $60 in gas in my hybrid, $130 in my minivan
        • ~2 hours by plane - <$50 by plane (Frontier)

        And that’s a route with a direct train connection, so literally no transfers. So, a train takes way longer, is probably more expensive (esp. if I take family), and I’d probably need a rental car on the other end. And that’s for a “best case” scenario with direct train service.

        Screw that, trains anywhere other than the east coast of the US makes pretty much no sense for transportation. As an experience, sure, but not to get from A to B.

  • player2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    2 months ago

    You’re already on hundreds of cameras by walking into any airport in the world. Do they need your consent to run facial recognition software on the security footage?

    • Uli@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I used to work for a company that did various kinds of biometric recognition. I unfortunately was paraded past these cameras many times for testing purposes, so my face was compromised many moons ago.

      We had two kinds of products we installed in airports. When looking at large crowds most airports wanted cameras that would monitor the flow of traffic, determining if there were any bottlenecks causing people to arrive at their gate (or baggage claim) after their luggage.

      The other product was facial recognition for identification purposes. These are the machines you have to stand right next to. There are various legal reasons airports did not want to use any crowd-level cameras for identification. They hadn’t obtained consent, but also, the low resolution per face would lead to many more false positives. It was also too costly.

      But we did have high def cameras installed in strategic locations at large music halls. These private companies were less concerned with privacy and more concerned with keeping banned individuals out of their property. In those cases, we registered faces of people who were kicked out for various reasons and ignored all other faces.

      My point I guess is twofold: first, you might not be facially tracked in as many places as you think you are. Second, eventually you will be and there’s not a whole lot we can do to stop it. For many years, Target has identified people with their payment card, used facial recognition to detect when they return to the store, and used crowd tracking to see where in the store you go (and sometimes they have even changed ad displays based on the demographics of people standing nearby).

      Mostly, you will be identified and tracked when there is financial incentive to do so.

  • MajorHavoc@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Facial recognition poses privacy risks, including potential data breaches,

    I know you’re using the acceptable legal term.

    As a Cybersecurity person, the “potential” data breaches we talk about, today, are really pretty certain, at this point, in history.

    We may work towards a collective genuine ‘potential’, where the breach might never happen, someday, with effort.

    Turns chair around and sits straddling it like a cool youth mentor.

    Y’alls faces at airports are definitely getting leaked on the dark web.

    The good news is it might take enough years to leak that your appearance might happen to change in between.

  • 1984@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    It’s about normalizing survellience, and the article also says this as an opinion further down in the text.

    Everyone can see that we are going towards the society in black mirror, with social scores, and people being punished for not complying with rules of any kind. I’m glad I’m kind of old because the future will suck.