←back to thread

You can't refuse to be scanned by ICE's facial recognition app, DHS document say

(www.404media.co)
574 points nh43215rgb | 6 comments | 01 Nov 25 08:58 UTC | HN request time: 0.002s | source | bottom
Show context
noodlesUK ◴[01 Nov 25 12:39 UTC] No.45781183[source]▶
This is going to be a huge pain. The US has a very fragmented identity system, and "move fast and break things" approaches like this to bring information from across government systems well outside the scope of what that information was collected for will result in real problems.

I worry what this app and systems like it might mean for me. I'm a US citizen, but I used to be an LPR. I never naturalized - I got my citizenship automatically by operation of law (INA 320, the child citizenship act). At some point I stopped being noodlesUK (LPR) and magically became noodlesUK (US Citizen), but not through the normal process. Presumably this means that there are entries in USCIS's systems that are orphaned, that likely indicate that I am an LPR who has abandoned their status, or at least been very bad about renewing their green card.

I fear that people in similar situations to my own might have a camera put in their face, some old database record that has no chance of being updated will be returned, and the obvious evidence in front of an officer's eyes, such as a US passport will be ignored. There are probably millions of people in similar situations to me, and millions more with even more complex statuses.

I know people who have multiple citizenships with multiple names, similar to this person: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45531721. Will these hastily deployed systems be able to cope with the complex realities of real people?

EDIT: LPR is lawful permanent resident, i.e., green card holder

replies(12): >>45781485 #>>45781852 #>>45781864 #>>45781962 #>>45782215 #>>45782371 #>>45782456 #>>45782564 #>>45782567 #>>45782617 #>>45783236 #>>45785284 #
randerson ◴[01 Nov 25 15:23 UTC] No.45782371[source]▶
Can someone remind me why this fragmented identity system is preferable to a National ID?

I get that nobody wants to be tracked by the government. But we are already being tracked... just imperfectly to the point where innocent people are being jailed.

The question should be how accurate do we want the government's data on us to be. And how much of our taxpayer money do we want to spend on companies like Palantir to fuzzy match our data across systems when we could simplify this all with a primary key.

replies(6): >>45782410 #>>45782496 #>>45782806 #>>45782940 #>>45789369 #>>45791100 #
noodlesUK ◴[01 Nov 25 16:25 UTC] No.45782940[source]▶
This argument rings especially true in the U.S. where there is already a primary key in use every day. The SSN serves as a universal enumerator but without canonical data.

If the U.S. wanted to have a national ID system with rules, a defined scope, and redress procedures when things went wrong, and established it in the open, following a democratic process, I would be much happier.

The system we are getting instead has all the downsides of centralisation, with none of the upsides.

replies(1): >>45783380 #
1. jonway ◴[01 Nov 25 17:13 UTC] No.45783380[source]▶
Well, in the 90s through the late 2000s there was a LOT of paranoia from the right, especially the evangelical right, as well as the milieu that is sorta called the "patriot movement" which includes minutemen militias, sovereign citizens, conspiracy theorists, separatists etc. regarding Government goons coming for them, "Mark of the Beast" stuff, and New World Order global cabals and what not. They even had magazines.[0] This is the precursor to the Obama FEMA Camp conspiracy theories (Which is ironic, since we are now building camps, just you know, for those people.)

Early 90's 2nd amendment anxiety, Ruby Ridge, assault weapon bans/Brady Bill and McVeigh's terrorist bombing in Oklahoma City propelled this stuff, and when we tried to impliment the national id (REAL ID Act) they very much flipped out, so they leaned on States Rights to shatter this notion, basically letting any state just not do it. 20 years later after REAL ID passed, you still don't need it unless you want to get on a plane.

It is highly ironic that the very same humans brains that constitute the right wing which railed against the REAL ID act are now basically demanding REAL ID Act. This is worth reflecting on.

[0] https://web.archive.org/web/20060702184553/http://www.nonati...

replies(1): >>45787652 #
2. mindslight ◴[02 Nov 25 03:28 UTC] No.45787652[source]▶
> 20 years later after REAL ID passed, you still don't need it unless you want to get on a plane

... or shop at Home Depot.

> It is highly ironic that the very same humans brains that constitute the right wing which railed against the REAL ID act are now basically demanding REAL ID Act

Ironic, coincidence, or all according to plan?

The so-called right wing has been being led around by the corporate lobbyist agenda for decades now. It's not a terrible stretch to imagine the same corpo political operatives that were behind the ratcheting authoritarian ID requirements are now behind the fascist kidnap squads as they tighten the noose around our society.

A bit paranoid and non-actionable, of course.

replies(2): >>45788907 #>>45791046 #
3. ◴[02 Nov 25 09:07 UTC] No.45788907[source]▶
4. mindslight ◴[02 Nov 25 15:34 UTC] No.45791046[source]▶
I just realized I inverted the sense of what you were saying about opposition to REAL ID. The way I remember it, it was the right wing cheering on the "Patriot" act, "REAL ID", and all those general "homeland security" laws back then. Yes, there was red tribe grassroots opposition in general terms, but that kind of thing always gets brushed aside when "their" team is doing it. See also the 2nd amendment - individual liberty and "from my cold dead hands", but then zero reservations about actively cheering the government agents who summarily executed Breonna Taylor. Or these masked abduction squads currently roaming the streets - blatantly anti-American anti-Constitutional, and if JOEBIDEN had done anything resembling this we would have never heard the end of it. But since it's "their guys" doing it it's just framed as some noble exercise of the government agents' own liberty to cleanse the undesirables.
replies(1): >>45795241 #
5. jonway ◴[03 Nov 25 02:10 UTC] No.45795241{3}[source]▶
No, the right wing fielded opposition to the real ID laws. See this 2008 CATO report[0]. There was a bipartisan movement against this at the time.

But yes, far less bothered by stingrays, ALPR national surveillance, etc in more recent times.

I just want to give people their dues on this. For example Rand Paul introduced the Justice for Breonna Taylor Act which would have banned no-knock warrants if it had passed.[1]

[0] https://www.cato.org/policy-report/july/august-2008/real-id-...

[1] https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/116/s3955

replies(1): >>45795477 #
6. mindslight ◴[03 Nov 25 03:05 UTC] No.45795477{4}[source]▶
> Rand Paul introduced the Justice for Breonna Taylor Act which would have banned no-knock warrants if it had passed

Yes, Rand Paul deserves credit for this. But isn't he basically like an exception that proves the rule?

The 2005 vote on the REAL ID ACT was 218 Yea 9 Nay for Republicans, and 42 Yea 152 Nay for Democrats. Ron Paul was one of those Nays. He deserves credit along with the other 8. But overall, it was still a Republican bill. That's what my original comment was referring to.

And it's great that Republican opposition to REAL ID built. But of course the immediate question is how much of that opposition was due to being bored with Bush, and having a Democratic administration on the horizon? Just like the dishonest cries about fiscal responsibility.

Because while it's important to give credit and look to build pro-freedom coalitions, it's also important to call out the rank hypocrisy. And rank hypocrisy seems to be the entire platform of the Republican party these days. For example, I don't see any of these purported 2nd amendment enthusiasts forming militias to defend their states against the federalized abduction squads.