Digg Townhall Tonight!
Tune into the live Digg townhall tonight at 5:00pm PST/8:00pm EST.
FBI Prepares Vast Database Of Biometrics
washingtonpost.com — The FBI is embarking on a $1 billion effort to build the world's largest computer database of peoples' physical characteristics, a project that would give the government unprecedented abilities to identify individuals in the United States and abroad. Digital images of faces, fingerprints and palm patterns are already flowing into FBI systems.
FirstDigg- 866 diggs
- digg it
- SeethisPass, on 12/22/2007, -2/+68The government is far too big.
- rkzda, on 12/22/2007, -1/+26That's the main reason why I support Ron Paul.
- BlazinEurasian, on 12/22/2007, -2/+7Imagine if they spent the extra billion on something useful, like a desalinization plant.
- virtualme7, on 12/22/2007, -1/+10Can't wait for the retinal scanners and microchips implanted at birth!
- ufia, on 12/22/2007, -11/+2Your ancestors were against birth name, they believed the village shaman was going too far, pointing at people was enough to identify them. Later came the street addresses, all a big conspiracy to control the masses, pointing at your home was enough to show people where you live. Today computers can identify our face? Oh, the humanity!
/Wake up, you naive shills, a camera can steal your soul!- jjmckay, on 12/22/2007, -3/+11Well said. Maybe people's fears are also based on an instinctual perception that something is wrong and that this FBI database story is one more link in the chain that will bind us. Ya know, tyranny has happened many times before so its a reasonable concern.
- sotopheavy, on 12/23/2007, -1/+1That would be funny if there was a poop scanner. Every time you wanted to get in somewhere you just had to poo.
- Spectre74, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1Scatners. How convenient.
- laughmore, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1Bizarre Live Interview with 911 Police Chief and Dir. of WTC
Who's Alan Reiss = Director of WTC, had to digg out of 5 & 6
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhCiAHTp4a4
What's more he barely survived the 1993 attack, when he was supervising engineer for operations. Man this guy has terrible luck. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940 ... What's more the Port Authority police, William R. Hall, chief promoted to the to Federal Security Director in 2002.
https://www.panynj.gov/AboutthePortAuthority/Press ...
- Spectre74, on 12/22/2007, -1/+77WHEN IS IT GOING TO STOP! Damn man. I feel like all the crap i was told to be scared of with Communism as a kid is happening in my own country now.
- yojiffyskippy, on 12/22/2007, -21/+2Get out before it's too late. I hear Putin has a lovely little country that you might consider.
- Napoleone, on 12/22/2007, -3/+21I see. Since there are worse places, he/she should put up with a thus far less tyrannical home government. Is that your implication, dumbass?
- Ajajadude, on 12/22/2007, -11/+3Nope. He's saying that this anything like "tyranny" at all. Sure, there is a possibility that this database could be misused to terrorize innocent people, but the odds of that happening are pretty slim.
Every land mass with some sort of governing body has the potential for becoming a tyrannical nation. Stop with the tinfoil hat brigade.- Napoleone, on 12/22/2007, -1/+16No one but fools like you is buying into your "submit and you'll be safe" *****. Nice try though.
- Kerrigore, on 12/22/2007, -2/+6You're fighting hundreds of years of culturally-based inherent distrust for government and authority in America. You're not going to win.
- Napoleone, on 12/22/2007, -0/+9@Ker No. He's fighting a distrust based on the historical fact that each and every government that's ever existed, that's had more power than its people, has inevitibly used it to repress and oppress them.
- DokGonzo, on 12/22/2007, -0/+10To hell with governments! People are waking up to the fact that the best government is the one that governs least. Unfortunately, so are the people in power, so they will try and control more and more, making sure the clueless public stays clueless. Their only hope is to convince the population that nothing can change, that giving up liberties is unavoidable, that this is the "natural order of things"... But they lie. They have always lied. And they'll continue lying because that's essentially all they do. Luckily, they never predicted what the Internet will do for the cause of Liberty. They are scared to death of it. So they will try to control it as well. But it's futile. THEY are the minority. And just as the great revolutions shaked the foundations of monarchies around the world some 200+ years ago, new revolutions will do the same, because LIBERTY is the "natural order of things"! Live free or die!
- JonForTheWin, on 12/23/2007, -0/+5>could be misused to terrorize innocent people, but the odds of that happening are pretty slim.
Just like with social security and the IRS.
OH WAIT - Kerrigore, on 12/23/2007, -3/+1@DokGonzo, Napoleone
I wonder what your excuse for why life sucks will be once you reduce the government. Governments in Canada and Europe have more power and scope than the US, but I don't hear the citizens complaining.
- Ajajadude, on 12/22/2007, -11/+3Nope. He's saying that this anything like "tyranny" at all. Sure, there is a possibility that this database could be misused to terrorize innocent people, but the odds of that happening are pretty slim.
- Napoleone, on 12/22/2007, -3/+21I see. Since there are worse places, he/she should put up with a thus far less tyrannical home government. Is that your implication, dumbass?
- MrCobaltBlue, on 12/22/2007, -2/+21It stops when Ron Paul gets elected President.
- jjmckay, on 12/22/2007, -1/+11Not sure when it will stop. I can't predict the future. We can speed up the process by electing Ron Paul in 2008 to the office of President of the United States.
- arplayer2k, on 12/23/2007, -0/+9Why do we need an extra $1b spent on our already big and incompetent intelligence agencies? Do you think this will help them do anything right.... I mean so far we have invested a lot, and they are not able to do anything right, let alone provide good intelligence.
- PhilLesh69, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1The money being spent goes to our leader's friends.
- PhilLesh69, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1The money being spent goes to our leader's friends.
- hiphoc, on 12/23/2007, -0/+4We were told to be scared of commies to distract us from the commies setting up shop here. This beast has been creeping along fro a long time now. The US always has some external enemy to scare the ***** out of people so they can give in to government.
- PhilLesh69, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1Internal or external enemies.
Yeah, we have beeh sold out.
- PhilLesh69, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1Internal or external enemies.
- HippyInASuit, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1That is why our kinds now don't get taught about social issues in the USSR and Hitler's Germany. They just get read a list of event and dates and names and are asked to recall those names and numbers.
- Spectre74, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1That, I didn't think about. It's a good point.
- yojiffyskippy, on 12/22/2007, -21/+2Get out before it's too late. I hear Putin has a lovely little country that you might consider.
- iraq, on 12/22/2007, -3/+55American voters have themselves to blame, I still can't believe President Bush won two elections in the United States. He was my governor in Texas, I knew he was one of the biggest idiots alive. Somehow his idiocy got looked over by voters who were concerned with Bill Clinton and where he was dipping his presidential sausage...
If another neo-con makes it into office, it's all over. America is hardly recognizable anymore, we need to restore this country and get these assholes out of office.- forteller, on 12/22/2007, -5/+47"I still can't believe President Bush won two elections in the United States."
You don't have to believe it, because he didn't! He didn't win any of the elections, they where both rigged.- dinostabOMG, on 12/22/2007, -0/+13Regardless, there was still an embarrassing proportion of voters who supported him. Although that has dwindled to a much smaller number now (where were you idiots when we needed you) it really is an embarrassment that he is still tolerated by so many.
- Napoleone, on 12/22/2007, -1/+17Every tyrant in history has had his or her supporters and strong advocates. We have to resign ourselves to that fact and stop trying to convince them of their folly. We have to fight them.
- dinostabOMG, on 12/22/2007, -0/+13Regardless, there was still an embarrassing proportion of voters who supported him. Although that has dwindled to a much smaller number now (where were you idiots when we needed you) it really is an embarrassment that he is still tolerated by so many.
- Ajajadude, on 12/22/2007, -1/+13The good news is, I think the American people might have learned their lesson. I know a number of people I got into really heated debates with during the last election who were die hard Bush fans/supporters. Now, they've realized that they made a big ass mistake and are even embarrassed to admit they voted for him...twice.
- virtualme7, on 12/22/2007, -7/+1and now they say "Ron Paul 2008"...they never learn
I, along with most who aren't rural hicks or ultra wealthy or fanatically religious, voted against him.- HippyInASuit, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1You can't possibly believe that any significant number of Bush supporters, former or otherwise, now support Ron Paul. Nice trolling though. I guess you got me.
- virtualme7, on 12/22/2007, -7/+1and now they say "Ron Paul 2008"...they never learn
- billtorpey, on 12/23/2007, -1/+4You are exa ctly right! There can be no justification for voting for Bush twice. This is really 1984, and it doesn't look like anyone can stop it. The best we can do is to make sure the new Democratic administration and Congress watch it every step of the way. Accountability is the byword!
- buckrogers1965, on 12/23/2007, -0/+4Most of the people I know who voted for Bush in the first election voted for the other side in the next race. Don't know where his support came in the second election.
- forteller, on 12/22/2007, -5/+47"I still can't believe President Bush won two elections in the United States."
- yellowcakewalk, on 12/22/2007, -2/+41Stand firm against Big Brother! Get out in the street today, protest S.1959 the "Thought Crimes Act of 2007". Look up this monstrous piece of domestic repression. It's a hard rain's a gonna fall, people.
- jquipp, on 12/22/2007, -4/+11Lots of possibilities here ... both good and bad. As always, the information is just the weapon ... someone still has to pull the trigger.
- Albionshores, on 12/22/2007, -4/+15Why make a weapon designed to be pointed at American citizens?
- Ajajadude, on 12/22/2007, -6/+2If you were paying attention, it's intended to be "aimed" at the entire world.
- redDC143C, on 12/22/2007, -0/+9If you were paying attention, America is part of the "entire world"
- Ajajadude, on 12/22/2007, -6/+2If you were paying attention, it's intended to be "aimed" at the entire world.
- Napoleone, on 12/22/2007, -3/+12There are no good possibilities with this. We should always keep in mind that all power we grant our government -- and this power to make databases on all of us isn't one of them -- can someday fall into the wrong hands.
Our Rights are being stripped from us and shredded and we're not even being consulted about it. This cannot be tolerated.- Ajajadude, on 12/22/2007, -8/+1The ironic, sad (but yet quite funny) thing is that you willingly publish personal information on the internet for all to see but can't handle the thought of the government knowing anything about you.
Anyway, yes, there are plenty of good possibilities for this, just like there are plenty of scary possibilities for this. The only way to keep your tinfoil covered noggin' safe is to hold your government accountable for everything it does.- Napoleone, on 12/22/2007, -0/+8What personal information? My false profile? You don't know a damn thing about me. All you know is you need to be a good party hack and government lackey.
- SeethisPass, on 12/22/2007, -0/+8 How the hell do we do that? They're too big to influence.and they don't want us to be able to.
- Ajajadude, on 12/22/2007, -8/+1The ironic, sad (but yet quite funny) thing is that you willingly publish personal information on the internet for all to see but can't handle the thought of the government knowing anything about you.
- Albionshores, on 12/22/2007, -4/+15Why make a weapon designed to be pointed at American citizens?
- rhabd0mancer, on 12/22/2007, -15/+3This reminds me of the Minority Report.
Bush, Cheney and Condi Rice are the Precogs.- JonForTheWin, on 12/23/2007, -0/+3No.
- PhilLesh69, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1No, they are just power-hungry politicians. Who can blame them for accumulating power? They just like that power.
Who can blame us citizens for failing our duty? God and country can! We have failed our duty by allowing this ***** to happen!
- Napoleone, on 12/22/2007, -3/+52If this isn't fascism then what is? Our so called government proposes we become inmates of a police state and we're still debating the pros and cons. Let me tell you, there's nothing good about this. There are people so afraid that they fear their own shadows, and they would like nothing more than to see us all tagged, monitored and herded for the sake of their own peace of mind. This is tyranny.
Open your eyes and look at the signs. Prepare yourselves, and forget about convincing fools of the danger at hand.
-Spy satellites aimed at us.
-Biometric databases of people who've committed no crime.
-Private armies like Blackwater.
-A thought crimes commission.
-An Executive Office with the power to suspend the citizenship of any American and declare them an enemy combatant.
-Torture.
-Secret prisons.
-A government unresponsive to the will of its people.
It can happen in America, because we're humans, too. We're as vulnerable as anyone to the madness that's plagued our species for millennia.
It's your call whether or not you fight or submit. But I, for one, will take pride in seeing my name amongst those who opposed this tyranny. I want the future to know that whether I failed or succeeded, I did not my part to try and stop it. This is real. Ready yourselves to fight it.- Napoleone, on 12/22/2007, -2/+9Scratch that "not" that was meant to preceed "cower" before a new thought entered my mind.
I will not stay still or silent in the face of tyranny. I have but one life to my name, and I will live it boldly. - Traddles, on 12/22/2007, -3/+6so wait, when you say "I want the future to know that whether I failed or succeeded, I did my part to try and stop it", which blog is it you're planning on posting to?
I agree with everything you've said, but put your money where your mouth is. I've heard way to many people sounding very outraged and militant about fixing problems but then I don't hear anything on the news about people actually DOING anything.... so here is a call for everybody to stop talking big if they can't act on what they so passionately believe. (And no, that doesn't mean you can just go write a blog entry in red angry text about how you hate so-and-so).
What happened to passionate individuals willing to get up and actually ACT on what the believe?- jjmckay, on 12/22/2007, -0/+3Traddles, I'd say what you said in a different way:
I call on people to continue to talk big but realize that doing so by itself may not make much difference. Talk is cheap, deeds are precious. If all you can to is speak up, then do that and don't be ashamed of speaking out.- Traddles, on 12/22/2007, -0/+4I will grant you, there are those who's only ability lies in speaking the truth and acting on what one believes is more or less impossible. But it's reaching the point where everybody agreeing that what the government is doing is wrong just isn't a very big threat to that government any more. Our government is no longer afraid of it's people, and that is a very dangerous place to be.
- Napoleone, on 12/22/2007, -0/+3I agree with you. But you presume too much in thinking I am idle.
- Traddles, on 12/22/2007, -5/+1so how many parliaments have you blown up lately? Or are you more of the white-board carrying type?
- Napoleone, on 12/22/2007, -0/+3@Trad
Any violent act that's performed by an individual or small group, as opposed to the masses, will effectively be portrayed as terrorism. And that will only lead to the further repression of the People; effectively short circuiting a popular uprising.
- DokGonzo, on 12/22/2007, -0/+4> What happened to passionate individuals willing to get up and actually ACT on what the believe?
They're supporting Ron Paul.
- jjmckay, on 12/22/2007, -0/+3Traddles, I'd say what you said in a different way:
- jjmckay, on 12/22/2007, -0/+8"...That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government,..."
---Declaration of Independence - HiCaP, on 12/22/2007, -8/+1(((((Tin Foil Alert)))))
- Frnnkdlxx, on 12/22/2007, -0/+7I just can't picture the Founding Fathers wearing tin foil hats like you want people to believe by marginalizing napoleone...
- Frnnkdlxx, on 12/22/2007, -1/+2Niiiiice!
- phanfromcheese, on 12/23/2007, -0/+5I agree. "People should not fear their government; A government should fear the people"
- Napoleone, on 12/22/2007, -2/+9Scratch that "not" that was meant to preceed "cower" before a new thought entered my mind.
- over900000, on 12/22/2007, -2/+31Police State
- URnotheonly1, on 12/22/2007, -6/+4I guess I will have to answer for those tickets and that DWI in the south sometime soon.
- rkzda, on 12/22/2007, -4/+5Hopefully that's sarcasm, people that commit DWI are idiots.
- URnotheonly1, on 12/22/2007, -1/+630 years ago it was a fine
- buckrogers1965, on 12/23/2007, -2/+1Yeah, but you were still an idiot.
- URnotheonly1, on 12/22/2007, -1/+630 years ago it was a fine
- rkzda, on 12/22/2007, -4/+5Hopefully that's sarcasm, people that commit DWI are idiots.
- vermax, on 12/22/2007, -1/+23boy this has like zero potential for abuse or inaccuracy, no sir. glad we didn't have anything better to do with a billion dollars. and I'm sure the whole system will work flawlessly, and not get scrapped within hours of turning it on because of backroom deals that overruled mobs of whistleblowers, nope that could never happen. who are they protecting us from again? people who want to take away our freedoms, right? who writes this *****, is there a writer's strike in the cosmic office or something? this intern-gagged noise is getting on my nerves.
- LaerrusFish, on 12/22/2007, -2/+6Wouldn't it be cool to take all the faces and order them by similarities and make one big ass people morph.
- SeethisPass, on 12/22/2007, -0/+2I've already seen the resulting faces but I don't remember where.The point was that the absolute most average face is the most beautiful and attractive.
- Darren07, on 12/22/2007, -2/+281984
- Miami305Dade, on 12/22/2007, -1/+23When we sacrifice liberty for the sake of security, we lose both!
- TheLD, on 12/22/2007, -1/+10Ok I am not going to the USA then. They already take all of this information from people who are British, but if they are going to be storing this information about me Eff it
- storm72, on 12/22/2007, -0/+12Unfortunately, we're going down the same Orwellian path as the UK here in the US. Your feeling about the US is about the same as my feeling about the UK.
- goldfishey, on 12/23/2007, -0/+3Me neither, The USA is on my list of countries I want to go to -It has some amazing places. But no, I see no reason why my data should be on a US database. So unless things change I guess I miss out. Its sad, but there it is.
- MadScientist440, on 12/22/2007, -10/+2True, this seems scary at first, but aren't there possibilities here for a fairer justice system? Look at how many innocent people who have been exonerated because of the overwhelmingly accurate method of DNA testing. If the truth is more easily proven, which is quite possible with this system of biometrics, the interests of justice are better served. That means less brutality trying to find answers, less persecution of the innocent out of lack of evidence...
How about accuracy in background checks? Don't you want the professionals upon whom you depend to take care of your money, your children, et cetera, to have the proven character to do the job with integrity?
Digg me down if you want... I just see potential for good with more transparency, as long as we heed the warnings of a dystopian future given to us by the likes of George Orwell.- appleseed1234, on 12/22/2007, -1/+3The problem is the system doesn't consider the fact that everyones flawed, and a little opacity means a little more freedom for everyone.
And it's BECAUSE people are flawed that this WILL be abused to revert to a dystopian society.- Ajajadude, on 12/22/2007, -5/+1Take a prozac or smoke a bowl, good lord, you people are way too paranoid for your own good.
- Schneckehaus, on 12/22/2007, -0/+7A tiny bit of paranoia is what keeps us safe.
- jjmckay, on 12/22/2007, -0/+5Diligence is the price of freedom, what little we have left.
- MadScientist440, on 12/22/2007, -4/+0Yes, everyone is flawed, but certainly not everyone is flawed enough that the FBI would use its limited resources to persecute them. We do have a very important resource in this country called the United States Constitution, and we need to make sure we are constantly keeping our leaders accountable to that document. It is not technology that we should fear. It is complacency. So long as we are watching them, who cares if they are watching us? They cannot do anything against the Constitution, which protects the rights of our citizens, so long as we do not let them.
The fact that they are watching should only serve as a reminder that it is our duty to watch them back.- jjmckay, on 12/22/2007, -0/+5Watch them back? You can't. They are in secured buildings. Try to enter a secured government facility to 'watch them back' as you put it. They'll deny and/or arrest you. You can't watch them that way. You can, however, stop them from watching you in the first place.
- spyd3rweb, on 12/22/2007, -0/+3I am almost certain it would overuse its 'limited resources' because then it could demand more funding. Every bureaucracy does this, look at the department of education, "WE NEED MORE MONEY FOR SCHOOLS!!!"
- Ajajadude, on 12/22/2007, -5/+1Take a prozac or smoke a bowl, good lord, you people are way too paranoid for your own good.
- dondara, on 12/22/2007, -0/+7I wish I could share your optimism. But with the lessons of history laid out before us, I just don't anything good coming of this. Things haven't really gotten any worse, the evil overlords have just quit hiding what they are doing. They have conditioned the people to stay drunk, watch TV and not question authority. Well, in 10 years when 90% of us are locked up in security centers or whatever ***** name the thugs give them, maybe China will take all the money that walmart gave them and come rescue us so we can make tainted toys for the EU.
- Frnnkdlxx, on 12/22/2007, -0/+2If you know you're going to get dugg down, they why advertise your hostility to libertarian ideals? Most Americans, whether they know it or not are libertarian and conservative at the same time but for varying ideas across the spectrum. Unfortunately they've been politicized to follow only their "parties". Had you said you support this type of thing only 200 years ago, you'd be taken outside, beaten, tarred, feathered, hung, shot. They did it to plenty of politicians immediately following the Revolutionary War simply because they wanted to further erode rights that we know we're entitled to under the guise of expedience and convenience..... How much do you understand government tyranny, globally?
- appleseed1234, on 12/22/2007, -1/+3The problem is the system doesn't consider the fact that everyones flawed, and a little opacity means a little more freedom for everyone.
- Bahimiron, on 12/22/2007, -0/+11Now Disney will hand over their biometric collection to the FBI and the feds will have a comprehensive list of people who love the happiest place on Earth!
- appleseed1234, on 12/22/2007, -0/+10Strange how they do all this stuff to make the world a better place but life only seems to get more difficult.
- yogurtslinger, on 12/22/2007, -1/+22My government would never do this to their people.
OOPS, TOO LATE TO WAKE UP NOW YOU ***** - krnldmp, on 12/22/2007, -0/+5Porn for snoops.
- Skab, on 12/22/2007, -1/+4/sarcasm
RIGHT!! NOW there preparing it, not for the past 7 years NOW.
/end sarcasm.
hmm theme parks dmvs checking account thumb prints what makes you think they dont and havent had access to this all the time. - JusticeAK, on 12/22/2007, -0/+8Biometrics? It's going to stop crime Right? I feel the prison doors starting to shut.
- Skab, on 12/22/2007, -1/+14vote ron paul
- caferrell, on 12/22/2007, -0/+19We know who you are, we know who you talk to, we know who you owe money to, we know what you write and what you read, we know what you purchase at the grocery store and at what time you do it, we know where you work, we know who you are married to, who you have divorced, we know what you do online, we know your medical history and have samples of your dna. That is good because we are your friends.
Soon with the national ID card we will be able to protect you even better because we will know everywhere you go and at what time. Everything you do will be in our data base and that is good bcause we are your friends.
Trust your government and fear the enemies of America because we are your friends.- JigsawX, on 12/22/2007, -0/+6***** dude that sounds like something that came right out of 1984.If thats what your getting at good job..Im thinking thats were you were going with it :).
- Farmgal123, on 12/22/2007, -0/+6some friends are more equal than others...
- WarBiscuit, on 12/22/2007, -0/+4Just wanted to draw attention to a slashdot post regarding this article,
It makes a good point about about privacy & the class system,
which I don't think I've heard brought up at all in similar discussions before...
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=397398&cid ...- Pherdnut, on 12/22/2007, -0/+2I like the issue but how is that not already a problem?
- jnmlmz, on 12/22/2007, -8/+7You guys are idiots....the is not a new system that President Bush or any other politician decided we needed to fight the war on terror. The FBI fingerprint system is a criminal system that has been in place for over a hundred years. It went digital in 1974 when Printrak installed a fingerprint card reader to digitize the inked fingerprint images and store on huge disks. In the late nineties, under Clinton, the current system, IAFIS, was installed by Lockheed Martin. This new system incorporates the new biometric modalities and move the architecture to SOA in which the matching systems, feature extraction and results analysis are moved from thick closed systems to open services.
No scheme to undermine our rights, just a move to modernize and simplify the process of identifying criminals.
If you are really concerned about privacy, you should be worried about the new US VISIT IDENT system. The current system is made by a Chinese company and is made of individuals who are not criminals, just people trying to get in the country for a vacation or family visit.
Peace.- JusticeAK, on 12/22/2007, -3/+6you must be high.
- thcobbs, on 12/22/2007, -5/+3So to be level-headed and presenting factual information on digg, you must be High?
No WONDER sanity can not come to digg. - HippyInASuit, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1No way, man. I'm high and I think he's just retarded.
- thcobbs, on 12/22/2007, -5/+3So to be level-headed and presenting factual information on digg, you must be High?
- Napoleone, on 12/22/2007, -0/+7Only affects convicted criminals, right? A simple modernization of a pre-existing system, and nothing more?
FTA: "The FBI will also retain, upon request by employers, the fingerprints of employees who have undergone criminal background checks so the employers can be notified if employees have brushes with the law."
In other words, the FBI will have innocent people on file. That is not currently the case. And it is not at all acceptable that it become the case.- Birdoftruth, on 12/22/2007, -0/+2uh how bout:
if check != [array of criminals] then
echo "Not a criminal"
That is all it takes to check the data of their database. They don't need every single innocent.
- Birdoftruth, on 12/22/2007, -0/+2uh how bout:
- Farmgal123, on 12/22/2007, -0/+5"The long-term goal," Hornak said, is "ubiquitous use" of biometrics.
Ubiquitous use on everyone. Perfectly harmless I'm sure. Trust in Gov.
- JusticeAK, on 12/22/2007, -3/+6you must be high.
- Vodd9, on 12/22/2007, -0/+2George Orwell would probably shoot himself out of despair if he knew how easily government can spy people today.
- Pherdnut, on 12/22/2007, -4/+0I think the scary part is the idea of a ubiquitous use system to constantly track people. Nobody needs that much information on me. Agreed on the identification factor though. That's more good than bad.
- alexandramw, on 12/22/2007, -0/+6Very Orwellian....kinda speechless about this. Watch--this too will be overlooked on the TV news channels. Instead, we will have reports of Jamie whats-her-name Spears. always a diversion somewhere...
- Pherdnut, on 12/22/2007, -4/+0Wow. If you had mentioned Ron Paul you would have hit all three of the most commonly spammed names on Digg.
- xerigen, on 12/22/2007, -0/+4OH GOD, ANYTHING THAT WILL STOP THE EVIL TERRORISTS!!!!!11!1111one1oneonewon
- thcobbs, on 12/22/2007, -3/+1Except, this is to keep tabs on convicted criminals.
- Napoleone, on 12/22/2007, -0/+3*****. Read the ***** article.
FTA: "The FBI will also retain, upon request by employers, the fingerprints of employees who have undergone criminal background checks so the employers can be notified if employees have brushes with the law." - xerigen, on 12/22/2007, -0/+4...and we went to Iraq to find WMDs.
- Napoleone, on 12/22/2007, -0/+3*****. Read the ***** article.
- xerigen, on 12/22/2007, -1/+1wrong thread. please digg down
- thcobbs, on 12/22/2007, -3/+1Except, this is to keep tabs on convicted criminals.
- JusticeAK, on 12/22/2007, -1/+9Terrorists live at 1600 Pennsylvania.
- demonsnake69, on 12/22/2007, -1/+7It seems like the government is getting too big for its britches. There's only one way to deal with them now, and it doesn't involve protesting or casting your vote.
- xerigen, on 12/22/2007, -2/+2Enjoy your trip to Guantanamo Bay.
- Napoleone, on 12/22/2007, -1/+5Why, are you going to inform on him? Are you a brownshirt?
- xerigen, on 12/22/2007, -0/+3LoLz. It was a joke, guys. Please calm down. But I guess technically S.1959 could send you to Gitmo for that. Google it.
- Napoleone, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1All right. Just checking. Don't promote fear of the government. It's not healthy and it won't help us.
- xerigen, on 12/22/2007, -0/+3LoLz. It was a joke, guys. Please calm down. But I guess technically S.1959 could send you to Gitmo for that. Google it.
- demonsnake69, on 12/22/2007, -1/+1Why would up end up in Gitmo? What did I say that would put me in prison, any prison?
- Napoleone, on 12/22/2007, -0/+5That's the face of fascism. It threatens you when you exercise your rights against it.
- Napoleone, on 12/22/2007, -1/+5Why, are you going to inform on him? Are you a brownshirt?
- xerigen, on 12/22/2007, -2/+2Enjoy your trip to Guantanamo Bay.
- motters, on 12/22/2007, -0/+8This sounds very much like the proposed UK system. Anyone who believes that biometrics are foolproof and that this will only affect criminals should bear in mind that you leave fingerprints everywhere and that its trivially easy to lift fingerprints from a coffee cup. There are videos out there on the internet which show how this can be used to fool fingerprint scanners. In this way criminals will use the identities of innocent people, and once your biometrics are on a national database you can't change them like changing a password.
- Pherdnut, on 12/22/2007, -6/+0Uh... Do you know what biometrics is? Maybe you should read the article.
- thcobbs, on 12/22/2007, -9/+1Too bad its only for convicted criminals..........
Or did you not read past the WaPo ***** agenda?- Napoleone, on 12/22/2007, -1/+4Employers are being asked to submit their employees background checks, which include biometric information in many instances. Are employees convicted criminals now?
Go ***** yourself with your disinformation. Government apologists like you need to die. - Farmgal123, on 12/22/2007, -0/+6Did you not read the part about the actual goal of this?
"The long-term goal," Hornak said, is "ubiquitous use" of biometrics.
Even the proponents admit it's not just for convicted criminals.
- Napoleone, on 12/22/2007, -1/+4Employers are being asked to submit their employees background checks, which include biometric information in many instances. Are employees convicted criminals now?
- ordig, on 12/22/2007, -0/+3I knew I should have become a plastic surgeon. Oh well, maybe I can just broker operations on the black market. I'll still make bank.
- spyd3rweb, on 12/22/2007, -0/+2"I'll take the gills."
- Pherdnut, on 12/22/2007, -8/+0Okay people. I'm very proud of you all but for the love of Christ, would you please stop trying to wow us with your usage of the word "Orwellian." Thank you.
- Napoleone, on 12/22/2007, -0/+4You've had an opportunity to contribute to this conversation, and all you've done is bitch about people mentioning Orwell.
- Pherdnut, on 12/22/2007, -4/+0Not true.
- Frnnkdlxx, on 12/22/2007, -0/+3lol. enjoy your immaturity... You'll have plenty of time to grow up when the Blackwater trained police are bursting through your door issuing a warrant to investigate why you've used more than your allotted amount of water.
*BAM*
"ARE YOU GROWING POT?!"
"No...no.sir...no officer, I..."
*automatic rifle fire*
*police laugh*
Wrong address...
- Frnnkdlxx, on 12/22/2007, -0/+3lol. enjoy your immaturity... You'll have plenty of time to grow up when the Blackwater trained police are bursting through your door issuing a warrant to investigate why you've used more than your allotted amount of water.
- Pherdnut, on 12/22/2007, -4/+0Not true.
- Napoleone, on 12/22/2007, -0/+4You've had an opportunity to contribute to this conversation, and all you've done is bitch about people mentioning Orwell.
- brent0n, on 12/22/2007, -0/+8wow. every single law-abiding citizen of the US should be up in arms about this.
- OEMHumanoid, on 12/22/2007, -2/+0I can has new government please?
Is it just Digg.com where everyone bitches about our country or is everyone else in this land feeling the same way? I don't hear it from very many friends,family or co-workers but when I get home and check Digg.com.. I get blasted with angst against our leaders.
What's going on here? It seems like the only flaw with our constitution is it does not provide a easy any easy way to make a revolution without force. I wish we could vote for a do-over so to speak.- Frnnkdlxx, on 12/22/2007, -0/+2Jesus....
What the hell did this guy just say?
I could have sworn I just heard a broken Martian accent.... - HippyInASuit, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1Your friends, family, and co-workers don't read the news on the Internet, they watch it on TV or read it in newspspers. That makes all the difference.
- Frnnkdlxx, on 12/22/2007, -0/+2Jesus....
- jjmckay, on 12/22/2007, -0/+5Where in the US Constitution does it authorize the establishment of the FBI, let alone this Orwellian program?
- buckrogers1965, on 12/23/2007, -0/+4Yeah, before we had national police we elected the local sheriffs and they hired deputies. Don't like how the laws are being enforced? Then elect a new sheriff, firing the old one.
The federal police can come in and kill dozens of people and all they get is a letter of reprimand, at worst.
- buckrogers1965, on 12/23/2007, -0/+4Yeah, before we had national police we elected the local sheriffs and they hired deputies. Don't like how the laws are being enforced? Then elect a new sheriff, firing the old one.
- jjmckay, on 12/22/2007, -0/+6"...That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government,..."
---Declaration of Independence - HiCaP, on 12/22/2007, -7/+1(((((Tin Foil Alert)))))
- Frnnkdlxx, on 12/23/2007, -0/+7*throws you out of a window*
(((((((PAVEMENT ALERT)))))))
- Frnnkdlxx, on 12/23/2007, -0/+7*throws you out of a window*
- hexayurt, on 12/22/2007, -1/+2I'd like to point you at a paper I wrote on how we can manage large scale biometrics databases and increase the amount of privacy we have from government snooping.
http://guptaoption.com/4.SIAB-ISA.php
The basic crux of this paper is that you can separate the biometrics database, which simply identifies your physical body, and isn't necessarily any more intrusive than Flickr, and the reputation database, which stores things like your credit rating, any criminal record, and the suspicions of various government agencies about your intentions.
So when you do something like rent a car, you give them a token which has your face on it. They match your face to the token, and say "ok, this token is valid." But the token doesn't have your name, or your SSN, or anything else on it: it's totally sterile.
But if you steal the car, they take the token to court, as well as the proof you gave it to them, and the court uses the token to get your name, SSN and other details.
If all that FBI database stored was tokens, and it required a court order to go from a match in the biometrics database to a name and street address, I think we'd have a fair balance between civil liberties and security.
A database of pictures of faces or fingerprints is no more intrusive than Flickr. It's the connecting of your face or your fingerprint to your background that is the intrusion, and we can separate the two databases and require a court order (and a crypto key) to reconnect them.
Cheap DNA scanners are coming. We've gotta fix this before they arrive.- slicerace, on 12/23/2007, -0/+4Uhm - except that you're assuming nobody will ever, ever, ever combine the databases without a court order. The FBI or NSA or CIA or any other agency would just get a hold of both of them, easily, and your whole plan is defeated.
A database is much more intrusive than Flickr- Flicker is voluntary. Having my personal fingerprint, social security number, biometric information along with my DNA available to anyone in the government that wants it is NOT the same as posting landscape photos or party pictures on Flickr - the analogy is a terrible one.
The government cannot even be trusted to keep the information a secret -- c.f. with the British, who lost millions of records on millions of families that only god knows who has right now...- hexayurt, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1On this you kind of have to read the paper. The idea is that the biometrics database - the thing which simply holds faces and fingerprints, but no names - is actually operated by an international agency. Then national governments hold the metadata, and the international body that controls the biometrics is contracted only to deal with national courts.
It's a constitution-like balance of power.
First draft, but it's a bit more robust than you think.- obliviousfool, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1I dugg you up for injecting something useful into the conversation even if it is idealistic.
- hexayurt, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1On this you kind of have to read the paper. The idea is that the biometrics database - the thing which simply holds faces and fingerprints, but no names - is actually operated by an international agency. Then national governments hold the metadata, and the international body that controls the biometrics is contracted only to deal with national courts.
- slicerace, on 12/23/2007, -0/+4Uhm - except that you're assuming nobody will ever, ever, ever combine the databases without a court order. The FBI or NSA or CIA or any other agency would just get a hold of both of them, easily, and your whole plan is defeated.
- jfitz369, on 12/22/2007, -0/+1Theoretically, if we had a government that was accountable to the people... ie. by the people and for the people, then I don't think this would be a bad thing. After all, if a crime were committed against you wouldn't you want the government to have the tools necessary to track the criminals down and hold them accountable? of course.
But since we have this lying institution with an agenda to dumb down the people and then exploit them to fill the pockets of war profiteers I guess we should be worried.
My point is that the technology and idea in and of themselves are not bad. It's just that the people using it are dishonest... and from the looks of it we are powerless to change that. :(- slicerace, on 12/23/2007, -0/+2The government will only be accountable to the people if it fears the people. The people shouldn't fear the government, which is why the founders intended for a limited government. Today is the exact opposite situation -- we have warrantless wiretaps, spy satellites looking at US citizens, secret torture prisons for "enemy combatants," etc.
- macwac, on 12/23/2007, -0/+2The funny thing is that as a non US citizen this will affect me too.. i don't want my private data stored with the US government and potentially be sold to other nations. fcuk..
- JedicodeWarrior, on 12/23/2007, -0/+2Curse you Gay Edgar Hoover!
- cgrier, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1okay... we need this "to solve crimes and identify criminals and terrorists", not for being in complete control of every possible aspect of people's lives. Not to keep an eye in the sky on American citizens.
apparently, when in doubt, its for finding terrorists!
except... i thought that was what racial profiling was for? - woodenray, on 12/23/2007, -0/+3Watch "Freedom to Facism."
- zomgz, on 12/23/2007, -0/+3im amazed at how little digs this article got.
seriously. i had my wife read it also, she said first thing that came to mind was all those old sci-fi movies about futuristic governments and tech used to control/watch the general population. - jbond, on 12/23/2007, -0/+0The good news is that the gummints collect all this data, then lose it and meanwhile there's nobody actually watching all the screens. And the more gummints rely on technology and reduce the number of actual people in the system the easier it becomes to simply sidestep it. The bad news is that if you're really unlucky you can find it used against you in a Kafka-esque nightmare from which there is no escape. The likelihood of that bad luck hitting you go's up dramatically if you're coloured, poor, or a foreign national journalist trying to visit the USA.
- anti-net, on 12/23/2007, -0/+2You American's, Always got to have the biggest this, the biggest that.
Also, the UK currently has the largest Biometric database, How dare you take that crown away from us! - wuxia, on 12/23/2007, -0/+3STOP screaming at the government and go after the companies that design and manufacture this treasonous technology. They are MUCH more vulnerable and have employees with families that are much more important than their job.
-
Show 51 - 58 of 58 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is