[distant_hat]

These are really niche issues and most people aren't even aware, let alone care about this. The only real solution to this is some kind of legislation that makes it difficult to carry on with business as usual. I wonder how this data collection squares with GDPR?

[landemva]

> The only real solution to this is some kind of legislation that makes it difficult to carry on with business as usual.

I have watched the voluntary full body scans at TSA checkpoints for years and have concluded people do not care to opt out of any data collection. The people don't care, or how many people do you see opting out of full body scans at TSA? People gleefully pose for TSA's new and voluntary facial recognition.

People go along with coercion even by government, so why do you think we can rely on government to solve privacy issues?

[dijit]

Ha! I get so much shit from my partner because I refuse to go through those scanners.

I don't make a big scene about it, but it's fun to note how much social pressure there is to just follow.

Most Airports are actually totally fine with the opt-out, except the British ones for some reason. "You won't always be able to opt out y'know" - yes mate, but then I probably won't fly anymore.

[JohnFen]

> "You won't always be able to opt out y'know"

What a strange thing to say. Maybe not, but you are able to opt out right now, and that's what matters most at that moment.

[kube-system]

> how many people do you see opting out of full body scans at TSA

They're all in the pre-check line.

[landemva]

An airline put me in precheck a few years ago due to FF status. Now it requires an application to government and fingerprint. And global entry (immigration) wants an eyeball scan. Biometric collection to avoid a TSA massage is not privacy.

[kube-system]

If you want to ALL avoid biometric collection when you travel, you're pretty much out of luck:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biometric_passport#/media/File...

https://www.cbp.gov/travel/biometrics

[arcticbull]

Then of course every country in the world records you on arrival.

[arcticbull]

It basically always required all those things. For a brief period they were doing a trial with frequent fliers, but it was always the exception and never the norm.

But uh, make no mistake, they were only putting you into Pre because they had all the data you are being asked to provide already. The application is like your tax returns - the goal is to see if you provide what they already know, not to surprise them with something new.

[landemva]

That seems reasonable using existing data, but why a finger print?

And I thought the checkpoints were to prevent physical contraband on planes. TSA facial recognition, while also allowing old people and precheck to wear shoes, doesn't stop that.

[kube-system]

Because dactyloscopy has been mature for a long time.

The purpose of trusted-traveler programs isn't to screen for contraband, it is to establish an elevated level of trust.

[bogwog]

> These are really niche issues and most people aren't even aware, let alone care about this.

Everyone seems to be aware of the protests in Hollywood, and I don't think it's too much of a stretch to tie that to privacy issues. Those AI models taking artists' jobs were trained with data scraped from the internet. Even if you aren't an artist, there's a risk that the data these companies collect on you will be used to train an AI model that will take your job, so you shouldn't be giving it away for free.

[ollien]

I do think that's a bit of a stretch. Regardless of your opinions on the ethics of AI companies training on scraped data, how is scraping publicly available artistic works a privacy issue?

Me, personally, I might call it unethical and undesirable, but I wouldn't call it an issue of "privacy" on its face.

[barbariangrunge]

There’s no union of people vs surveillance tech to act on our behalf