Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

FBI Bringing Biometric Photo Scanning To North Carolina, Via DMV

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the if-you-have-nussink-to-hide dept.

Privacy 221

AHuxley writes "The FBI is getting fast new systems to look at local North Carolina license photos via the DMV. As the FBI is not authorized to collect and store the photos, they use the North Carolina Division of Motor Vehicles. The system takes seconds to look at chin widths and nose sizes. The expanded technology used on millions of motorist could be rolled out across the USA. The FBI's Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System is also getting an upgrade to DNA records, 3-D facial imaging, palm prints and voice scans."

cancel ×

221 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (5, Insightful)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732299)

NH gives you the option to have your picture removed from their database after they print your license. Too bad more states aren't that progressive. Why is Government even allowed to use our driver licenses for anything other than driving, anyways? I don't even carry mine unless I'm driving. Why would I?

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29732385)

How do you know it's actually removed?

Governments can't be trusted. Government software systems developed by expensive consultants often can't be trusted to work properly, even for their simplest functionality.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (2, Insightful)

daem0n1x (748565) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732687)

I'm so glad private corporations exist, because they are sooooo more reliable. And their consultants are sooooo much cheaper.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (1, Insightful)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733133)

At least when the Comcast monopoly or other corporations come-round demanding money, I can tell them to "Fuck off; I don't want your service." Try doing that with the U.S. or State government sometime. There are three possibilities: (1) Suck the money directly from your paycheck. (2) Jail. (3) Get shipped to Afghanistan, Vietnam or some other place where we are currently fighting.

Corporations are bad, evil, et cetera but at least I can ignore them. I can't ignore Congress because they keep pushing their way through my front door, trying to run every piece of my life.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (2, Insightful)

daem0n1x (748565) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733273)

Corporations are bad, evil, et cetera but at least I can ignore them. I can't ignore Congress because they keep pushing their way through my front door, trying to run every piece of my life.

Have you tried getting out and seeing the world? Corporate abuse and monopolies are all around. You can't ignore them, nobody can. And the worst that can happen is when corporations and the government get together.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (1)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733575)

And the worst that can happen is when corporations and the government get together.

Sounds like an argument for keeping Government small and limited in the powers it can exercise. Otherwise Government starts to intrude into the marketplace and instead of a free market we wind up with monopolies backed by the power of the state.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (1)

daem0n1x (748565) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733687)

Why not the other way around? Ah OK, it's not compatible with the free-market mantra, that will bring prosperity and happiness to all the universe anytime soon. Thou shall not deny the Dogma!!!

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (1)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733771)

I don't think of myself as a particularly strong free-market fan. I'm just skeptical of government attempts to "correct" imbalances in the market. Given the choice between the evil of the free market and the evil of government, I'll choose the markets any day of the week.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733801)

Apparently you can not read. Let me repeat - "Corporations are bad, evil, et cetera but at least I can ignore them." I hate corporations; I just hate government more. Even before corporations existed, governments were going-round killing people. Look at Nero and the old Roman Republic.

Anyone who believes they can trust government, after the thousands of years of history showing you can not, is a fool.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (1)

daem0n1x (748565) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733823)

Before governments existed, people killed each other for food, shelter or anything. Don't blame it on governments.

Corporations vs. government (3, Interesting)

mi (197448) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733591)

You can't ignore them, nobody can.

I lived the past 9 years without TV — watching it only in gym sometimes. Yes, we do have a TV-set — but no cable (our Internet comes via DSL). I think, I've ignored Timewarner/Comcast/whoever it is, whom the government gave my part of town as a monopoly.

The GP's point is valid — ignoring corporations is far easier, than the government.

The government's only acceptable role is ensuring, various corporations compete in providing a service or making goods, rather than collude. When the government attempts to provide the same service themselves (having declared the oxymoronic "market failure"), you get the worst of both worlds — government's inefficiency and a monopoly's arrogance.

I do hope, we don't get to experience this ourselves again in health care. Public schools, USPS, and highways are enough...

And the worst that can happen is when corporations and the government get together.

Yes, that's called Fascism. Some people ascribe this to Obama administration, as it aims to take over corporations. Calling him "Hitler" over this misses the point, though, (and triggers Godwin's Law) — Nazism is an aberration of Fascism and Obama does not deserve the mustaches printed on his portraits (although they do make me glee, because Bush deserved it even less [thepeoplescube.com] ).

Things sucked in Mussolini's Italy and in Franco's Spain, without the death camps. One need not be genocidal to destroy economy...

Re:Corporations vs. government (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29733787)

Looks like somebody's Econ 100 course didn't cover natural monopolies and network effects.

Re:Corporations vs. government (2, Funny)

dorque_wrench (1394209) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733949)

Public schools, USPS, and highways are enough...

You were giving positive examples here, right?

Keeping the pictures (2, Informative)

qwerty shrdlu (799408) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733175)

Keeping the pictures on hand does help to prove identity theft. Back in the 90's I sold a couple of cell phones to a guy who'd actually gotten some one else's nfo by rooting through his gym bag. The ID looked like a genuine ID from the DMV because it was. But being the criminal mastermind he was, he didn't realize the DMV would have a copy of the ID with his picture and the other fellows name. Awkward. By not keeping the photos, you'd make it much harder to prove it wasn't you.

Re:Keeping the pictures (1)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733255)

By not keeping the photos, you'd make it much harder to prove it wasn't you.

And you also keep your picture from being used for projects like the one described in TFA. I'll take the added "risk" that someone uses my ID to defraud a cell phone company.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (1, Offtopic)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733261)

>>>Governments can't be trusted.

I'm glad Hitler didn't have this photo-filtering technology in 1935. He would have skipped all the nonsense of registration and yellow armbands, and just gone directly to drivers' licenses to find and round-up all the Jews (and other enemies). This new efficient technology would have allowed him to succeed in his goal virtually overnight. Oh yes I know. Godwin's Theory. I don't care - history is history and those who ignore history are fools.

Or just read the book Fatherland -

- "The setting is Berlin, 1964, some 20 years after the Third Reich's victory in World War II. Germany and the U.S. the world's two superpowers, find themselves in a cold war resulting from a nuclear stalemate; but U.S. President Joe Kennedy is soon to visit Berlin for an historic summit meeting with Hitler, clearing the way for detente. Meanwhile, cynical police detective Xavier March finds hard evidence of the wartime extermination of Europe's Jews..."

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (2, Informative)

z4ns4stu (1607909) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732461)

In Oklahoma and a few other states (Connecticut for sure) all adults are required by law to have photo identification on them at all times. If you don't qualify for a DL, you can still get a State-issued ID card.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (1)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732485)

that's pretty much standard worldwide, however that has nothing to do with what the OP is saying.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (2, Informative)

LordAndrewSama (1216602) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732661)

That's not the case in Britain. Nor iin South Africa. Although it was for black people during apartheid. I guess I'll start calling your country the land of the less free every day?

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (0, Offtopic)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732875)

Uh, correct me if I'm wrong, but do you know how many countries require you to have a passport to get in? All of the european union for sure. Not *once* you're in, but to get in for example.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (1)

LordAndrewSama (1216602) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733065)

Sure, totally agree, to get into the UK, I had to wave my passport, and south africa Is the same, but the bloke I was replying to was saying it's required by law to walk around at all times with ID worldwide. which is horribly wrong.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29732937)

Yup, not in Australia, France, New Zealand, Netherlands, Belgium... I could go on and on.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (4, Informative)

StikyPad (445176) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732571)

This is a common misconception, but you're only required to identify yourself if asked. Carrying a license is obviously required when engaged in the relevant activity (driving, hunting, selling alcohol, etc.)

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29732745)

In many states, for example California, you must identify yourself USING a valid, unexpired, government-issued, photo ID. If you don't have such an ID when it is requested, you are guilty of a misdemeanor. Depending on your skin color, you will be given a summons or booked into jail.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (2)

SydShamino (547793) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732713)

In Oklahoma and a few other states (Connecticut for sure) all adults are required by law to have photo identification on them at all times.

[Citation Needed]

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29733193)

In Oklahoma and a few other states (Connecticut for sure) all adults are required by law to have photo identification on them at all times.

[Citation Needed]

Considering some of the people I knew when I lived in OK, if its not on the books, it should be.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (4, Informative)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733339)

The U.S. Supreme Court over-turned those laws as illegal searches. You're required to provide basic information like your name, address, but not required to show a photo ID. You need not carry anything on your body.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (1)

daem0n1x (748565) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732763)

Why is Government even allowed to use our driver licenses for anything other than driving, anyways? I don't even carry mine unless I'm driving. Why would I?

Maybe having a national ID card, like most of the world, would help to avoid that.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (2, Interesting)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732795)

Maybe having a national ID card, like most of the world, would help to avoid that.

Maybe if the rest of the world valued liberty over convenience we'd be better off.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (1)

Herkum01 (592704) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732835)

Considering the United States has one of the highest, if not the highest, rates of incarceration in the world. I wonder if the USA really values liberty over persecuting people.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (1)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732899)

Most of that is attributable to the so-called War on Drugs. There are a few exceptions but by and large the rest of the world isn't doing any better than the United States on that front. More's the pity.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (4, Interesting)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733289)

Much of the world that is having the hardest time with the "War" on unlicensed drugs is having it because the USA is insisting upon it. Meanwhile the USA is one of the world's largest producers and consumers (import and export, consumption and production, and trafficking as well) of illegal drugs. It's solely about profit; even prisons are often for-profit now, which anyone should be able to see is a form of slavery that can only be self-perpetuating in a capitalist oligarchy.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733363)

Spain has legalized drugs. Now if you're caught rather than being arrested, you may ask for free medical assistance to break the habit. Or continue on your merry way.

What an enlightened policy. Don't punish people - help them.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (3, Insightful)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733529)

How are they legalized if you still have to worry about getting "caught"? Perhaps you meant to say decriminalized instead?

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (1)

daem0n1x (748565) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733425)

At least we don't have so many of our population in jail [wikipedia.org] so it's cheaper.

About the war on drugs, it seems that the rest of the world, while not doing much better, is doing a lot less worse [wikipedia.org] .

Maybe the "war on drugs" is somewhat of a poor excuse [wikipedia.org] and there are other causes, like, for instance, hum, income inequality [wikipedia.org] ?

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (1, Interesting)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733481)

Correlation != causation. In any case, if your argument is "We suck, but you suck more" then I don't think this is going to be a particularly productive dialog :)

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (1)

daem0n1x (748565) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733619)

if your argument is "We suck, but you suck more"

You are right, "Correlation != causation." is a lot more insightful.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (-1, Troll)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733727)

Go fuck yourself.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29732821)

Having a huge gold star on the clothes of all criminals would also be useful.

But then the Feds would have to pay for it. (1)

qwerty shrdlu (799408) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733005)

If they can fob the program off on the states, they can duck the expense, too.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (5, Insightful)

spinkham (56603) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732789)

Any interaction with police not involving a motor vehicle should involve primarily these phrases:
"Am I being detained?" "Am I free to go?"

If you are being detained, stop and identify laws in about 1/2 of the states allow officers to demand identification. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_and_Identify_statutes#States_with_.E2.80.9Cstop-and-identify.E2.80.9D_statutes [wikipedia.org] Even in most of those states, you are only required to state your name, not provide documents or any further information besides your name.

You new script is now:

"I do not consent to a search" "I do not wish to answer questions without a layer present"

See http://www.flexyourrights.org/street_stop_scenario [flexyourrights.org] for the slightly more complicated automobile case.

Police officers script many of their interactions because of the legal requirements.. You should also.

Note, much of this advice I've received from police officer friends. Endeavor to be polite, but don't give up your rights voluntarily. If the officer has probable cause to hold you or search your belongings, they will make that clear and won't ask for your permission. If they're asking, not telling, say no.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (4, Interesting)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733525)

>>>Any interaction with police not involving a motor vehicle should involve primarily these phrases: "Am I being detained?" "Am I free to go?"

I think even that's too much. I prefer to give my name, my address (if asked), and then silence. I might say something like "According to my Miranda Rights and the 5th Amendment I'm not required to answer," but most times I just keep silent.

I've seen too many videos where people repeat "Am I detained" and "Am I free to go" as if they are having a verbal fight with the officer. No good can come of that. It merely escalates the tension of the encounter, whereas silence tends to be calming and de-escalate.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (2, Insightful)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733567)

>>>If the officer has probable cause to hold you or search your belongings, they will make that clear and won't ask for your permission.

What I hate is when they use a dog. The U.S. Constitution required an oath before a judge, and since dogs cannot take oaths, they shouldn't be able to establish probable cause either.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (1)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733637)

Do you think they should be able to use the dogs once probable cause has been established through other means? I have an issue with them using the dogs to get PC (a trained handler can make a dog "hit" on anything) but I do tend to think they should be able to use them if they already have PC.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29733869)

In Colorado I guess they can conduct 2 pat downs

Who do I contact when my law's have typos?
State senator? State Web Master?

http://www.dvmen.org/dv-177.htm#16-3-103

"(1) A peace officer may stop any person who he reasonably suspects is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a crime and may require him to give his name and address, identification if available, and an explanation of his actions. A peace officer shall not require any person who is stopped pursuant to this section to produce or divulge such person's social security number. The stopping shall not constitute an arrest.(2) When a peace officer has stopped a person for questioning pursuant to this section and reasonably suspects that his personal safety requires it, he may conduct a pat-down search of that person for weapons.

(2) When a peace officer has stopped a person for questioning pursuant to this section and reasonably suspects that his personal safety requires it, he may conduct a pat-down search of that person for weapons."

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (2, Interesting)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732969)

I'm glad Illinois kept my picture.

The last time I renewed my license, I wouldn't have had to go down to the DMV thanks to a good driving record. However, I'd had eye surgery [slashdot.org] and for the first time in my life I had a chance to get the "corrective lenses" restriction removed. I was happy as hell when they took my picture, and also for the first time in my life the picture wasn't unflattering.

Last April my wallet was stolen, and when I had it replaced they used the picture form the database. But it would be nice to have the option.

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733593)

You saying people with glasses are unflattering? Hmph. (walks off)

Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... (4, Insightful)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 4 years ago | (#29734003)

I'm glad Illinois kept my picture.

The road to 1984 is paved with convienence.

What is convienent for you is also convienent for law enforcement & other government agencies to troll through.
This is why civil libertarians fight against government & private databases at every turn.
There is a balance between convience and security, but the balancing point is highly individual.

Mr. Orwell Please Stand Up (1)

kantos (1314519) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732323)

An interesting work around to the implicit right to privacy in the 9th amendment. The States are authorized to gather and store such information under the 10th amendment, however there is nothing preventing the FBI from asking kindly for access.

Re:Mr. Orwell Please Stand Up (1)

bconway (63464) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733217)

I believe they call it cleanroom reverse engineering around here.

Re:Mr. Orwell Please Stand Up (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733711)

>>>there is nothing preventing the FBI from asking kindly for access.

That's good news. It means the state government can say "no" and shoo the FBI away. My state run by Democrats will probably cooperate, but hopefully my future home in the Free State Project (New Hampshire) will say "frak off" and close the door to Washington D.C.'s intrusions.

Anyone Know the Exact Rates (4, Interesting)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732435)

I think this was tried in Florida (as the article notes) back in 2002 but was killed instantly. It seems the trial run had focused on true positives meaning that they only reported numbers on when a person who was in the database was identified correctly. But overlooked the false positives, especially regarding someone who was not in the database being identified incorrectly as being in the database of criminals. Now, that ate up so much time it was instantly canceled. Of course, the FBI have figured out how to reduce this by combining many biometrics and it's now not okay to smile when you get your license picture taken where I live (planning for the future of biometrics, I suppose).

Does anyone know what the rates are for false positives in this new system? How much time is wasted double checking results?

Re:Anyone Know the Exact Rates (1)

techwrench (586424) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733235)

I remember reading Here [slashdot.org] back in December 08 about Indiana Banning smiling in License photos.

I believe that rule is still in effect here.

Re:Anyone Know the Exact Rates (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29733527)

Yet you can still wear a fucking burka.

Re:Anyone Know the Exact Rates (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29734117)

I think this was tried in Florida (as the article notes) back in 2002 but was killed instantly.

Florida tried to institute counterfeit-proof driver licenses in 1997.
Headline: Thieves Take Computers Used For Driver Licenses [google.com]

Thieves went in and robbed 7 DMVs for their license making equipment.

Now would be a good time to write your officials (2, Informative)

Lord Byron Eee PC (1579911) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732457)

Write your governor, state representatives, federal representatives, and your DMV to let them know how you feel.

Especially if you are a resident of NC. I for one would be pretty pissed off if I was forced to participate in a (virtual) line-up.

Re:Now would be a good time to write your official (1)

loki.TJ (959555) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733177)

I am in NC and I'm writing everyone I can find right now.

Re:Now would be a good time to write your official (1)

jDeepbeep (913892) | more than 4 years ago | (#29734059)

I am in NC and I'm writing everyone I can find right now.

Same here.

*waits for someone to mod me redundant... rolls eyes*

Re:Now would be a good time to write your official (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29733695)

I'm in NC too and this is unbelievable. I'm going to start typing up those letters right now.

Hmm (2, Interesting)

ShooterNeo (555040) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732463)

Ignoring the Big Brother/Police state implications for the moment : how well does this technology actually work? How accurate could the measurement of chin width/nose size be if you only have a single photo to make measurements from? With a large uncertainty in your data, I would imagine that there would be many collisions in the database.

It doesn't seem likely that a camera could be set up somewhere in the state that could recognize any North Carolina resident with a driver's license. More likely than not, there would be thousands of hits for each face that walked by the camera, even if the subject wasn't in the database.

 

Re:Hmm (1)

Thelasko (1196535) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733513)

how well does this technology actually work?

Just don't smile. [slashdot.org]

I wonder what would have happened (2, Insightful)

GungaDan (195739) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732471)

had the NC DMV told the FBI to kindly go Cheney itself when issued the request? Seems they are under no obligation to share, but chose to do so. Now I wonder what the NC DMV is getting from the Feds in return...

Sounds like (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29732483)

y'all should start growing full face beards, just to piss them off.

Re:Sounds like (2, Funny)

Anonymous Monkey (795756) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732861)

Yea, right. I'm half Pacific Islander, I don't think my three facial hairs will do much good.

Re:Sounds like (1)

Ivan Mawesome (1144015) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732923)

Seriously. I have a full beard in my driver's license picture. Are they going to start making people shave? Treachery!

They may have my picture... (2, Funny)

smitty777 (1612557) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732497)

...but they can't see through my tin foil mask!

I bet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29732513)

I bet it won't take long before the DHS adds DNA testing to their procedures too, one more step to humiliate friends of the US who come visiting the country.

Mass lineups (1)

netruner (588721) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732523)

I read the article yesterday at Yahoo - the one thing that kept coming to mind was this:
The best way to avoid being the victim of false accusations is to not be in the subset of people eligible to be accused. With a system like this, everyone's inclusion is automatic unless you're willing to be an "unperson".

The numbers don't work (4, Insightful)

HangingChad (677530) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732567)

They have caught a couple people but investigated dozens of innocent people. And the AP reporter picture came back as a possible terrorism suspect. You want to end up in an FBI report associated with a terrorist? Even if they clear you out later?

Hopefully they figure out the mistake before you end up where ever they'll be sending terror suspects after GTMO closes.

Re:The numbers don't work (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29732775)

You assume that it's possible to be cleared out at all. This is highly unlikely, and probably impossible

1-off events don't exist when it comes to criminal investigation. Welcome to the system, CITIZEN!

Re:The numbers don't work (1)

ZenDragon (1205104) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733269)

There was a lawyer (Brandon Mayfield I believe) in Oregon a couple years ago that was prosicuted because his finger prints were a very close match to a known terroriest involved in the Spain bombings. Though the man was released when they found out he was OBVIOUSLY not the same guy, he lost his job and has an federal investigation on his record when he gets a background check. Which pretty much excludes him from any high profile jobs dispite the fact that he was innocent. It does happen!

mustaches and beards (1)

taniwha (70410) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733319)

So nose size and chin widths - isn't this just going to be screwed up for those with mustaches and beards - sort of good for catching almost everyone but Osama binLaden?

Re:The numbers don't work (2, Insightful)

westlake (615356) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733337)

They have caught a couple people but investigated dozens of innocent people.

In the real world, federal criminal investigations don't play out like Columbo.

There can be hundreds of possibilities at least worth considering.

 

Same comments, new tyranny. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29732569)

The same comments are made again and again each time another brick is added to the wall. When will it be realized that we are collectively being imprisoned and impoverished? Once freedom is eradicated we will be enslaved.

What's worse? (1)

codeAlDente (1643257) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732731)

Taxi to the dark side, or taxi to the DMV?

Extra information (-1, Troll)

El_Muerte_TDS (592157) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732747)

I'd like to give them even more information, like a fresh stool sample

As a North Carolian, this scares me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29732755)

I have nothing to hide...
I'm not part of a terrorist organization...
I have no criminal record...
I don't break the law...

However, this technology and process scares the crap out of me. Just because my face may match 88% with a terrorism suspect that they have a bad picture of, I could be singled out by the government as a suspect?

I will be writing the governor and state representatives about this.

Asheville NC has thet worst police in the state (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29733719)

I also live in NC. After meeting some of the police here, in different cities, in quite innocent situations where they went very far out of their way to get me to incriminate myself, and tried to bring me up on false charges twice now, the thought of them having one more tool to lord over us in the typical power-down dynamic here, is completely awful.

PS. Police in Asheville NC are the WORST in the state. They are filthy liars and con artists. They will do anything possible to get you in the clink, since then they know that the state will be getting $$$ out of you somehow during the process.

This is the begining of a Police state (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29732759)

I am not normally an alarmist, but the fearmongers of the past 8 years have helped make this happen. This is the beginning of a police state.
As seen above, there is more money and time spent investigating innocent people than actually capturing guilty. This IS guilty until proven innocent.

Re:This is the begining of a Police state (1)

jcr (53032) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733153)

This is the beginning of a police state.

No, this [wikipedia.org] is the beginning of a police state. The federal government has always sought to take power not granted to it in the constitution.

-jcr

What is the big deal? (1, Interesting)

Zantac69 (1331461) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732817)

Donning my flame suit here - but what is the big deal here?

Plenty of people are whinging on about Orwell...Big Brother...ad nauseum. Do people not understand the concept of what identification is and why we need it? Your drivers licence has become so much more than just a "drivers licence." Hell - when you buy beer they "ID" you. If the cops want to talk to you, often they do the same thing - check your ID so they know that you are who you say you are. What is the alternative? Everyone running around saying their name is "Nunya Bizness"?

Personally, I am for a national ID system - and a national ID card. Verify social security numbers and biometric data (and even DNA) - and unless govt screws the pooch - identity theft is a thing of the past. Mistaken identity is a thing of the past. Illegal aliens using false ID is a thing of the past. Hell - sequence DNA from a string of serial rapes and crossreference - does not scare me in the least! And dont be so droll as to think that cops are going to be pinning crimes on John Q Innocent because he matches 80%...they are going to investigate just as they would any other crime. Are there going to be some false positives? Of course there will be - just like there is in standard police investigations.

Some people really need to stay off the pipe - makes yah paranoid!

Re:What is the big deal? (1)

WAG24601G (719991) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732965)

</sarcasm>

I think you forgot this.... right??

Big assumption (4, Insightful)

LockeOnLogic (723968) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733023)

Personally, I am for a national ID system - and a national ID card. Verify social security numbers and biometric data (and even DNA) - and unless govt screws the pooch - identity theft is a thing of the past.

I suggest you listen to your own arguments, might change your mind.

Re:What is the big deal? (1)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733083)

Move along citizen. Go to work. Go home and watch your TV and play your video games. Here are some sporting competitions for your amusement.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

Re:What is the big deal? (4, Interesting)

KillerBob (217953) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733227)

Somebody's going to moderate you troll for what you've said, but I don't think that'd be entirely fair... I do, however, feel that I should address what you're saying...

I don't want the government to have its grubby mitts on my DNA. I don't object to photo identification. I don't even object to having my fingerprints in a national database, even though fingerprints have been shown to be falsifiable, and aren't really all that reliable as a 100% certain way to identify somebody. I do, however, object to the idea of the government taking a sample of my DNA for a very simple reason: it's private. While it is a slippery slope argument, have you ever seen the movie Gattaca? I don't live in the US, but you need to prove your identity to do a great many things, including buying health insurance. If your DNA is part of that identity proof, how long is it going to be before companies start looking through the sequence for markers, and decide that your car insurance rate is going to be 3X as high as mine because you have a marker that indicates you might be slightly more predisposed to narcilepsy?

Quite aside from that, DNA evidence as a means of identifying somebody has been called into question. The genome as it resides in you changes over time, developping small mutations with cell division. Beyond that, there's 3.2million base pairs in the human genome, which would take an inordinate amount of time to sequence completely. As a result, a DNA test usually only looks at certain indicators, rather than the whole sequence. The possibility for false positives resides in members of your own family... even "distant" relations have the possibility of generating a false positive on a search through a DNA database, with the probability increasing as you reduce the number of comparison points that they store. When you're considering a database with hundreds of millions of data points, with the potential for billions if it's expanded to a global scale, you're going to run into a feasibility issue: if you want to store that many records, you either spend billions of dollars developping and maintaining a computer system that's capable of storing and searching through that many records (and allowing fudging in the search to account for mutations due to aging), or you start making decisions as to which search points to store, and which to drop.

And in response to your point:

And dont be so droll as to think that cops are going to be pinning crimes on John Q Innocent because he matches 80%...they are going to investigate just as they would any other crime. Are there going to be some false positives? Of course there will be - just like there is in standard police investigations.

Have you ever heard of police tunnel vision? We've got a match from the DNA database. Sure it's only 80%, but clearly it must be them! The police have been known on many many occasions to ignore evidence that proves the innocence of their suspect because they've decided that the suspect must be guilty. Often, it's only come to light after the suspect has been convicted, and sometimes it's not until after that wrongly accused suspect has been executed. (one such case is actually why capital punishment is illegal in Canada)

So no. You're not going to get your hands on my DNA for national identification. There's other ways to ID me, thanks.

Re:What is the big deal? (1)

cellurl (906920) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733573)

I have been on slashdot for 5 years and I still don't know or understand how to "mod" comments? I +/- the firehose, but thats it....
Lost

Re:What is the big deal? (1)

venom85 (1399525) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733281)

What you're obviously not realizing is that the only reason identity theft exists in the first place is that there's a national ID number. Your SSN is a de facto national ID, and it makes it really, really easy to perform identity theft. If you create an even more formal national ID system, you actually make identity theft even easier since it's just a single document or number you have to steal.

And, I'm sorry, I couldn't care less about catching criminals with a system like this. If you have even 1 false positive, you've got too many. False positives are absolutely unacceptable under any circumstances, and our current judicial system is way past unacceptable at this point. I want no part of giving my DNA or fingerprints or anything else to the FBI for their databases, and I want no part of a system that can "accidentally" throw me in prison for something I never did.

Re:What is the big deal? (1)

xednieht (1117791) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733453)

There is no big deal at all really, America stopped being the world leader. The only way America can influence other people is by pointing guns at them.

America is ghost, dead, kaput. The principles America used to stand for will always live on though. You might have to move someplace else to realize them, but sometimes a change of scenery is nice.

Had this conversation the other day actually... when my family first arrived in this country the pilots invited my little brother and I into the cockpit for a view, today we're lucky to get on a plane.

America has gone in the direction of the country we ran away from, now it seems time to run away from America.

Re:What is the big deal? (1)

SmurfButcher Bob (313810) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733893)

I think the error is that your premise requires both competence and good faith on the part of the (very sociopathic) establishments.

Case and point... "The FBI is not supposed to collect / use a national db of faces et al". The spirit and intent of that is rather obvious... so how can you claim "good faith" when they end-run it, and how can you claim "competence" when others collaborate with them to make it happen. This is not one of those "slippery slope" issues - this is waaaay past that little hump. Complete authority, complete invisibility, with zero accountability.

"If you've done nothing wrong, then you have nothing to hide."
"...if I've done nothing wrong, then you have no reason to look. Period."

Re:What is the big deal? (1)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 4 years ago | (#29734083)

I've never understood the anglo (commonwealth + former parts of the british empire) paranoia about ID cards. The rest of the world uses them and abuse is very rare. You could make the argument that in this technological age data is more easily found and correlated to your identity with such a scheme. I look at it from another point of view though. The technology is going in that direction anyway and identity is going to be established by some authority regardless, I'd rather it be controlled by the government than some corporation. [theonion.com] At least citizens exert some form of direct control over government as long as we stay vigilant.

With a patented algorithm (3, Funny)

Ukab the Great (87152) | more than 4 years ago | (#29732859)

It will recognize threats to society like terrorists, illegal aliens, and UNC fans.

Wanted By The F.B.I : (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29732939)

If you see this person, do not approach.

Call this phone number: 1-800-CAL-LFBI [huffingtonpost.com]
and report your information.

Yours In Minsk,
Kilgore Trout

nose sizes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29732943)

>>nose sizes
so we can finally identify all the jews at record speeds?

Such a piece of shit state... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29733161)

The state of North Carolina is such a piece of shit. I know, because I spent 12 years of my adult life there. I'm not surprised that they're in bed with the FBI and trampling all over people's rights and freedom with shit like this.

This is the same state that penalizes you $50 if you accidentally let your auto insurance lapse for a DAY.

Fuck you, North Carolina. Fuck you.

disturbing... (3, Informative)

ZenDragon (1205104) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733209)

All this information collection as of late is getting a bit disturbing. I work for a bank and I had managed to go 28 years without being fingerprinted, until this year. I have nothing to hide nor fear but I definately do not like having my biometric information floating around out there. I could care less about my social security number and all that, its just inforamtion that can not be directly tied to me. However as a law abiding citizen I take issue with ALL of my information being documented. Part of the patriot act required that every employee working for a bank get finger printed, background checked, photographed, etc. Thanks GWB Lets just make it easier for somebody to steal identities. Seems like the cold war all over again except this time its the government ploting a war against its own citizens.

Re:disturbing... (3, Insightful)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733587)

Seems like the cold war all over again except this time its the government ploting a war against its own citizens.

Those who do not understand the lessons of history... The cold war was a war waged by the industrial capitalists of the US and the USSR against the citizens of both nations. The people who benefited most were the robber barons of the military-industrial complex. Some of the workers therein benefited as well, except that the resulting damage to both economies (the extent of which is not yet fully accounted for in this nation) is harmful to them as well in the long run.

NC DMV are a bunch of shitheads (1, Informative)

cats-paw (34890) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733421)

I received a speeding ticket in NC WHICH I PAID - it was $100.

5 years later I'm trying to get a driver's license in ANOTHER STATE and can't because of my "ticket" in NC.

I have to call NC and I find out I have to send them another $25. The stupid DMV shithead on the other end of the phone won't tell me why exactly it is I need to do this considering I had already paid the ticket.

This is why cooperation between various government agencies is not a good thing.

Fuckers. And yes, I am still bitter about it, why do you ask ?

I'd rather take my chances with Al-Qaeda than the government trying to "protect" me.

The FBI is not allowed to collect and store (1)

edrobinson (976396) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733505)

our pictures. This is a bit of a scam as they, in essence, are storing them with this latest invasion.

Keeping a database without actually keeping one (1)

Adrian Lopez (2615) | more than 4 years ago | (#29733887)

How long until the FBI does the same kind of end-run around the law by tapping into DMV biometric data? Right now the government can only obtain a person's fingerprints upon being arrested for some reason, but if the FBI adopts the same policy for DMV biometrics as for DMV pictures it could end up with a database of every licensed driver's biometric data without actually keeping such a database itself.

It seems to me they shouldn't get away with such a thing on a mere technicality of the law.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?