
The FBI Is Tracking Our Faces in Secret, and We’re Suing - dredmorbius
https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/the-fbi-is-tracking-our-faces-in-secret-were-suing/
======
caconym_
I wish we would stop emphasizing the social justice/accuracy concerns so
heavily when talking about this. Starting that way will cause a huge segment
of the population to switch off as soon as you start talking.

Imagine it works perfectly, and a three-letter agency with practically zero
oversight, transparency, or accountability is collecting an accurate history
of every single thing you do--everywhere you go, who you talk to, what you say
to them, what content you consume and create, what emotions you feel, detailed
biometric profiles, and so on. Are you ok with that?

~~~
dorchadas
Sadly, I know a lot of people who _are_ ok with that. They're very much of the
opinion, "Well, I'm doing nothing wrong, so I don't care. Especially if it
helps catch bad guys". Not really sure how to fight that.

~~~
maximente
\- do you know anyone who has been stalked, harassed, worse? or: do you have
kids?

\- yes (hopefully)

\- would you tolerate use of software that allows users to more effectively
stalk, harass, or worse? [especially your kids?]

\- no (hopefully)

\- are you aware that software with that power exists today, and that since at
least 2007 some of its users have been convicted of using it for
stalking/harassing/worse?

\- no, tell me more (hopefully)

~~~
jlgaddis
> _\- would you tolerate use of software that allows users to more effectively
> stalk, harass, or worse? [especially your kids?]_

It's easy to dream up ideal scenarios, such as the above (even though they are
almost never realistic). For example, one possible unexpected response to the
above question might very well be:

> _" Such as Tor?"_

~~~
dorchadas
Or, the one I get the most, "But it's our government and I have nothing to
hide from them." So while they wouldn't want _private_ actors to have that
information, they're fine with the government having it because they still
believe the law is actually fair and impartial and such.

------
mikece
After listening to Joe Rogan's interview with Edward Snowden I bought and
listened to his book "Permanent Record." At this point I have to assume that
at least a dozen agencies in a handful of countries are watching me through my
webcam as I type this message right now. Snowden suggested (or at least I
inferred) that he didn't reveal all there is to know about the scope of
government surveillance and it's only logical to conclude that techniques and
technologies have gotten more advanced and more subtle since he fled the
country.

~~~
rapind
They aren't watching you. They're recording you. They're running algorithms to
classify and index you. They're building massive data centers to house all of
this semi organized and raw data.

And when _they_ leak it all _they_ won't be held accountable because
terrorists, children, and stuff.

It's not a conspiracy theory. It's real and it's a black hat's wet dream.

Oh yeah, they can use it for political purposes too I suppose. To silence
dissent and all that.

~~~
wallace_f
Also -- and I swear I read thid in the NYTimes, but I can't find it -- CEOs
are now not uncommonly ditching cellphones and laptops before going into
important meetings.

In a general sense, this sort of thing seems to have the potential to have
incredible conseauences for liberty, justice, the economy and Western society.

------
oil25
What a poorly designed site. Nothing but a spinning circle with Javascript
disabled - Firefox reader mode doesn't work, either. Completely unacceptable
from a privacy and usability perspective.

~~~
altec3
It's great if websites work without Javascript but, I don't think its fair to
call them poorly designed if they dont.

The web is made from HTML, CSS and Javascript. Turn off one of them and of
course things aren't going to work or look right.

~~~
dingus
Javascript required for text rendering is incredibly poor design. For those of
us with limited connections, I turn off Javascript because I don't want to
download 10MB of Javascript ad tech and frameworks. This is expensive and
takes forever to load on satellite and rural connections.

Good design takes these basic common issues into account.

~~~
staticjak
rural != common

~~~
dingus
A quarter of the US population isn't common? Not to mention entire countries
with limited connections.

~~~
staticjak
Common is 50% or more by everyone's definition.

~~~
mckinney
You confuse "Most" with "Common" e.g., A Toyota is a common car to see on the
road. See.

------
pmoriarty
Ironically, it's impossible to read this ACLU page without enabling
Javascript, which opens one up to more browser fingerprinting attacks,
potential Javascript vulenrabilities, and tracking.

~~~
throw1234651234
I am hard-pressed to think of a popular page which doesn't use JavaScript.

~~~
kick
"doesn't use JavaScript" and "can't work without JavaScript" are two separate
issues.

Google, the _most_ popular page on the internet, doesn't force you to use
Javascript.

~~~
vthriller
> Google ... doesn't force you to use Javascript.

About 3 months ago Google became unusable when browsed through w3m: search
results are not rendered as links, just as a regular text that can't be
followed-through. They clearly assume you always browse with js enabled, I
can't think of any other explanation.

~~~
kick
That sounds like a w3m problem. Still works on elinks and links.

Actually, I just tried it on w3m. Still works just fine. It must be that
whoever compiled your w3m messed up in some way.

~~~
vthriller
My w3m installation didn't change in the last year or so. I also had
opportunity to test this on various machines when needed to google random
things in a hurry—it's consistently broken for me.

As for reproducability, in just this week I've seen two versions of image
search page back and forth, with little visual changes here and there as well
as CORS headers that break some bookmarklets that I occasionally use. I guess
they're doing some A/B testing, or just roll out changes slowly.

------
ta092378
The United States government treats it's citizens like the enemy.

Why on earth should we accept this situation?

~~~
annoyingnoob
Completely agree and we shouldn't accept it.

------
rkagerer
I remember a time when it was good manners to ask before taking someone's
picture.

~~~
incompatible
Ironically, I suspect people are more concerned now about random people taking
their photo, or photos of their children. Remember the outcry over Google
Glass?

------
swader999
To give a government absolute control like this is insane.

------
rayiner
Pervasive surveillance is inevitable. ACLU would be better served fighting to
protect rights that exist in the constitution (the second amendment) than
rights that do not (“privacy” right not to be tracked in public).

