HN Reader

I remember nostalgically when this kind of thing would have been so unpopular in the USA, including (especially?) among the "populist right", that it would not have happened.

The escalation of the surveillance security state has been quick and vast.

One thing that i would prefer in biometrics would be that the iris/fingerprints get treated as what they are publicly available and easily obtainable data.

At worst using it a a secret key is similar to using your name as a hidden variable for authorisation, whent it sshould strictly be a identification token.And once leaked you cant revoke it .

Back on topic , a Gattaca type system is unbelievably bleak and when(not if) it is finallly shoved through.It wont take long to foist it on the rest of the planet (see the recent visa requirements viz social media and insane bond requirements demanded of some countries like Mali citizens being asked for $15K per visa application).

The problem with these types of technologies is that you will be at the mercy of whoever uses them. It's like chat control, censorship, gun laws, etc. You can't control how they will be leveraged.

I lived in California for some time a few years ago, and it was a mess, so I understand people being okay with this type of stuff if it will make them more secure, but it's a very risky slippery slope.

The other thing is that with all the data Google has, they can probably uncover everything they need just by paying for Google Ads data :/

It's weird how many people's perception of this type of behavior is shaped by the person sitting in the White House.

EDIT: It's also weird how my comment is being perceived exclusively as criticizing the critics of this administration rather than criticizing the supporters of this overreach. My comment was intentional phrased very generally, if you think it is specifically about you, that reveals something about you.

You can submit a public comment on the proposal to DHS at the link below:

https://www.regulations.gov/document/USCIS-2025-0205-0002/co...

Did you know that the State of California has a DNA sample from every person born in the state since 1983? It's required by law for the hospital to collect it and give it to the state.

Don't most people in the US get fingerprinted at some point?

Let's see. I've been fingerprinted, all 10 fingers, for, at least, 1) the US Army, 2) security clearance for a DoD job, multiple times, 3) a permit to ride a horse on SF Water Department property, and 4) Customs and Border Protection Global Entry, which also took an iris scan.

California DMV takes a thumbprint, but not all 10 fingers. They've been recording me at every transaction for decades.

So I'm on file.

I think of being IDd as a normal part of life, for any position of trust. Is this unusual?

I think it's an interesting visual to compare the Stasi's rows of scent jars to data centers filled with banks of flash memory storing biometric data.

Be careful - this may be a case where they say they're going to do one thing (collect data from US citizens), but walk that part of it back after people protest - while those very same people overlook the fact that they're still going to be getting every immigrant to submit to the scans.

Hospitals in california steal the DNA of every single baby born there and collect it in a database.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/california-newborn-dna-privacy-...

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/baby-dna-parental-consent-genet...

I think it's worth mentioning that while biometrics for identification have flaws (as mentioned in this thread, they're not 100% collision free, are not necessarily secret, and are non-trivial to collect), DNA has a different risk profile if it leaks than fingerprints and iris scans if you consider technology advances. DNA could let people (moving beyond government, since you should probably assume anything in a government database will be leaked at this point) target your family and not just you, it includes information that could let adversaries find out ways you're uniquely exploitable (for instance allergies, sensitivities, diseases) and in general its potential for harm goes far beyond impersonation or being used in court.

(On the plus side, I suppose, I think the story on storing DNA at the scale we're talking about is not fully complete. DNA does denature and it takes a reasonably good sample to get a full genome sequence, and fully sequencing and storing data for every person has other practical issues. The article itself only references using DNA results to "prove or disprove biological sex", which is much more trivial and while it's likely to come with its own problems and edge cases, is also much less information.)

Hilariously, this is the second Sam that wants to collect everyones iris's for nefarious purposes

I used to think this kind of thing didn’t concern me. But once family members get pulled in and citizens get scanned by association, it’s hard to stay untouched.

Is this really about safety, or are we quietly building something we won’t be able to roll back?

FFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK NNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOO

The USA needs a national ID, it will help to avoid fraud, to get socialized health care, etc.

To collect data just for police enforcement is horrifying and it will increase the control that goverment has in private affairs without proving anything of value to society.

The USA claims freedom to avoid taking care of their own, but it claims security to spy and control its own citizens.

It’s somewhat important to point out that this is the same thing that was done during the Iraq war to potential “insurgents” so the biometrics tech was “trained” and used experimentally there before it has been brought home. Wouldn’t be surprised if the people that used it in Iraq (as technicians) are now going to be the people operating the tech now in the US.

Every grocery store I have been to in the US is recording people at the checkout.

There is a massive difference between collecting your DNA and iris or fingerprint.

a Gattaca-esq society is terrifying.

DNA seems especially egregious. That’s useful for things other than identification and has commercial value and thus incentive to abuse.

Idk I’m just planning to stay clear of the US till we see if they recover from their bout of authoritarianism

You've been asleep or something? Current policy of every Five Eyes country:

"You could be refused entry to [...] if you:

[...]

- refuse to let an immigration officer take your photo, fingerprints or an iris scan"

Unsurprising.

India, which given its colonial-era ruling-elites who are maniacally obsessed with the Anglosphere, is today considered a "laboratory" for doing social experiments that'd be considered a outrage against human dignity in their own countries. This country was the first in line not only the biometric identification projects (Aadhar), and for demonetization (of 2016 with UPI). All of these were funded and pushed by USAID.

Both of these were implemented by running roughshod over constitution and regulation, by "roping-in" key regulatory people by giving them what they desire the most - access to the ruling elites in the US. Eg. Infosys' Nandan Nilekani was thrust to the top with his USAID funded projects.

Now the results of this "human corralling" experiments (note: a lot of what Orwell described came out of his experience in British-colonial India), is now coming to the West.

The party of liberty and small government.

Does anyone know about PRISM?

I'm quite disappointed by the discourse in this thread.

We can build privacy-preserving identity. It's a huge opportunity. Go work on it!

If you're in the Bay, there's a conference on it every year where the people building the tech and setting the standards are hashing out the ideas!

When the government comes knocking, they're not coming up with stuff from scratch—they're picking up the tools we left around ready to use.

DNA is already stored after every infant is born and blood drawn.

EU's recently rejected chat control looks like child's play compared to this. These are some Stasi methods that are going to destroy the US if implemented. Europe already went through creating dossier on citizens in the past, the next immediate step is always fascism. Nothing good comes out of fascism, as the history showed.

This shows how complex the balance is between security and privacy, every new technology seems to push that line a bit further.

Imagine giving them your DNA data that could be sold to anyone without your knowledge because you don't have legal grounds to allow or disallow that.

In other news, water is wet.

How is this news, the usgov has been taking my biometrics for the past 5 years