Printable View
Maybe the guy was playing with him? Or he's insanely bored?
I already have a bar code on my passport so it might be biometric without the finger print. Don't know. Why is giving a finger print such a big deal? It's a picture of your finger, already have one of your much more detailed face on the passport any way, we already have your Face Print. ;)
In all reality its not! Although the US ignores pleas from European governments to wait sometime so they can catch up-according to my second link-, shows some ignorance. But I believe they collect more information than just your dirty finger print, at least after you leave the counter. Having a database full of everybody's info bothers me! You see how our government has problems keeping up just with general security, hows it going to protect those peoples identities? ah..nvm.Quote:
...Why is giving a finger print such a big deal? It's a picture of your finger, already have one of your much more detailed face on the passport any way, we already have your Face Print.
To be absolutely honest Americans have no idea what living in fear is. Even with 9/11 they still have no idea what terrorism means when it is a dialy occurrence that affects their lives directly....Quote:
The thing that is unfortunate is Americain society seems to be living in a enviroment of fear and the administration seems to be fueling it.
You have no idea how much information your government already has on you. When you start crossing borders it gets worse because your application for your passport draws much of what they know about you into a single pile.Quote:
But I believe they collect more information than just your dirty finger print, at least after you leave the counter. Having a database full of everybody's info bothers me! You see how our government has problems keeping up just with general security, hows it going to protect those peoples identities?
Wait till the first time you fly from the US to Paris, drive to Amsterdam and fly back from there and get asked by the immigration official how Paris was.... Remember, you didn't show the immigration official your ticket on the way and even if you did he only glimpsed at it out so how does the one on the way back on know where you were? It's all really rather simple.... If they need to find you in the US and you aren't hiding in the woods you have about 24 hours of freedom.....
Catch up to what?
You walk up, hold your finger on a pad and that's it.
The biometric passports aren't going to be implemented until later, the US already granted an extension. The technology to scan a million records while you stand there ins't in place and won't be for a long time. By then we'll all be microchiped anyway, except me.
The one's fueling paranoia are those that screamed Bush didn't do enough and pushed change on the government out of polical motivation. Even with the latest 9/11 commision there ware a fever to chop some heads. Mostly liberals but also many conservatives.
And it IS a picture of your finger. ;) What do you thinkg happens when you go through imigration in any country? Your data is recorded they already have a host of information. Even before computers it was kept. Of course a fake passport or visa was easy before the 90s but still everything was recorded. When you enter, when you leave, where you went, assuming you told them upon entering etc. Not to mention you flew over on a plane with a manifest of your personal info. Credit card, address, seat number, spouse, favorite beverage...
Yes very true but the truth is that either do you, or any of us do for that matter. The problem is security wise, even you quoted that but seemed to percieve/jumped to something else?Quote:
You haveno idea how much information your government already has on you.
Paris? yuk lmao jk. I know that one. I flew from the US to Germany and back. Those questions are all too familar to me.Quote:
Wait till the first time you fly from the US to Paris, drive to Amsterdam and fly back from there and get asked by the immigration official how Paris was..
ok:confused: I thought that was a given??!?Quote:
And it IS a picture of your finger.
Besides the fact that it might be slightly inconvenient for me as a european travelling to the US, I don't have anything against this. I'm not really that difficult when it comes to exchanging privacy for security. Those who have nothing to hide, hide nothing. All countries should do this. Although I do think that ALL people, including americans, should be photographed and fingerprinted. I'm sure there are people who are american citizens who have something against the US (hiding it for obvious reasons) and can potentially blow things up. If not, this would just be a bullshit, hypocritical thing to do. I don't see why other countries should adjust their passport though. Fingerprints and pictures should be good enough.
I don't see how a country, or an organization, holding information about who you are, what you eat, why you eat it, who you ****, and what you do could cause any damage to you as an individual. I would gladly share all my information if it makes my direct environment a safer place to live in, as long as everybody else also does it, else it would be a pretty useless act.
The desire for privacy, is a manifistation of fear. Fear to be naked while everybody else is clothed, fear of rejection, fear of society's judgement of your personal habits, mistakes, and quirks. Besides the fact that the narrow-minded society will actually judge and redicule extremely insignificant foolish things, it is a fear which has nothing to do with security or any practical issues at all.
the government of switzerland has made a weird arrangement regarding travel passports... from the beginning of 2005, swiss citizens can apply for a passport containing biometric info. if they want. its a five year pilot project and goes parallel to the standard swiss passport, that was issued 2003... so at least until 2010 and perhaps the winds have turned by then. right.
german, but anyways http://www.swissinfo.org/sde/Swissin...05&sid=5215449
The need for privacy IS fear, fear of human history.
the need for intimacy is a facet of human nature, i think. very matter of fact and cant be abstracted with logic. like total honesty is a good ideal, but destroys most relationships, being exposed to the sight and judgement of others destroys character in long term. people should have room for themselves to recover and rest, but this has little to do with e-mail-traffic, does it. i bring this up because i think there's a difference between intimacy and privacy.
privacy is an abstract construct of mind with no real justification, i think, but it came to life in the capitalistic world. i'm not communist or even close to it, but i directly connect privacy with possession. the intention of man as social being goes toward having influence on others in some way. today this is reached by collecting values which others would also like to have, or which give some kind of advantage. even marriage and the whole structure of how society works is directed toward building up some kind of protected space. were meatballs all right, but ever since the greeks we couldnt help but giving thought more value than matter. thought connects us, money is thought and status is thought. meat is weak. privacy is the protection of thought, and regarding the competition, attempt to direct or even keep others from thinking.
"system inherent" - keep both or drop both :P
intimacy requires privacy.
Without privacy inticimcy is a contruct of acceptable norms of the governing society.