• Travelers can opt out of facial recognition at US airports by requesting manual ID verification, though resistance or intimidation may occur.
  • Facial recognition poses privacy risks, including potential data breaches, misidentification, and normalization of surveillance.
  • The Algorithmic Justice League’s “Freedom Flyers” campaign aims to raise awareness of these issues and encourage passengers to exercise their right to opt out.
  • Alph4d0g@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    2 months ago

    Opt out. If we don’t exercise our rights, we lose them.

    "What if they retaliate and make life difficult for me? "

    That’s both illegal and against policy. If someone delays your right to travel for this specific reason, delay their job by asking for their supervisor and their name and employee number. Then file a complaint. That will dissuade that public servant (and their leadership) from exhibiting such behavior and encouraging it respectively.

    “But they are capturing your image in 10 skillion other public locations.”

    1. Sure, and you have the option to create your own privacy in public.
    2. Further, what’s the real purpose of the scanner at the TSA check if they already have that detailed image of your retina, your facial pore patterns and whatever the fsck else they store? They don’t have that level of detail yet on CCTV.

    If you don’t care, then that’s fine. Some people don’t mind the slow encroachments on 4th Amendment protections. Cool. Others do. Cool also. That’s why we can opt out.

    • Petter1@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      There should exist a law that orders privacy by default forcing all this intrusive stuff to bi opt-in instead of opt-out. With data, it is often to late if it is only opt-out…

      • Alph4d0g@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        25 days ago

        Agreed. This was rolled out without any regard whatsoever for people’s interest in data privacy. That kind of entitled behavior from any government agency is just plain gross.

  • Björn Tantau@swg-empire.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Stupid privacy people. What’s the worst that could happen? A fascist coming into power next year who could misuse the data?

    • CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      Stupid privacy people. What’s the worst that could happen? Surveillance companies that have already scoured the internet for photos of people to build a giant database of people?

      It’s also not like they could ever use the hundreds of other cameras all over the airports. What would they do with all that data anyways?

  • merde alors@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    2 months ago

    For international flights, US citizens can opt out but foreign nationals have to participate in face scanning, with some exceptions.

        • Dagnet@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          I remember when travelling in the US (Im a foreigner) there was a vip pass thingy to skip lines and enter without even talking to a migration officer (I think). Really seemed like a rich person pass

          • noseatbelt@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            I’m Canadian and I used to have a pass like that. It was $50 at the time and valid for 5 years.

          • M500@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Yeah, there are two different programs. One is for domestic flights and one is for domestic and international.

            I did the domestic flight one once because it was free with my credit card.

            But I had to fill out some forms and interview in person.

            I only got to use it once because they vip lanes were always closed.

            It’s only worth it if you need to travel a lot.

            Additionally, I’ve never really suffered long lines through airport security.

            The long lines are typically at immigrations and you can’t skip those outside of being a diplomat or private jet rich.

  • Imhotep@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    2 months ago

    For international flights, US citizens can opt out but foreign nationals have to participate in face scanning, [with some exceptions]

    I had no idea we were already at that point.

    always wanted to visit the US. I guess that won’t happen then.

    I refuse to participate in this dystopia. But I’m a little worried this will make me a recluse

    • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      Trust me you’re already a recluse relative to most by being on here. If you observe what passes for a “normal” “person” these days, they will endlessly scroll algorithmic ai-generated incomprehensible horrors on Tiktok, then purchase something through an ad from temu, they do not think. They are gone.

      But once you stop worrying that you may be saying no to experiences too much purely on principle, then you’re free to go even further and eradicate surveillance capitalism influence from your life altogether. One day you can ascend to even go smartphone-free.

      • JackbyDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        If you observe what passes for a “normal” “person” these days, they will endlessly scroll algorithmic ai-generated incomprehensible horrors on Tiktok, then purchase something through an ad from temu, they do not think.

        Can you just like, not be so damn condescending and elitist? Literally saying people who use TikTok and purchase stuff from Temu are sub-human

        • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Yeah I’m sorry, I just feel pretty strongly about this I guess and Lemmy is one of the few safe places to vent to like-minded folks.

          To explain myself a little: It’s not the “normies” that the techy people hate, it’s the perverted messed up world those less savvy in technology live in and everything about it, and with how much we’ve learned to circumvent corporate control it’s often a culture shock to see that people just take it, even stuff like online ads or algorithmic content feeds, stuff I haven’t experienced in probably a decade, like as if that’s just normal, and the sad part is it is for so many.

          Imagine if most of the world population was just falling for pyramid schemes or other blatant financial scams constantly. That’s how it feels.

          It becomes all too easy to blame the people rather than the systems that led to this, and sometimes it just feels like nobody outside of the hacker (classic definition) circles really gives enough of a shit to take control of the few things they can, and this is late stage capitalism, so I can’t really blame them, we’re all so tired just trying to survive.

      • Emerald@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        they will endlessly scroll algorithmic ai-generated incomprehensible horrors on Tiktok

        How is that much different from scrolling Lemmy? They are both social media

        • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Because Lemmy is Free, as in Libre and as in free beer, it is open source, and on top of all that, it’s not run for-profit by a single large corporate entity, it’s decentralised structure precludes that by design.

          There is nothing actually wrong with websites or forums like this or “social media”, not anymore than there is anything wrong with atoms even if humans found a way to make a weapon of it.

          In this case technology is weaponized by capitalism, and they’ll do anything to make you think it’s anything but the corporations who are to blame, misinformation on top of misinformation.

          The “mental health effects” of social media or smartphones are all just corporate distractions from the fact all those are really effects of capitalism. Even cryptocurrency isn’t actually bad inherently, I use monero all the time, it’s a great idea actually, especially where power consumption is addressed, but capitalism made it a speculative assets and state backed players wrestle for control. AI too. Open source LLMs benefit everyone, but the lack of tech literacy turned progressives against it and the played right into OpenAI and the rest of those scumbags’ hands.

          The fact that those who aren’t immersed in tech don’t know this is why all is lost. For the common man - they won, and it’s all black box products made to exploit people to the last drop.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        One day you can ascend to even go smartphone-free.

        Ascended to that in late 2014 because using a smartphone was a trigger for my anxiety.

        Back to using those since 2020 because of WhatsApp calls, apps for every shit and such being needed in life.

        • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          I have two these days, one Google™️ Pixel™️ for all government and job bullshit, and one crappy old riced to hell and back Sony for everything else. No Google play, no SIM, rooted and ROM’d, no problems, just a neat multi tool in a pinch.

  • retrospectology@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I did this during an international trip last year coming back into the country. The guy mostly seemed confused and kind of suspicious, but it was nbd.

    They will potentially take you out of line to a side room to hand you off to someone else. It seemed to be an area where they deal with any oddball kind of things. There was a lady ahead of me who was more raucus and upset about some issue with her ID. The guy who checked mine mainly seemed kind of bemused, like it was unusual.

    Be prepared for “We have the biometric data from your photo already, why do you care?”

    You’re not obligated to give them a super detailed justification. Just remain polite and unconfrontational, and explain that you prefer not use the system as long as the right remains afforded to you to opt out.

    (Note, this right only extends to US citizens)

  • selokichtli@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I find stupid to give away my biometric data to everyone asking for it just because I gave it away once in exchange of my passport, but I guess that’s just me.

  • credo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’m okay with the TSA scan (pre-check) since… you know… they already have you if you took a picture for your ID.

    Those “clear” people however. Who TF thinks it’s a good idea to hand your biometric info to a corp?

    • Infynis@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      There’s no way my ID photo would work for facial recognition. I don’t plan on giving them anything new before I’m forced to

    • Zectivi@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Clear is now a TSA “vendor” for the precheck process. The machines they use for the sign up process - at least the airport I was at - don’t have the eye scanning camera in the kiosk.

      The Clear representative I was asking questions of had said they don’t require eye scans for Clear, though that is the default. People can ask to use just fingerprints, which he said does disrupt the terminal process as the agents don’t think to ask if fingerprints were what was registered when the eye scans fail.

      I am not advocating for Clear. I refuse to use them. I simply do want to call out that they are one of 3 who handle the process for the TSA now. People do have a choice of which of the three to use.

    • Limonene@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      How did you get into TSA Pre without providing fingerprints? I tried once, and they strictly refused to let me apply because I wouldn’t give fingerprints.

      • credo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Well, I’ve had DLs in multiple states and they all required fingerprints. The little digital ones. Maybe that’s not the case everywhere though.

        • ThunderWhiskers@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Oh, weird. They don’t require prints for a DL in TX, but we’re already closing in on an authoritarian state anyways. I didn’t know this was a thing.

          • toddestan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            It probably has to do with whether the driver’s license is Real ID compliant or not. Here in Minnesota, you have the option of getting the Real ID license that can be used as a federal ID card for things like flying, or the regular old driver’s license which soon will really only be good for showing you’re allowed to drive a car.

            I only have the regular driver’s license so I don’t know what all getting the Read ID involves, but having your biometric data scanned and stored seems like something they’d require.

            • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              I’m in Utah and have a “real ID” or whatever (the little gold star) and never had my fingerprints taken, eyes scanned, etc. If they required that, I’d say no and just use my passport instead, which also didn’t require biometrics.

  • ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I’m going to assume they can photgraph you the moment you walk into the airport.

    I used to be extra during the TSA body scan BS. And honestly, I felt like they won.

      • ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        They pulled me in a private room when I refused to body scan and my bag was suspicious.

        It was an extra 25 minutes. Enough to be inconvenient as they tried to find two available TSA agents willing to body check me then check every single item in my suitcase.

    • ThunderWhiskers@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      That’s the fun part about the war for privacy. We have already lost and if you make a big deal about it they’re just going to make your life hell!

      • techt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        It’s not such a binary thing as winning or losing, it’s a constantly shifting process. The only way to actually lose is by giving up – instead, consider it making it as hard as possible for your privacy to be infringed upon. Sometimes it’s more inconvenient, but what makes us such a farmable populace is our reluctance to be inconvenienced. Be good at being uncomfortable.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Yup, go to the airport early, wear something like reflectacles and a mask, and record everything. Who knows, maybe they’ll violate your rights and you can find a lawyer to sue them to recoup some of that inconvenience.

    • henfredemars@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I tried to refuse the face scan and they looked at me like I just grew eye stalks. After a long pause, I said never mind I need to catch this flight, let’s do it.

      It’s not a hill I’m willing to die on, even though I’m disappointed with the practice.

      • techt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 months ago

        I refused, it went fine. I had to repeat myself because it was unexpected and dudebro wasn’t prepared, and they had to turn on the other machine and wait for it to start up, but it only delayed me like 2 minutes. The more people ask, the easier it gets.

  • slickgoat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    The game was lost for me when I started getting fingerprinted at certain airports. This privilege used to be reserved for suspected criminals. Now we’re are all suspected criminals on a default setting.

    • al4s@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 months ago

      For distances >600km, flying is usually 4x-10x faster at a similar price. At least in and around Germany. I assume in the US trains compare way worse, also because the distances are way larger.

      Examples: “Normal” example: Stuttgart (Germany) -> Amsterdam (Netherlands) Train: 11h 10min - 241€ Plane: 1h 20min - 225€

      Best case scenario for train in Germany at around that distance (because there’s a direct connection): München -> Berlin Train: 3h 54min - 167€ Plane: 1h 5min - 226€

    • Fades@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      They are very much incomparable more so than they are comparable. Try taking a train over a sea or across a country like the US.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Exactly. I live near SLC, and to get to SF would take:

        • ~19 hours by train and cost $92 in coach
        • ~11 hours by car - $60 in gas in my hybrid, $130 in my minivan
        • ~2 hours by plane - <$50 by plane (Frontier)

        And that’s a route with a direct train connection, so literally no transfers. So, a train takes way longer, is probably more expensive (esp. if I take family), and I’d probably need a rental car on the other end. And that’s for a “best case” scenario with direct train service.

        Screw that, trains anywhere other than the east coast of the US makes pretty much no sense for transportation. As an experience, sure, but not to get from A to B.

      • TechNerdWizard42@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        I’d actually love to take some sort of sea train, underground tunnel or floating death wave train one day. It wouldn’t be relaxing, peaceful, or cheap. But it would be an adventure.

    • pewter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      Hour vs. hour it’s the best form of transportation

      You get more space, there’s no TSA, you don’t get charged for bringing luggage, you can carry on liquids, you get leg room, the wifi is decent.

      But if I’m traveling a really far distance… For example, if I’m going from California to New York I’d rather go by plane. Going by train for that seems to be pretty horrible. America is in desperate need of a ground transportation that can get from California to New York quickly.

      • Liz@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        If we put in a mag-lev system that averages 250 mph from station to station, an overnight sleeper train across the country becomes extremely attractive.

        • Chee_Koala@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          There is a sleeper train from Amsterdam to Vienna, last 2 / 3 years I checked it was sold out almost everyday. It seems like the perfect mode of transport

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        if I’m going from California to New York

        Yup, that’s like 70-80 hours, depending on where in CA you’re leaving from. So you’ll be on that train for 3 days, and have to change trains 2-4 times. The plus side is that it’s cost-competitive w/ flying ($400-ish, vs $200-ish flying), but that’s for coach, so you’d spend those 3 days sleeping in a chair. If you want a sleeper room, that’s like $2k.

        A direct flight would take 5-ish hours and cost $200-ish.

        There’s a reason nobody rides trains in the US, and it’s because it takes way too long and it’s too expensive. It would be a fun experience, but not great if you’re using it for transportation.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    Simply stand away from the camera or keep your face covered with a mask, present your ID, and say, “I opt out of biometrics. I want the standard verification process.”

    This sounds like a great way for a SovCit to get a full ass inspection from a sausage-fingered security guard.

    The best you’re going to get is redirected to a very long queue of people who’s passports don’t have biometrics.

    • BetterDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Actually no, they look at your face and your ID, make sure the information matches, and move you along. No secondary inspection, no difference except you didn’t get scanned with facial recognition. It’s the same process as before facial recognition was implemented.

      Why even write that comment?

      • Squizzy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Because to get to the guy in the kiosk you have to queue up and that is likely to be long. That is what was stated.

        • BetterDev@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          I’ve been in and out of DFW, BOS, and JFK since these facial recognition scanners went in and I can tell you with a great deal of confidence that there’s no additional wait time, or queue, or anything else if you opt out. There’s a TSA agent right next to the scanner who collects your ID whether you get scanned or not. That’s the same person who otherwise just checks it if you opt out. What are you even on about? Maybe its different at some airports, but I’ve been opting out every time I fly and it’s no big deal.

          • Squizzy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            I never said it was a big deal at all, it isnt.

            But there is an increased likelihood of a queue when opting for the non automated route. It is the reason automation is implemented.

            I too have been throuhh airports, it has never bothered me but if you dont go through the automated queue you might face a longer queue because a lot of previously manual customs real estate is given over to automation now.

            • BetterDev@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              ¯\(ツ)/¯ maybe, but as long as I have the option and it’s not tedious to do so (which is the case), I’m gonna opt out and encourage others to do so. Fair enough if your perspective is you want to accept whatever new security theater data collection is implemented in exchange for some perceived convenience. Making your case here with me in this conversation has taken more effort on your part than opting out of facial recognition at the security checkpoint in an airport would have, and I find that fact amusingly ironic.

              • Squizzy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                I also I never said I prefer the convenience over the privacy. Here is a tip, just because you hold a viewpoint does not mean it is infallible. There ae trade offs. While personally I am scurity and privacy conscious, I was pointing out the barrier for people to opt out, that is all. There is no two ways about it, unless there are a ratoo of 1:1 staff to passengers who opt out there will be a queue. The machines were put in in massive volume far exceeding the number of staff that would ever be checking people through in order to speed up the experience and due to them costing less to run.

                I agree with you. You can still be objective and recognise the situation for what it is. A barrier to opting out is the likelihood that the manual check through takes more time. It doesnt have to be significantly more time.

                • BetterDev@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  And what I’m saying is it doesn’t take more time to opt out in my experience. Its just as quick to get manually verified as to be biometrically scanned.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Get clear ones. Most (all?) of those security cameras use IR illumination to ID you, so you can have lenses that allow visible light through, but mess up IR scanning. I think you can get them w/ prescription lenses if you email the creator, so you can legitimately tell them you need your glasses to see (if you need a prescription, that is).

            • csm10495@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Then just ask to not be facial scanned. Last airport I went to had signs saying you could opt out.

              Then you don’t need weird glasses either.

              • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                I’m less worried about the face scanning (you can opt-out, as you said), I’m more worried about the camera scanning in other parts of the airport. The glasses combat the most common form of face scanning, which uses IR illumination. It also works at grocery stores and whatnot, which is especially important if you’re a POC and likely to be racially profiled as a shoplifter (I’ve read some horror stories).

                It does paint a bright red target on my chest since they show up as a massive bright light source on IR feeds (if a security guard happens to watch), so it’s more a form of protest than anything.

  • 1984@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    It’s about normalizing survellience, and the article also says this as an opinion further down in the text.

    Everyone can see that we are going towards the society in black mirror, with social scores, and people being punished for not complying with rules of any kind. I’m glad I’m kind of old because the future will suck.

  • CodandChips @lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Brit here. About eight years ago I flew from London to Belfast and return for business. We don’t need a passport to travel to Northern Ireland, just photo id like driving licence is fine.

    Coming back to London I approached the gate and before I could pull out my wallet to show my id, the guard says " Good evening Mr. Codandchips have a safe journey "…

    Yes they have facial recognition, the cameras are visible but you don’t notice them.

      • communism@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        It isn’t necessarily. Had a police officer greet me by name once (had never interacted with this officer or the station they were from). They’ll have the data necessary to identify you by sight. If you’re a British citizen the British government most likely has a photo of you somewhere if you have any photo ID, not to mention if your face is known to the state through other means eg through interaction with the criminal justice system.

  • AlecSadler@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    The last time I flew they did this, but there was a huge sign that said photos are immediately deleted after verification…is this not true?

    • SulaymanF@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s discussed in the article. We can’t really be sure if they do, but they already store the measurements of your face along with other bits of metadata. They could reconstruct your face with it even without the photo. It’s a deceptive claim, because even if they throw away the camera video they still have your face for all intents and purposes.

    • Infinite@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Just for example, that’s an easy way to save just the biometric signature and have very few people question it.

      • jet@hackertalks.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Also, bureaucratic lies can be technically true. They copy the photo from the original device to a database, then delete the photo on the device. So it’s technically true the photo was immediately deleted, it’s just also copied and persisted forever. And a bureaucrat will proudly stand in front of you all day and tell you they deleted the photo, and they will sleep well that night with not any concern