It’s far from picture perfect
Published 3:58 pm Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Is technology the opiate of governments? Is there no problem that a high-tech gizmo can’t fix, or better yet, prevent?
Since February, six U.S. airports have been using body scanners instead of metal detectors to screen passengers for weapons. The program is testing whether the $170,000 body scanners should replace $10,000 metal detectors that have screened airline passengers since 1973, USA Today reported. The scanners are being used in Tulsa, San Francisco, Las Vegas, Miami, Albuquerque and Salt Lake City.
The Transportation Security Administration believes the scanners close a hole in security by finding non-metallic weapons such as plastic and liquid explosives, which the agency considers a major threat, the paper reported.
Critics believe the scanners pose a major threat to privacy, since screeners (inside a closed room) are looking at passengers’ bodies through their clothing, while looking for weapons. According to the TSA, the images are immediately deleted. (If one objects to the scan, one can go through the metal detectors instead, but must also be patted down.)
“We’ve struck a very good balance between security and privacy,” TSA spokesman Christopher White said.
Oh, sure. Images won’t be kept, and bodies won’t be “discussed,” unless there’s a good chance you’re a terrorist. Or if you have a hot body, or a weird one, or a fat one, or a famous one, or a young one, or whatever. (They are working on scanner technology that would identify airport screeners who would ever do such a thing.)
Meanwhile, because of all the identity theft, states are using “facial recognition” technology when issuing drivers licenses. Washington’s new enhanced license uses such technology. Four frowny states — Arkansas, Indiana, Nevada and Virginia — now require people to adopt a “neutral facial expression” when being photographed for their license, because smiles really throw off the facial recognition technology. Which is beautiful, if you’re not in the facial recognition technology business. (Other states say their technology can handle smiles.)
The software compares a new license photo with others that have already been shot. When a new photo seems to match an existing one, the software sends alarms that someone may be trying to steal another’s identity.
We are not security experts, nor identity thieves. But wouldn’t it be more effective to have software that compares names and dates of birth rather than faces? Or technology (or a person!) who can tell if that birth certificate is forged? Is it not names that are being stolen? Or can we look forward to “full-body neutral expression” license photos?
