You can't refuse to be scanned by ICE's facial recognition app, DHS document say

Increasingly a human can't be held responsible for their decisions either.

Accountability literally means "being forced to give an account of your decisions", i.e. explain the reasons behind why you made the choices you did. The idea is that when you have a public forum of people with common values, merely being forced to explain yourself will activate mechanisms of shame, guilt, and conformism that keep people inline. Otherwise you'll face the judgment of your peers.

This mechanism breaks down when your peers don't hold common values. If nobody agrees on what right and wrong are, you just find different peers until somebody thinks that what you're doing is right. Or you just don't care and figure solipsism vs. the status quo is just a matter of degree.

IBM wasn't held responsible either:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust

The alleged facts are worse than an AI simply making mistakes:

https://www.972mag.com/lavender-ai-israeli-army-gaza/

[flagged]

[flagged]

[flagged]

It's better that the alternative which is humans. Unless you think enforcing laws or ever having the need to establish identity should never take place

DON'T SUSPECT A FRIEND, REPORT HIM

I don't know whether I can trust your take on this. Have you got a 27B-6?

Well, these ICE thugs being told to do what they are doing is the actual trouble. Let's not shrink that Overton Window so small it can't be seen

All that tech is already persecuting people in China. It's up to us to hold the line here. I kind of gave up after the L3 got those Naked Body scanners into the airports based on the "underwear bomber" that was probably a false flag operation. We can always hope for a mostly peaceful downfall of the state, like when Hungary finally shed its communist government, but most likely it will be a shooting war at some point. It is the nature of humanity--peace, freedom, and prosperity are exceptional, not the rule.

Incidentally, I was reading about the Lincoln County War recently and realized it was a microcosm for all the kinds of corruption that we see on display nationwide today. The rings controlled commerce and any upstarts were facing brutally low chances for success and would be snuffed out if they became a threat.

Not the people doing it, though. They proudly call themselves "domestic terrorists." [1] It's OK when they do it, you see.

1: https://xcancel.com/ProjectLincoln/status/191249066980685851...

Most of Federal law enforcement except for those that patrol certain, usually sharply defined (but see border patrol for a big exception) areas historically has been in one of two modes interacting: either gathering information (this includes serving a search warrant), or arresting based on an existing arrest warrant, usually from a felony indictment. In the former case, something really out of ordinary has to happen to turn it into an arrest in that interaction (though that doesn't mean you wont be indicted and arrested based on it) and in the latter nothing is likely to deter arrest.

Border patrol specifically is wildly different, looking for people who are suspected of being subject to their jurisdiction without a specific indictment, detaining with in practice, if not in law, a much lower standard of suspicion than applies usually, and then generally having those detained subject to process that is almost entirely within executive branch “courts” with consequences as severe as criminal process but much lower protections than criminal process (where literal toddlers defend themselves in “court" against government lawyers.)

The current “immigration” crackdown, while ICE (which historically has worked more like a regular federal law enforcement agency despite its detainees often flowing into the executive immigration system and not the criminal justice system) has been the public face of it is effectively applying the Border Patrol culture/approach far more broadly (which is also why, in frustration with the “inadequate” results so far ICE middle leadership is being purged and replaced with Border Patrol personnel.)

"Fewer people cared when this was an objectively much smaller problem" is not the clever observation you seem to think it is, even with the weird Whole Foods snipe.

Some fedcops were always like this, but we can look back at previous administrations for invalid apprehensions of US citizens to see that the numbers used to be much lower over the last several decades.

It's a bit worse now [1] with Trump in lead.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnUO0Plcpbo

Sure you can jam all cellular frequencies. Not exactly legal but certainly possible.

>Will ICE get it right?

Hands on the ground don't read the laws, they only bring people before the person who actually knows them.

So no, ICE goons will do the basic thing -- check how white the person is, if not white enough, ask for documents, if documents are not convincing enough to them, snatch the person and let the more nuanced decisions to be made by those who can read.

Now if the person above them isn't agreeing with interpretation of the law that was used to issue those documents, it's sitting in the jail waiting for a judge time.

>Will ICE get it right? or will she be put into a prison for months with poor conditions, with an administration that does not want lawyers involved, with little ability to be found or call out for help?

Better yet -- whisk her out of the country and then claim that she no longer has standing to sue.

[dead]

I struggle a lot when I see comments like this.

This comes off to me as a more refined "Yes of course, what did you expect you naive person ?" type of comment you often find online (somewhat common among radical leftists)

Maybe commenter agrees with you that the point is to empower a national police to subjugate the populace (This opinion does not raise any of my eyebrows) but do you think this is going to reach people who don't already think that ? To put any doubt in their minds ? I understand the anger the current situation is causing and I am guilty of breaking the hn guidelines a few times myself but I am also convinced of the need to actually explain what you think are the actual problems from the ground up rather than just casting your own conclusions onto people, no matter how obvious they seem to you

So I did think they did a good job with their comment

> a white man who can trace his lineage to the 1600s in VA

and where exactly did those white men in 1600s VA come from? right, you're an immigrant, you should be detained. the 1600s detail is just smoke. the only key thing you said was white. everything after that is just fluff for telling the story.

Who cares about correct answers. While technically correct, it means nothing in the world of today. Those in power believe unless you can prove you are a citizen, you are not. It is only correct answer if that's how people are behaving.

See: 8 U.S.C. § 1304(e) : "Every alien, eighteen years of age and over, shall at all times carry with him and have in his personal possession any certificate of alien registration or alien registration receipt card issued to him pursuant to subsection (d)." [1] So aliens are indeed required to carry papers at all times. The balance between the rights of citizens and the obligations of aliens comes in the form of probable cause. It's similar to how a cop can't pull you over and just randomly search your car without reason, but if he has probable cause, then suddenly he can.

An ICE officer can't just detain somebody for having an accent or whatever, but if they have probable cause to think the person may not be a citizen then they have a substantial amount of leverage to affirm that. Probable cause has been tested somewhat rigorously in the courts and really means probable cause and not the knee-jerk obvious abuses like 'he's brown!'

[1] - https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1304

Was unamerican.

Seems to the rest of world that this is very much what America is now.

The thing I think most people forget is why society made the decision that the government requires a neutral third-party to be consulted to determine if there is probable cause to conduct a search of "persons, houses, papers, and effects".

Otherwise, you have a 'king' issuing general warrants which allow federal agents to search and seize anyone they want in the course of their investigations based on 'feels'. What makes it even worse is some court said racial profiling is sufficient reason to conduct a Terry stop to determine if the person is engaged in (civil) criminal activity and lets law enforcement demand they show their papers or be scanned by some dodgy app.

How much you believe this might depend on which regional bubble you're in. I live in Montana and around here I have an expectation that while there might be the odd rogue law enforcement person roaming the state, generally things still work like America.

Meanwhile last week I was in LA for a family thing and caught some TV ads playing there. That dog-killing gnome woman was on TV saying something like "We will hunt you down and deport you, there is no hiding, leave now". Initially I thought I was watching some comedy skit, but no it was an official US government advert.

Whether I'm in Montana or in LA vastly changes my perception of what's considered ok in America today.

I think this is a valid question. The first thing that comes to mind for me is that multiple conflicting records introduce a doubt about the veracity of those records. So we might be able to consider that there has been a mistake made. Contrast that to a single identification with an error. In that case, there is no way to tell that an error has been made, and very little recourse.

This argument rings especially true in the U.S. where there is already a primary key in use every day. The SSN serves as a universal enumerator but without canonical data.

If the U.S. wanted to have a national ID system with rules, a defined scope, and redress procedures when things went wrong, and established it in the open, following a democratic process, I would be much happier.

The system we are getting instead has all the downsides of centralisation, with none of the upsides.

> Can someone remind me why this fragmented identity system is preferable to a National ID?

States prefer having the power to issue ID cards and all of the control that grants them, they do not want to give up those powers, and politically the states have enough political and legal power to keep it this way.

Don’t make the mistake of presuming that this the result of a flawed cooperative system. It isn’t — it’s adversarial.

Just look at how long states fought to stop Real ID legislation.

Because when it is convenient, people like to think state's rights means something and that the federal government is the wrong place for things like this. Giving a national ID cedes power from the states to the fed. Or so discussions go

They were born as a network printing system, and became a US citizen later in life.

I see you, Wintermute, I see you.

Lawful Permanent Resident - https://ohss.dhs.gov/topics/immigration/lawful-permanent-res....

It's the official status of green card holders.

I also searched the web: Laryngopharyngeal Reflux

(second result was Lawful Permanent Resident; make of that what you will)

I’m with you on this, especially this year LPR seems to stand for license plate recognition (Flock and others) much more often.

tried searching for "noodlesUK" and didn't find anything meaningful

Legal permanent resident

Several results on the first page of Google for "lpr acronym" brings up "lawful permanent resident" or similar on my end.

Are there any details available on whether or not anything actually happened there?

Are you talking about DOGE? That data already existed in government databases. There was also no scraping involved.

Who needs mandatory id systems? State ID's and passports work just fine. What if I don't want an ID?

Not coincidentally, 24 was produced by the neocon Murdoch's Fox, and dramatized the same "ticking time-bomb" scenarios that Cheney was talking about on national TV in order to justify torture. Where you might think torturing one person is justified if it's going to help save thousands from the bomb, that kind of scenario never actually happens. Instead one of the main uses of torture was to extract "confessions" from people swiped from streets all over the world that they belonged to al-Qaeda, in order to justify the war aims of that criminal cabal of still-powerful and protected individuals.

24, dr. Phil, and a whole lot of other trash from that era sowed the seeds of the current faacism-lite brewing in America right now. Neoconservatism is as much of a cancer as civic nationalism is.

[flagged]

It's not just gaming it out theoretically! It's important to keep in mind that it's not just a policy dispute - everyone involved in this is violating the law, and when constitutional government is restored they can and should go to prison for it. (If you find yourself working for ICE, even indirectly, I'd encourage you to keep that in mind!)

Frankly it's a miracle it took this long to be a problem IMO.

The supreme court over the years has watered down constitutional protections against government enforcement upon individuals massively because doing so was necessary to empower the government to enforce speeding tickets, financial regulation, environmental regulation, chase bootleggers, etc, etc, with it's power only constrained in practice by political optics.

So now here we are, in a situation where the government is doing what it always does, levying what's essentially a criminal punishment (incarceration in this case, typically fines historically) in a case where allegedly no crime has been committed, and then give the accused only kangaroo court administrative process because it's not a crime, but now it's doing it at scale, flagrantly, loudly and against the political will of some of the locations it's doing it in.

There are a lot of bricks in this road to hell and someone somewhere was issuing a warning as each one was laid. Should have listened.

Nope they didn't decide that. It's actually even worse!

A lot of Americans have the impression that SCOTUS keeps deciding in the administration's favor, but this is not true.

SCOTUS is saying: "We're not going to hear this case right now, but we likely will in the future. In the meantime, we are going to overturn the lower court who did actually hear the case and allow the administration to continue its actions. No, we will not explain we think the lower court got wrong."

Increasingly these SCOTUS orders totally unexplained which is a blatant violation of their judicial obligations, and they are frequently unsigned by the majority (conservative) Justices. Presumably because they don't want their names written on papers that they know will be understood by future generations to be totally indefensible.

SCOTUS has proven itself functionally incapable of fulfilling its Constitutional duties and has proven that we need a lot more Justices. If you don't have the time to hear the cases we need you to hear, then the court needs to be scaled up and we can pick random panels to hear different cases.

Nothing to do with policy disagreements (how would any American even know if they had a policy disagreement with an unexplained, unsigned SCOTUS order?) – we just need courts that can decide on things that are important to our country.

> This company might remember their history.

For the record: Apparently they helped the original Nazis. One link of many: https://time.com/archive/6931688/ibm-haunted-by-nazi-era-act...

> IBM, according to Black’s book and the lawsuit, was responsible for punch card technology used by Nazi demographers in the years leading up to World War II — and eventually by the SS, which was charged with rounding up Europe’s Jews. Although it has long been known that IBM’s German arm, which was taken over by the Nazis, had cooperated with the regime — and, indeed, was in a consortium of companies making payments to survivors and victims’ families — Black says that the American parent was fully aware of the use to which the technology was put. And after the Germans surrendered, Black says, IBM’s U.S. office was quick to collect profits made during the war by the subsidiary, called Dehomag.

> The punch cards and counting machines, says Black, were provided to Hitler’s government as early as 1933, and were probably used in the Nazis’ first official census that year. The technology came in handy again in 1939 when the government conducted another census, this time with the explicit goal of identifying and locating German Jews — and finally, Black alleges, in tracking records at Nazi concentration camps.

> It’s this specificity of purpose, says William Seltzer, an expert in demographic statistics at Fordham University, that provides the most damning evidence. “Microsoft is not responsible for every spreadsheet made with Excel,” Seltzer told TIME.com. “But if someone is doing custom designing of a database, they have to know what’s going on. With these punch cards, Dehomag had to design a card for every piece of new information that the government wanted.”