Clear wants to scan your face at airports – privacy experts are worried(washingtonpost.com)
washingtonpost.com
Clear wants to scan your face at airports – privacy experts are worried
https://www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2023/12/20/clear-facial-recognition-technology-airport-security/
68 comments
I can say that I have never heard of a single person not flying somewhere because of the TSA or other security ruined flying for them. Maybe it wasn't actually good and you're just blindly believing the nostalgia of older folks.
Oh I would absolutely fly more if the TSA process was less onerous. Hands down. But the entire airport process is so painful that it's just not worth it for a lot of things. Like Houston to New Orleans would 100% be a flight, but with the current security (and check-in process)...I just drive instead. It also regularly makes me reconsider flying longer distances and I choose leisure destinations/activities that are more drivable instead.
This reduces my flying by a potential 4-8 round trip flights per year for me personally.
This reduces my flying by a potential 4-8 round trip flights per year for me personally.
Those seem to be two different things though.
But to you first point, I definitely fly less than I would if we got rid of TSA. They're a fucking nightmare in my city.
But to you first point, I definitely fly less than I would if we got rid of TSA. They're a fucking nightmare in my city.
Maybe get out more? I know _lots_ of people for whom this is true and who take multi-day road trips rather than deal with air travel.
I routinely flew for business before 9/11 and would typically show up about 15 minutes before boarding time at one of the three busiest airports in the US and typically got through security and would then had to wait 5-7 minutes before boarding would start. Air travel is radically different than it was pre-9/11.
I routinely flew for business before 9/11 and would typically show up about 15 minutes before boarding time at one of the three busiest airports in the US and typically got through security and would then had to wait 5-7 minutes before boarding would start. Air travel is radically different than it was pre-9/11.
> I have never heard of a single person not flying somewhere because of the TSA or other security ruined flying for them.
There have been quite a few flights I've not taken because of the security gauntlet. I really only fly when there is no other realistic option -- which means I that I only rarely do it recreationally anymore at all.
Getting to the plane has become utterly horrible.
There have been quite a few flights I've not taken because of the security gauntlet. I really only fly when there is no other realistic option -- which means I that I only rarely do it recreationally anymore at all.
Getting to the plane has become utterly horrible.
It's really not that bad if you have GlobalEntry/TSA Pre. I've been through quite a few airports since getting it and never had an issue.
Not as easy as when I was pound atd you could walk right up to the boarding gate to meet someone getting off a plane, but definitely not horrible or even challenging.
However, that's with TSA Pre. I recently flew through Orlando and good gods that security line was a disaster.
I'm an Abolish-the-TSA type, they do more harm than good, don't get me wrong, but if you want to fly just go get GlobalEntry, and everything is quite painless. (right up until you get to the gate and the airline starts screwing you, but that's a different problem.)
Not as easy as when I was pound atd you could walk right up to the boarding gate to meet someone getting off a plane, but definitely not horrible or even challenging.
However, that's with TSA Pre. I recently flew through Orlando and good gods that security line was a disaster.
I'm an Abolish-the-TSA type, they do more harm than good, don't get me wrong, but if you want to fly just go get GlobalEntry, and everything is quite painless. (right up until you get to the gate and the airline starts screwing you, but that's a different problem.)
GlobalEntry only helps if you're flying international, and even then it only helps you once you land and everyone else is standing in the line at passport control.
It doesn't do squat for you if you're staying in the same country.
It doesn't do squat for you if you're staying in the same country.
Global entry gives you pre check.
> It's really not that bad if you have GlobalEntry/TSA Pre.
Yes, that's what I hear. That's well beyond what I am willing to do, though.
Yes, that's what I hear. That's well beyond what I am willing to do, though.
Here's my anecdote.
It was really good, as someone who flew pre 9/11. I remember reaching Logan airport 20 minutes before my scheduled flight in 2001 thanks to Boston's traffic. I walked to the gate unimpeded (nothing to check in). Zero stress.
Part of it is also that flights used to be much less overbooked and the overall experience was better and this isn't just nostalgia.
However I don't think it's completely fair to blame the TSA for the worsened experience. The threat model has changed since then. Add to that shrinking seats, worse customer service, more crowded airports, and the experience is much worse.
A few years back, we decided to minimize air travel and take a lot more local vacations. Yes, we miss flying but at some point the hassle exceeded the desire to visit exotic locales.
It was really good, as someone who flew pre 9/11. I remember reaching Logan airport 20 minutes before my scheduled flight in 2001 thanks to Boston's traffic. I walked to the gate unimpeded (nothing to check in). Zero stress.
Part of it is also that flights used to be much less overbooked and the overall experience was better and this isn't just nostalgia.
However I don't think it's completely fair to blame the TSA for the worsened experience. The threat model has changed since then. Add to that shrinking seats, worse customer service, more crowded airports, and the experience is much worse.
A few years back, we decided to minimize air travel and take a lot more local vacations. Yes, we miss flying but at some point the hassle exceeded the desire to visit exotic locales.
There are lots of issues with flying. Fees galore, fewer amenities on the plane, smaller seats, etc. Yeah, you can't blame any of that on TSA. But having to arrive at the airport several hours before my flight, yeah I can blame that on TSA or it's equivalent counterpart in foreign countries.
But what is worse is there is no obvious upside for TSA. It costs time and money with no apparent increase in safety. In fact the only time I'm unsafe is when I'm going through the security line. That is standing in a bottleneck next to barrels of suspected explosives and letting my bags out of my sight.
Europe, mid-1970s: Bader-Meinhof is in full swing; Palestinian, Armenian, and other groups were planting bombs. Plane hijacking was a new tactic with much news coverage. The modern age of assassination hysteria that started with JFK was still going.
Did we fly like those nostalgic pics of businessmen and their wives smoking and eating steak? No, we stood like scared refugees, with heavily armed military personnel and German shepherds walking around scanning the crowd. I was a little kid in Zurich but remember it well.
9/11 may feel like a turning point in airport security, but it just brought to America what has been happening in other places at other times. And apparently made it permanent.
Did we fly like those nostalgic pics of businessmen and their wives smoking and eating steak? No, we stood like scared refugees, with heavily armed military personnel and German shepherds walking around scanning the crowd. I was a little kid in Zurich but remember it well.
9/11 may feel like a turning point in airport security, but it just brought to America what has been happening in other places at other times. And apparently made it permanent.
Eh also add that most years number of people traveling by flight increases. 2009 and 2020-2021 were outliers. We're dealing with around 20% more fliers than 2000 but most major destination airports have not expanded in kind to deal with the additional traffic.
Also add in housing incursion to most airports where development has got closer making it near impossible for current airports to expand.
Also add in housing incursion to most airports where development has got closer making it near impossible for current airports to expand.
"Absolutely ruined"? We still get value from flight, just now trade wait time and privacy for security. It's clearly still worth it for the vast majority of the world, see global flight stats.
Is it that much worse? I was in my late teens by the time 9/11 happened. But I flew a lot both before and after that, and it still feels similar, except security is a bit worse (unless you have PreCheck and Global Entry, in which case it's actually quicker and easier than before). Once you're on the plane, the experience is mostly similar except you can't visit the cockpit and talk to the pilots anymore.
Don't get me wrong, the service has also gotten a lot worse: less legroom, shittier food, fewer drinks/snacks, etc., at least in the USA. But that's more just capitalism and airlines being greedy than the government doing anything.
It's also been my experience that American airlines are pretty bad across the board. The European and Asian ones are typically much nicer, and even their regional/budget airlines have very nice accommodations and check-in experiences compared to United, etc.
Don't get me wrong, the service has also gotten a lot worse: less legroom, shittier food, fewer drinks/snacks, etc., at least in the USA. But that's more just capitalism and airlines being greedy than the government doing anything.
It's also been my experience that American airlines are pretty bad across the board. The European and Asian ones are typically much nicer, and even their regional/budget airlines have very nice accommodations and check-in experiences compared to United, etc.
Scenes from the 1990s:
In 1991 a friend needed to fly home. She was anxious about flying. I went with her to the gate until loading, to help her keep her calm. Not possible now. You could also meet people at the gate when they arrived.
In 1998, working for a startup, my boss came in on a late flight. I volunteered to pick her up. I got to the airport about 15 minutes early. It's late, and not busy. I park right in front of the terminal and wait. While waiting, I cleared up some trash from my car. Now, due to concerns about possible car bombs, the airport prohibits parking in front of the terminal.
In the early 2000s I flew from New Mexico to Sweden pretty regularly. The group I visited had a weekly sauna. I would bring a 6-pack of Modelo, tortilla chips and salsa as my contribution. Not possible now, due to the liquids rule put into place a few years after 9/11.
You say with PreCheck and Global Entry security is easier than before, but in the 1990s it was easy. Luggage in the X-ray machine, walk through metal detector, and done. No pulling out of laptops, liquids, no TSA id check. And I think even that security wasn't done 100% of the time.
There was still an id check at check-in but that was because in th early 1990s the airlines wanted to prohibit the ticket resale market. In the 1980s if you had a New York/LA ticket and couldn't make the flight, you could sell the ticket to anyone else. Even with the id check, a partial match was accepted - my mother and I have the same initial, so either of us could fly with "A. Dalke".
I heard from older people that in the 1980s kids who were plane enthusiasts would go to the terminal just to watch the planes. Back then there was no security check at all.
Each of these are small things, but they add up.
In 1991 a friend needed to fly home. She was anxious about flying. I went with her to the gate until loading, to help her keep her calm. Not possible now. You could also meet people at the gate when they arrived.
In 1998, working for a startup, my boss came in on a late flight. I volunteered to pick her up. I got to the airport about 15 minutes early. It's late, and not busy. I park right in front of the terminal and wait. While waiting, I cleared up some trash from my car. Now, due to concerns about possible car bombs, the airport prohibits parking in front of the terminal.
In the early 2000s I flew from New Mexico to Sweden pretty regularly. The group I visited had a weekly sauna. I would bring a 6-pack of Modelo, tortilla chips and salsa as my contribution. Not possible now, due to the liquids rule put into place a few years after 9/11.
You say with PreCheck and Global Entry security is easier than before, but in the 1990s it was easy. Luggage in the X-ray machine, walk through metal detector, and done. No pulling out of laptops, liquids, no TSA id check. And I think even that security wasn't done 100% of the time.
There was still an id check at check-in but that was because in th early 1990s the airlines wanted to prohibit the ticket resale market. In the 1980s if you had a New York/LA ticket and couldn't make the flight, you could sell the ticket to anyone else. Even with the id check, a partial match was accepted - my mother and I have the same initial, so either of us could fly with "A. Dalke".
I heard from older people that in the 1980s kids who were plane enthusiasts would go to the terminal just to watch the planes. Back then there was no security check at all.
Each of these are small things, but they add up.
> except security is a bit worse (unless you have PreCheck and Global Entry, in which case it's actually quicker and easier than before).
Security is worse everywhere, even if you have PreCheck.
For starters, the rules for PreCheck are completely arbitrary and up to both the airport, terminal, and the whims of whoever is in charge that day. Even using the same checkpoint at the same terminal, sometimes you'll have to take your laptop out, sometimes you won't, sometimes you'll have to go through the scanner, sometimes you'll be able to use a metal detector, etc. Before 9/11, it was much more consistent (in large part because they didn't care about most of those things).
In addition, the inability to take arbitrary liquids (and more recently powders) is a huge inconvenience that wasn't in place before 2006 (and 2018).
> It's also been my experience that American airlines are pretty bad across the board. The European and Asian ones are typically much nicer, and even their regional/budget airlines have very nice accommodations and check-in experiences compared to United, etc.
This is a common perception, but having flown a lot within Europe and Asia, I disagree with this. One reason people perceive this is because they're used to comparing European airlines on international routes (where they are often, but not always, better), and because of the geography. Many of the popular US domestic flights are coast-to-coast, which results in a six hour flight. There's nowhere in the EU where you'll get a six-hour domestic flight - LIS to HEL is only 4.5 hours, and that's about as long as you'll get[0]. If you fly, say, AMS-WAW or AMS-BER, even on KLM, you'll get pretty minimal service on a narrow body with no in-flight entertainment or WiFi. And that's considered acceptable because it's a pretty short flight. But it's not exactly a step up from what you'd get on a comparable length in the US.
This isn't to excuse US airlines - as a frequent flyer, I'd really love better service on domestic flights. But it's an apples-to-oranges comparison: flights within the EU are shaped differently from flights within the US, and if you compare flights of similar lengths and similar levels of competition, the gap is pretty small.
As for the regional/budget airline difference... I don't know if I'd agree with that either. Is Spirit really worse than Ryan Air?
[0] You can stretch further by going as far as KEF, but at that point you're flying FI, and even though they've gotten a little better now that they have to compete on their international flight routes, I would not want to fly them for any long-haul flight if there's another option.
Security is worse everywhere, even if you have PreCheck.
For starters, the rules for PreCheck are completely arbitrary and up to both the airport, terminal, and the whims of whoever is in charge that day. Even using the same checkpoint at the same terminal, sometimes you'll have to take your laptop out, sometimes you won't, sometimes you'll have to go through the scanner, sometimes you'll be able to use a metal detector, etc. Before 9/11, it was much more consistent (in large part because they didn't care about most of those things).
In addition, the inability to take arbitrary liquids (and more recently powders) is a huge inconvenience that wasn't in place before 2006 (and 2018).
> It's also been my experience that American airlines are pretty bad across the board. The European and Asian ones are typically much nicer, and even their regional/budget airlines have very nice accommodations and check-in experiences compared to United, etc.
This is a common perception, but having flown a lot within Europe and Asia, I disagree with this. One reason people perceive this is because they're used to comparing European airlines on international routes (where they are often, but not always, better), and because of the geography. Many of the popular US domestic flights are coast-to-coast, which results in a six hour flight. There's nowhere in the EU where you'll get a six-hour domestic flight - LIS to HEL is only 4.5 hours, and that's about as long as you'll get[0]. If you fly, say, AMS-WAW or AMS-BER, even on KLM, you'll get pretty minimal service on a narrow body with no in-flight entertainment or WiFi. And that's considered acceptable because it's a pretty short flight. But it's not exactly a step up from what you'd get on a comparable length in the US.
This isn't to excuse US airlines - as a frequent flyer, I'd really love better service on domestic flights. But it's an apples-to-oranges comparison: flights within the EU are shaped differently from flights within the US, and if you compare flights of similar lengths and similar levels of competition, the gap is pretty small.
As for the regional/budget airline difference... I don't know if I'd agree with that either. Is Spirit really worse than Ryan Air?
[0] You can stretch further by going as far as KEF, but at that point you're flying FI, and even though they've gotten a little better now that they have to compete on their international flight routes, I would not want to fly them for any long-haul flight if there's another option.
Yeah, the liquids thing is a real bummer. And there is definitely variance -- smaller airports tend to be way more friendly and accommodating -- but in general, I would say PreCheck has been a huge blessing for me. 90%+ of the time I don't have to take anything out, take off my belt or vest or shoes, etc. Usually in and out of security in 2-3 minutes.
Global Entry is even nicer, letting you skip the hours of immigration lines.
I don't particularly like flying, but I do love airports... just hanging around in them, having a drink while watching the planes do their thing... so it's really valuable to me to be able to get through security easily and be able to enjoy the scenery and people+plane-watch :)
--------
edit: either you edited your comment after I posted, or I missed the second half of it:
> One reason people perceive this is because they're used to comparing European airlines on international routes (where they are often, but not always, better), and because of the geography.
I can believe that!
> you'll get pretty minimal service on a narrow body with no in-flight entertainment or WiFi
I don't care about that so much, but the seating is sooooooo uncomfortable, at least on the short-haul United, Delta, and American flights I usually take.
https://www.seatguru.com/charts/shorthaul_economy.php
Has a good comparison... United's seat pitch and width are typically pretty bad, especially for their regional short-hauls, but they're very often the only airline that flies where I live :(
> As for the regional/budget airline difference... I don't know if I'd agree with that either. Is Spirit really worse than Ryan Air?
Don't know, haven't flown either.
But NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER EVER fly Frontier: https://www.flyfrontier.com/
Worst experience of my life, ever. I'd rather go to the dentist than fly with them ever again.
Global Entry is even nicer, letting you skip the hours of immigration lines.
I don't particularly like flying, but I do love airports... just hanging around in them, having a drink while watching the planes do their thing... so it's really valuable to me to be able to get through security easily and be able to enjoy the scenery and people+plane-watch :)
--------
edit: either you edited your comment after I posted, or I missed the second half of it:
> One reason people perceive this is because they're used to comparing European airlines on international routes (where they are often, but not always, better), and because of the geography.
I can believe that!
> you'll get pretty minimal service on a narrow body with no in-flight entertainment or WiFi
I don't care about that so much, but the seating is sooooooo uncomfortable, at least on the short-haul United, Delta, and American flights I usually take.
https://www.seatguru.com/charts/shorthaul_economy.php
Has a good comparison... United's seat pitch and width are typically pretty bad, especially for their regional short-hauls, but they're very often the only airline that flies where I live :(
> As for the regional/budget airline difference... I don't know if I'd agree with that either. Is Spirit really worse than Ryan Air?
Don't know, haven't flown either.
But NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER EVER fly Frontier: https://www.flyfrontier.com/
Worst experience of my life, ever. I'd rather go to the dentist than fly with them ever again.
Pre 9/11 I used to routinely fly a commercial route with no security screening process. There was once even an attempted hijacking and the (lack of) procedures remained. The grandparent is correct, everyone went insane after 9/11. And this wasn't even in the same hemisphere as the USA.
"Moving from iris and fingerprint scanning to facial scanning should help customers get through Clear’s checkpoints faster."
So they're moving from strong authentication to security theater?
So they're moving from strong authentication to security theater?
Well we were already in security theater. But what strong authentication did they have before?
Not that I agree with facial recognition
Not that I agree with facial recognition
The value add of Clear over precheck seems really small to me. I've never been in a precheck line for longer than 10 minutes flying out of reasonably busy airports (DCA is my home airport, but DFW, ATL, etc are also never that slow unless something is really goofed). And if you get Clear you still have to get precheck to not have to take your belt off / laptop out.
In some places (Seattle, Denver, a few others I've been to) the Clear line can be significantly shorter than the pre-check line, especially close to the holidays.
To be clear (no pun intended), Clear lets you jump to the start of the PreCheck line too (they "stack").
This summer in Denver, for example, the pre-check line took about 30-45 minutes, wrapping around several parts of the airport.
The Clear line (which I didn't have access to) jumped to the end of head of that queue, cutting off like 20-30 min.
Many travel credit cards will pay for PreCheck anyway, but only a few will pay for Clear.
But having both will be the fastest. Often it won't matter, but when it does, it's nice.
To be clear (no pun intended), Clear lets you jump to the start of the PreCheck line too (they "stack").
This summer in Denver, for example, the pre-check line took about 30-45 minutes, wrapping around several parts of the airport.
The Clear line (which I didn't have access to) jumped to the end of head of that queue, cutting off like 20-30 min.
Many travel credit cards will pay for PreCheck anyway, but only a few will pay for Clear.
But having both will be the fastest. Often it won't matter, but when it does, it's nice.
In Seattle on a busy morning, the PreCheck line snakes around, folding on itself many times, with a worker holding an “end of line” sign that could be hundreds of feet away from the security area. Clear is totally worth it.
As a consequence, many people have signed up so…now Clear sometimes has a big line.
As a consequence, many people have signed up so…now Clear sometimes has a big line.
Every single time I flew from Denver, the Clear line was SLOWER than the pre-check. (Everytime I take the person at the end of the clear line as reference and check where he is when I'm about to get through).
The TSA-pre line wraps around but goes super fast, almost walking pace. The clear line barely moves.
Clear has become a gimmick that makes you believe you are going through faster because the line is shorter.
The TSA-pre line wraps around but goes super fast, almost walking pace. The clear line barely moves.
Clear has become a gimmick that makes you believe you are going through faster because the line is shorter.
Were you looking at the Clear line for non-Precheck people, perhaps? (I can't remember if Denver had a separate line for that, but many airports do).
I was in the Precheck line without Clear, and the Precheck + Clear people moved way faster to the head of the line I was in.
(To be clear, there are two separate Clear lines in many airports, one for people with Precheck and one for people without it. So four lines total, normal/precheck/normal+clear/precheck+clear).
-----
But regardless, sometimes one of the lines will be shorter than others. Sometimes regular is faster than Precheck too (but you'll have to take off shoes and take laptops out, etc.). Some entrances will also have shorter lines than others.
But having both PreCheck + Clear means you can choose from any line you want. If the PreCheck line without Clear is faster, well then, just go in that and skip Clear this time.
I was in the Precheck line without Clear, and the Precheck + Clear people moved way faster to the head of the line I was in.
(To be clear, there are two separate Clear lines in many airports, one for people with Precheck and one for people without it. So four lines total, normal/precheck/normal+clear/precheck+clear).
-----
But regardless, sometimes one of the lines will be shorter than others. Sometimes regular is faster than Precheck too (but you'll have to take off shoes and take laptops out, etc.). Some entrances will also have shorter lines than others.
But having both PreCheck + Clear means you can choose from any line you want. If the PreCheck line without Clear is faster, well then, just go in that and skip Clear this time.
No, I'm specifically talking about the tsa-pre line without clear vs the tsa-pre line with clear.
I know it is counter-intuitive because the clear line is so much smaller, but every single time it barely moves. Check yourself next time.
I know it is counter-intuitive because the clear line is so much smaller, but every single time it barely moves. Check yourself next time.
I'll pay extra attention next time!
Sounds like it's time to implement Crystal Clear™ which lets you cut to the front of the Clear line.
But not your carry-on. That has to go through the slower line unless you also pay for the Crystal Clear Plus upgrade. It comes with a 20% discount on the $8 baggage carts though, so it's a great deal!
Some airports (ATL) have let their precheck stack up so Clear is preferred.
Anecdotal only. I fly fairly regularly.
Anecdotal only. I fly fairly regularly.
In the Austin airport, I've seen the pre-check line be longer than the regular line. Everybody is doing pre-check now.
Clear lets you bypass the pre-check line and go straight to the head of the line. People will pay extra for that. And they'll gladly give up their fingerprints and retina prints. My wife certainly did, and she's a lawyer.
Clear lets you bypass the pre-check line and go straight to the head of the line. People will pay extra for that. And they'll gladly give up their fingerprints and retina prints. My wife certainly did, and she's a lawyer.
My most recent travel to and from Austin, the Clear line was massively longer than just walking up to the precheck line. Flying out of Austin the Clear line was piling up through the ticket counter area. I could count the people in the Precheck line on one hand.
It depends on which Clear line you go through. The Eastern side (towards gate 1) is frequently very long, for all the lines. In all the times I've been there, I've never seen it less than very busy.
The middle security checkpoint (near gate 12) also has a Clear entrance, and that has always been empty every time I've been there. The Precheck line might be empty, or it might be longer than the regular line -- I've seen both types of situations, on multiple occasions.
The West checkpoint (near gate 27 and above) is one I'm not as familiar with. I don't know if they have a Clear line or a Precheck line. We almost never go through there.
The middle security checkpoint (near gate 12) also has a Clear entrance, and that has always been empty every time I've been there. The Precheck line might be empty, or it might be longer than the regular line -- I've seen both types of situations, on multiple occasions.
The West checkpoint (near gate 27 and above) is one I'm not as familiar with. I don't know if they have a Clear line or a Precheck line. We almost never go through there.
Oh, and the East checkpoint might have separate Clear-only, Precheck-only, Clear+Precheck, and regular. I'm not sure. We don't go down there much.
The middle checkpoint has Clear, Precheck, and regular. There's no fourth line -- if you're in the Clear line, they just take you to the head of whichever other line you're going through.
The middle checkpoint has Clear, Precheck, and regular. There's no fourth line -- if you're in the Clear line, they just take you to the head of whichever other line you're going through.
Were you looking at the regular Clear line (for non-Precheck people), or the Clear line for PreCheck?
i.e. Clear lets you jump straight to the security part. Many airports will have a dedicated Precheck+Clear lane, which would typically be faster than either Precheck or Clear on their own.
i.e. Clear lets you jump straight to the security part. Many airports will have a dedicated Precheck+Clear lane, which would typically be faster than either Precheck or Clear on their own.
I hate to sound like an alarmist but here is my concern: If TSA can use facial recognition to confirm against a state issued ID, then that could be used to "confirm" your current facial biometric. In other words, this is definitely you.
Now use that same technology across the plethora of government controlled and accessible cameras, and now you could very well have total surveillance, and one day, Chinese style social credit scores.
Now use that same technology across the plethora of government controlled and accessible cameras, and now you could very well have total surveillance, and one day, Chinese style social credit scores.
Do you really think the government has a tough time tracking us now...? We're one subpoena away from all our emails, credit card transactions, text messages, cell phone locations, etc.
Would you rather they have a real person standing in a booth looking at your old picture, at your face, at the old picture, at your face, doing the same thing but taking 10x as long...?
Would you rather they have a real person standing in a booth looking at your old picture, at your face, at the old picture, at your face, doing the same thing but taking 10x as long...?
That's the key word however, subpoena. With this system you don't even need it.
I wouldn't mind Clear one bit if they had their own dedicated security scanners. But they don't--they cut into the PreCheck line.
If a Clear customer goes through a PreCheck line, that's because they also have PreCheck (paid separately, not related to their Clear subscription). They are different things -- the gov offers PreCheck, and all Clear does is let you jump whatever queue you would've gone into anyway.
You can also be a Clear customer without having PreCheck, in which case they'll just move you to the front of the non-PreCheck line.
You can also be a Clear customer without having PreCheck, in which case they'll just move you to the front of the non-PreCheck line.
Why should you be able to pay to jump any line, just to go through the same screening? Total regulatory graft.
I agree, and wish Clear were not a thing. To a lesser extent I also think PreCheck should not be a paid service, just an optional free screening that any citizen or resident could get.
I do mind my government contracting out the ability to cut the line to a non government entity.
The whole setup is ridiculous. PreCheck is pay to play too. If the government wanted equitable security it could just offer the same background check for free to anyone. But then all the lines would be long again because everyone would be on equal footing, like the citizen lines in immigration.
It's just their lame way to appease rich people and business travelers after the increased security after 9/11.
And yeah, outsourcing some of that security to a private company -- and a single one at a that --just seems like rampant corruption. Wouldn't expect any less from the US gov.
It's just their lame way to appease rich people and business travelers after the increased security after 9/11.
And yeah, outsourcing some of that security to a private company -- and a single one at a that --just seems like rampant corruption. Wouldn't expect any less from the US gov.
If one were to truly embrace the free market you would allow airlines to compete on the level of security. Maybe say Delta does a full CT scan and chemical tests. American is like getting on BART[1]. And we can let the free market decide the risk people want to take.
[1] Small hill to die on. On BART someones packing a gun on every ten car train.
[1] Small hill to die on. On BART someones packing a gun on every ten car train.
> PreCheck is pay to play too.
True, but typically doesn't involve cutting into the non-precheck line.
> all the lines would be long again because everyone would be on equal footing
Also true, but processed faster.
I certainly wouldn't mind it being free.
True, but typically doesn't involve cutting into the non-precheck line.
> all the lines would be long again because everyone would be on equal footing
Also true, but processed faster.
I certainly wouldn't mind it being free.
Supposedly, the line could move faster if we didn’t have to take shoes off.
After the next terrorist attack, we're all just going to have to start flying naked.
> It's just their lame way to appease rich people and business travelers.
PreCheck costs $75 and is valid for 5 years.
PreCheck costs $75 and is valid for 5 years.
Which, for the many people who don't travel frequently, is a non-trivial cost on top of expensive tickets.
And time to go to an airport and get your fingerprints taken. Either way, it could cost $0.01, the point is a barrier is put in place to allow some people to save time.
Not at the Austin airport. They have their own dedicated scanners at the Austin airport.
Multiple EU airports like Schiphol already do facial scanning+passport for automated entry for citizens of select countries; so does CBP on US entry from abroad. What's the issue, that it's a subcontractor?
I feel like there's a big overlap between the tech crowd and privacy zealots. It's such a common sentiment here on HN (and on Slashdot before it), but in real life, I've never met a single person concerned about facial recognition at all. It's not that they are actively for or against it, they just don't waste any time thinking about it or discussing it. Many countries do this and nobody cares.
The last few times I've been through Schiphol those machines were turned off.
I don't have a huge problem with the government doing the facial recognition.
But recently I boarded a plane using facial recognition. How did the airline know who I was? Presumably they got the info from the government. But why is the government giving that info out?
> What's the issue, that it's a subcontractor?
For me, mostly yes. I simply don't trust companies enough to be OK with this level of data collection and intrusion.
If it were a government-run operation, I'd be less resistant to it. I'd still bristle about it, but I'd probably accept it.
For me, mostly yes. I simply don't trust companies enough to be OK with this level of data collection and intrusion.
If it were a government-run operation, I'd be less resistant to it. I'd still bristle about it, but I'd probably accept it.
When I lived in a big city with a big airport, Clear was a nice luxury. But their scanner was a bit janky, TBH. The whole thing is security theater anyway, and if facial recognition makes it faster, I'm all for it. It's already encoded in my passport anyway and many countries use facial recognition for recognition.
I wonder if this would get Clear kicked out of the Chicago airport, though. They normally ban facial recognition, but if Clear is working for the government... shrug: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biometric_Information_Privacy_...
I wonder if this would get Clear kicked out of the Chicago airport, though. They normally ban facial recognition, but if Clear is working for the government... shrug: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biometric_Information_Privacy_...
Last time I was at the airport someone from Clear was there trying to sell it to him. I declined. I know people talk a lot about waiting in TSA lines, but for me the wait has never been long enough where it feels worth signing up for some service to jump the line. Giving them my information for the sign up was already a bridge too far, even without a facial scan.
Of course I'm one of those crazy people who would rather be 4 hours early than 4 minutes late, so if a line is long I'm not stressing about it. I'm sure the lines seem longer when person is worried about missing a flight.
Of course I'm one of those crazy people who would rather be 4 hours early than 4 minutes late, so if a line is long I'm not stressing about it. I'm sure the lines seem longer when person is worried about missing a flight.
Meanwhile in Europe facial recognition is commonplace and mandatory fingerprinting is coming in the next year.
i especially hate how Clear people just yell at you while you are waiting in line, despite me already knowing i dont qualify because I'm not a US citizen. who did they bribe to have special access to every airport, and to be able to shove their privilege in my face every time i am waiting in line?
Not just no, but hell no. I suppose that when this stuff becomes mandatory, I'll have to stop flying entirely.
And we got less than 100 years out of it before it got absolutely ruined by bureaucracy and politicians convincing everyone to pretend to be concerned about terrorism. I didn't even get to experience it when it was good because 9/11 happened when I was 4.