🚨🇪🇺EU TO PHASE OUT PHYSICAL PASSPORT STAMPS WITH NEW DIGITAL ENTRY SYSTEM

Starting November 10, the European Union will replace physical passport stamps with a digital Entry/Exit System for non-EU visitors.

The new system will use high-tech scanners to digitally register… pic.twitter.com/SoZlt9hPfx

— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) September 6, 2024

This whole biometric ID system was first talked about as a way to deal with migrants, and people were like “yeah, but you could at any time just stop allowing these people in the country though?”

Then it really picked up steam during the coronavirus hoax, where they said they were going to stop virus people from moving around with viruses using biometrics. That also made no sense (even if you believed in the hoax), but it really pushed the plan forward. If you recall, the government could just do whatever during that virus hoax.

Now they’re planning to really fuck you bad with a total control grid, exactly like the one they claim exists in China (which does not actually even exist in China).

The Guardian:

The full implementation of an EU entry-exit system introducing fingerprinting and facial recognition checks at ports and airports is expected to be delayed again amid fears over congestion and long queues.

Ylva Johansson, the EU’s home affairs commissioner, said recently that the new entry-exit system (EES) would be introduced on 10 November with a contingency of delaying it one week to 17 November.

Johansson had given member states until 5 September to provide the required declaration on their state of readiness.

It is understood three countries, France, Germany and the Netherlands, have written to her to say they will not be ready. They raised concerns about the lack of testing of the system in the field, raising new questions about the target launch date, according to multiple sources.

…

The EES is being introduced at all entry ports and airports within the Schengen area so also impacts airports across the continent, particularly Schipol, Charles de Gaulle and Frankfurt – three of Europe’s biggest transport hubs – while Germany is also concerned about Cologne and Munich.

Passengers will have their fingerprints or photo of their face taken the first time they arrive in the EU after the introduction of the EES, with electronic verification of biometric data thereafter.

The problem with face ID is that all black people look the same. That’s not a joke, go look it up.

You would think with the advances in AI, the software would be able to recognize blacks – surely, they don’t all literally look exactly alike? – but, no. Even with these new powerful LLM AIs, they still can’t make it work on blacks.

In China, an alert just goes off – WARNING WARNING BLACK FACE BLACK FACE RED ALERT.

I’m just joking. They don’t really go Defcon 3 for every black. But yeah, China’s face ID system does just acknowledge that all black people look the same, and I’m sure some people using it go on high alert when a black passes through.

Again, the scope of China’s biometric system is nowhere near what they claim in Western media in the first place. That’s another kind of blood libel against Chinese people, pushed by the West, which claims it is somehow “more free” than China, when anyone can just go to China and check that claim for themselves, realizing it is false about 10 minutes after arriving in the country.

Black people are the biggest criminals and the people you actually do need to check. But the EU probably wants to use this system to punish people who post supposedly offensive memes on the internet, so they don’t even care it doesn’t work on the blacks.

🇬🇧EU BORDER CHECKS THREATEN BRITAIN’S CHRISTMAS FOOD SUPPLY

New EU Entry/Exit System (EES) checks, starting November 10, may disrupt Britain’s food supply chain and create long delays at Dover.

The system requires fingerprint and facial recognition for non-EU passengers,… pic.twitter.com/NhHoZmBcW5

— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) September 13, 2024

The Irish Congress of Trade Unions (ICTU) are holding a rally in “solidarity with all the people of the capital” to “denounce” the Dublin City riots. The ICTU have revealed themselves yet again to be an enemy of the people. No solidarity with with the families of the children or… pic.twitter.com/tDXhyeqLl4

— Lawyers For Justice Ireland (@LFJIreland) November 27, 2023

The Algerian immigrant in Dublin accused of carrying out a mass stabbing attack on children had been arrested this year on suspicion of possessing a knife but wasn’t convicted. He was previously supposed to be deported but was aided by activists. https://t.co/hUi2NNqkNf

— Andy Ngô 🏳️‍🌈 (@MrAndyNgo) November 27, 2023

Previously: “Far Right” Riot in Dublin After Allegedly Vibrant Stabber Stabs Children

You wouldn’t think you’d be able to ram through facial recognition software laws and then use them on footage recorded before the laws were passed.

But apparently, in Ireland, you can do that.

To protect democracy AKA mass immigration.

The Guardian:

Irish police are expected to make sweeping arrests of suspected ringleaders of Thursday’s riot in Dublin and to obtain wider rights to use facial recognition technology to help identify suspects in any future disorder.

The moves come amid mounting pressure on the government and police chiefs over the mayhem on 24 November when an estimated 500 anti-immigrant activists and gangs of youths looted shops, burned vehicles and attacked police, leaving swathes of Ireland’s capital resembling a war zone.

Senior officers have promised “large-scale arrests” of ringleaders and participants in coming weeks in addition to the 34 people already arrested, the Irish Times reported on Monday.

Helen McEntee, the justice minister, also signalled an intention to fast-track legislation to expand the use of facial recognition technology to help police trawl CCTV footage after public disorder incidents.

There are about 6,000 hours of footage from last week’s riot, she said. “This should not take months. It should be done in a matter of days and in a matter of weeks. With the use of facial recognition technology that can be possible.”

The proposal has dismayed civil liberty advocates, opposition politicians and members of the Green party, a junior member of the ruling coalition. “Ramming legislation through the Dáil without proper debate is not the solution,” said Aodhán Ó Ríordáin, the Labour party’s justice spokesperson. “There has been a building series of missteps in justice.”

Again, any normal government would respond to this kind of riot by listening to the concerns of the rioters and at least pretending to do something to placate the mob.

Instead, the Indian prime minister of Ireland is vowing revenge and a total shutdown.

BREAKING: Another stabbing has happened in Dublin this evening. It is said that an immigrant stabbed another immigrant during a brawl.

This has to stop. Send ‘em all back to where they came from. pic.twitter.com/FHIBdzlvxK

— Cillian (@CilComLFC) November 27, 2023

Apologies to the original posters who posted these videos, but it’s been officially confirmed. Yet another stabbing in #Dublin city last night. Talbot Street. I wasn’t sure when I saw the videos and waited for confirmation, but the pool of blood says it all… pic.twitter.com/XVqq7AKFUP

— Noel Dolan 🇮🇪 🇧🇴 (@cybernoelie) November 27, 2023

Here’s a real AI threat – they’re going to link every single CCTV camera in the Western world and track you in real time everywhere you go.

Again, it’s not the AI that’s the threat, it’s the people using it.

The Guardian:

Police will use live facial recognition technology in Cardiff during the Beyoncé concert on Wednesday, despite concerns about racial bias and human rights.

The technology will be used in Cardiff city centre, but not at the stadium, to “support” the artist’s concert at the Principality stadium by identifying wanted individuals and ensuring safeguarding, South Wales police said, as the artist kicks off the UK leg of her first solo headline tour in seven years.

A spokesperson for the force said the technology would be used in the city centre, not at the concert itself. In the past, police use of live facial recognition (LFR) in England and Wales had been limited to special operations such as football matches or the coronation, when there was a crackdown on protesters.

Daragh Murray, a senior lecturer of law at Queen Mary University in London, said the normalisation of invasive surveillance capability at events such as a concert was concerning, and was taking place without any real public debate.

“I find it very hard to believe that it could be useful at a concert, or at a rugby match,” said Murray, who has studied the Metropolitan police’s use of LFR. “But given the really significant interference with human rights, I think it’s up to the police to provide a really compelling argument as to why it’s necessary.”

With live facial recognition technology, it is typically a standalone deployment where, using cameras, police scan passersby to match biometrics against those held on a watchlist.

South Wales police last used the technology for the FIM Speedway Grand Prix held at the same stadium in August 2022. The event, which scanned 20,929 people against a watchlist of 245 images, produced no alerts, actions or arrests, according to the force.

Murray said the technology had dangerous effects on modifying behaviour and, in turn, democratic processes such as protests or political opposition.

“I think things like live facial recognition are the first step, but I think they’re opening the doors to the use of permanent facial recognition across city-wide surveillance camera networks,” he said.

It’s going to be more than city-wide, my friend.

There is zero reason it would not be established across the entire Anal Empire.

They are actually planning this.

Your choices are cops that hate black people and want to kill them all, or robots who hate black people and want to kill them all.

No matter what, anyone on the planet who is in law enforcement hates black people. They hate the color of their skin.

Reuters:

Facial recognition is making a comeback in the United States as bans to thwart the technology and curb racial bias in policing come under threat amid a surge in crime and increased lobbying from developers.

Virginia in July will eliminate its prohibition on local police use of facial recognition a year after approving it, and California and the city of New Orleans as soon as this month could be next to hit the undo button.

Homicide reports in New Orleans rose 67% over the last two years compared with the pair before, and police say they need every possible tool.

“Technology is needed to solve these crimes and to hold individuals accountable,” police Superintendent Shaun Ferguson told reporters as he called on the city council to repeal a ban that went into effect last year.

Efforts to get bans in place are meeting resistance in jurisdictions big and small from New York and Colorado to West Lafayette, Indiana. Even Vermont, the last state left with a near-100% ban against police facial-recognition use, chipped away at its law last year to allow for investigating child sex crimes.

From 2019 through 2021, about two dozen U.S. state or local governments passed laws restricting facial recognition. Studies had found the technology less effective in identifying Black people, and the anti-police Black Lives Matter protests gave the arguments momentum.

But ongoing research by the federal government’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has shown significant industrywide progress in accuracy. And Department of Homeland Security testing published last month found little variation in accuracy across skin tone and gender.

“There is growing interest in policy approaches that address concerns about the technology while ensuring it is used in a bounded, accurate and nondiscriminatory way that benefits communities,” said Jake Parker, senior director of government relations at the lobbying group Security Industry Association.

…

Though the recent studies have eased lawmakers’ reservations, debate is ongoing. The General Services Administration, which oversees federal contractors, said in a report released last month that major facial recognition tools disproportionately failed to match African Americans in its tests. The agency did not respond to requests to provide details about the testing.

Facial recognition will be reviewed by the president’s new National AI Advisory Committee, which last week began forming a subgroup tasked with studying its use in policing.

…

California in 2019 banned police from using facial recognition on mobile devices such as body-worn cameras. But the prohibition expires on Jan. 1 because of a provision state senators added.

Now, news reports about rising retail theft and smash-and-grab robberies have captured lawmakers’ attention, said Jennifer Jones, a staff attorney for ACLU of Northern California.

As a result, ACLU has faced resistance from law enforcement to make the ban permanent.

People talk about what facial recognition AI means for black people, but the real question no one is asking is what law enforcement using facial recognition technology means for women and makeup. Are we going to ban makeup so that the facial recognition AI works correctly?

Have you seen what the Blade Runner 2049 chick looks like with slightly less makeup?

A bit different than what she looks like on screen.

Enough difference to fool an evil, nigger-hating robot?

Clearly. The robots are so stupid and ignorant, they literally hate people for their skin. These robots are inbred trailer trash. They’re not smart.

For this AI to work, you’d have to ban makeup.

On the other hand, if we’d rather not have the government tracking our every move, we should tell women that facial recognition software means the end of makeup, and let them do the protesting.

You think they’re mad about the baby killing thing? Telling them they can’t wear their demon-masks will launch them into orbit.

Yeah, I’m not sure host even a normie didn’t have themselves involuntarily tagged in a photo and think “eyyy.”

I mean, this is weird, having computer intelligence identify your every move. This stuff should have been made illegal long before it was employed.

The Guardian:

Facebook will delete the “faceprints” of more than a billion people after announcing that it is shutting down its facial recognition system due to the “many concerns” about using the technology.

The social media network has been under political, legal and regulatory pressure over its use of the software, which automatically identifies users in photos and videos – and let’s them know if a fellow user has posted a photo or video with them in it – if they have opted in to the feature. In a statement, Facebook’s parent company, Meta, said it would shut down facial recognition on the platform over the coming weeks and delete 1 billion facial recognition templates.

Meta’s vice-president of artificial intelligence, Jerome Pesenti, said the technology had helped visually impaired and blind users identify their friends in images and can help prevent fraud and impersonation. But Pesenti said the advantages needed to be weighed against “growing concerns about the use of this technology as a whole”.

“There are many concerns about the place of facial recognition technology in society, and regulators are still in the process of providing a clear set of rules governing its use,” he said. “Amid this ongoing uncertainty, we believe that limiting the use of facial recognition to a narrow set of use cases is appropriate.”

If users have opted into the face recognition setting, the faceprint used to identify them will be deleted. If that face recognition setting is turned off, Meta said there is no faceprint to delete. Pesenti said Facebook will encourage users to tag posts manually.

In 2020, Facebook’s parent company paid $650m (£477m) to settle a US class action lawsuit brought by users who claimed the firm had created and stored scans of their faces without permission. Complaints had also been filed with the US competition regulator and in 2012 a Facebook application to introduce facial recognition in the EU had to be withdrawn because no provision had been made to gain user consent.

I definitely doubt they will actually delete it. These companies are not regulated, so they can simply lie to the public about anything and there cannot be consequences for them.

What is the point of having a government that feeds the people into corporate meat grinders?

Everyone must get vaccinated so we can stop wearing the masks that stop facial recognition from actually working, but vaccinated people should still wear a mask anyways.

Please get vaccinated. Please wear a mask. Lives are at stake. #NewProfilePic pic.twitter.com/eN0l7mv88O

— Nancy Sinatra (@NancySinatra) August 23, 2021

If this doesn’t make sense to you, you better start following The Science or you’re gonna end up dead.

Washington Post:

The federal government plans to expand its use of facial recognition to pursue criminals and scan for threats, an internal survey has found, even as concerns grow about the technology’s potential for contributing to improper surveillance and false arrests.

Ten federal agencies — the departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Homeland Security, Health and Human Services, Interior, Justice, State, Treasury and Veterans Affairs — told the Government Accountability Office they intend to grow their facial recognition capabilities by 2023, the GAO said in a report posted to its website Tuesday.

Most of the agencies use face-scanning technology so employees can unlock their phones and laptops or access buildings, though a growing number said they are using the software to track people and investigate crime. The Department of Agriculture, for instance, said it wants to use it to monitor live surveillance feeds at its facilities and send an alert if it spots any faces also found on a watch list.

The government’s expansion comes as major tech companies have pushed to stall law enforcement’s adoption of the software. Amazon said in May that it had stopped selling its facial recognition software Rekognition to U.S. police, citing the lack of federal laws governing how the software should be used. (Amazon founder Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post.)

Three states — Virginia, Massachusetts and Maine — and more than a dozen cities, including Boston, Portland and San Francisco, have banned or restricted the technology’s use by public officials or police.

Representatives from both parties voiced concerns about the technology during a House Judiciary Committee hearing last month. And Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.) in April introduced a bill that would ban the government from using facial recognition systems that relied on data that had been “illegitimately obtained.”

Federal agencies need stricter limits on facial recognition to protect privacy, says government watchdogProponents say the software’s accuracy is improving and that it has played a critical role in helping track and identify major criminals. But the technology’s accuracy has been shown in research to vary wildly depending on the skin color of the person being surveilled. Facial recognition searches have been cited in at least three wrongful arrests, all of which were of Black men, and in the identification of protesters accused of violence during demonstrations over the murder of George Floyd.

“Even with all the privacy issues and accuracy problems, the government is pretty much saying, ‘Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead,’” said Jake Laperruque, a senior counsel at the Project on Government Oversight, an independent watchdog group in Washington.

Because of racist reasons, it’s pretty hard to apply the same algorithms to white people and black people.

Many have tried to figure out a way for black people to be correctly identified, but they all failed. Even Google failed.

Some of the artificially generated faces used to test Twitter’s algorithm.

I’ve had much more than enough of this computerize racism.

It’s time we take a stand against the bias of computers.

The Guardian:

Twitter’s image cropping algorithm prefers younger, slimmer faces with lighter skin, an investigation into algorithmic bias at the company has found.

The finding, while embarrassing for the company, which had previously apologised to users after reports of bias, marks the successful conclusion of Twitter’s first ever “algorithmic bug bounty”.

The company has paid $3,500 to Bogdan Kulynych, a graduate student at Switzerland’s EFPL university, who demonstrated the bias in the algorithm – which is used to focus image previews on the most interesting parts of pictures – as part of a competition at the DEF CON security conference in Las Vegas.

Kulynych proved the bias by first artificially generating faces with varying features, and then running them through Twitter’s cropping algorithm to see which the software focused on.

Since the faces were themselves artificial, it was possible to generate faces that were almost identical, but at different points on spectrums of skin tone, width, gender presentation or age – and so demonstrate that the algorithm focused on younger, slimmer and lighter faces over those that were older, wider or darker.

Twitter had come under fire in 2020 for its image cropping algorithm, after users noticed that it seemed to regularly focus on white faces over those of black people – and even on white dogs over black ones. The company initially apologised, saying: “Our team did test for bias before shipping the model and did not find evidence of racial or gender bias in our testing. But it’s clear from these examples that we’ve got more analysis to do. We’ll continue to share what we learn, what actions we take, and will open source our analysis so others can review and replicate.” In a later study, however, Twitter’s own researchers found only a very mild bias in favour of white faces, and of women’s faces.

The dispute prompted the company to launch the algorithmic harms bug bounty, which saw it promise thousands of dollars in prizes for researchers who could demonstrate harmful outcomes of the company’s image cropping algorithm.

Historically, the problem with these algorithms has mostly been that when they’re able to accurately recognize the faces of people of color, gorillas and other primates get counted as people too due to the similarities in bone structure and facial features.

Conversely, black people may be identified as animals instead of people. This problem is hard enough to solve that Google’s initial solution to the problem was simply banning gorillas.

“Almost every major AI system we’ve tested for major tech companies, we find significant biases,” said Parham Aarabi, a professor at the University of Toronto and director of its Applied AI Group.https://t.co/JRPj9PJ9y0

— Cyrus Farivar (@cfarivar) August 9, 2021

Most of these impending doom technologies are less about doing whatever they say they’re supposed to do, and more about controlling people’s lives.

Biometric facial recognition is supposed to be about preventing fraud, but it turns out it’s really easy to commit fraud against it.

Wall Street Journal:

Facial-recognition systems, long touted as a quick and dependable way to identify everyone from employees to hotel guests, are in the crosshairs of fraudsters. For years, researchers have warned about the technology’s vulnerabilities, but recent schemes have confirmed their fears—and underscored the difficult but necessary task of improving the systems.

In the past year, thousands of people in the U.S. have tried to trick facial identification verification to fraudulently claim unemployment benefits from state workforce agencies, according to identity verification firm ID.me Inc. The company, which uses facial-recognition software to help verify individuals on behalf of 26 U.S. states, says that between June 2020 and January 2021 it found more than 80,000 attempts to fool the selfie step in government ID matchups among the agencies it worked with. That included people wearing special masks, using deepfakes—lifelike images generated by AI—or holding up images or videos of other people, says ID.me Chief Executive Blake Hall.

“Thousands of people have used masks and dummies like these to try and trick facial identification verification, according to ID.me,” Wall Street Journal reports.

Facial recognition for one-to-one identification has become one of the most widely used applications of artificial intelligence, allowing people to make payments via their phones, walk through passport checking systems or verify themselves as workers. Drivers for Uber Technologies Inc., for instance, must regularly prove they are licensed account holders by taking selfies on their phones and uploading them to the company, which uses Microsoft Corp.’s facial-recognition system to authenticate them. Uber, which is rolling out the selfie-verification system globally, did so because it had grappled with drivers hacking its system to share their accounts. Uber declined to comment.

Amazon.com Inc. and smaller vendors like Idemia Group S.A.S., Thales Group and AnyVision Interactive Technologies Ltd. sell facial-recognition systems for identification. The technology works by mapping a face to create a so-called face print. Identifying single individuals is typically more accurate than spotting faces in a crowd.

Still, this form of biometric identification has its limits, researchers say.

…

Analysts at credit-scoring company Experian PLC said in a March security report that they expect to see fraudsters increasingly create “Frankenstein faces,” using AI to combine facial characteristics from different people to form a new identity to fool facial ID systems.

The analysts said the strategy is part of a fast-growing type of financial crime known as synthetic identity fraud, where fraudsters use an amalgamation of real and fake information to create a new identity.

Until recently, it has been activists protesting surveillance who have targeted facial-recognition systems. Privacy campaigners in the U.K., for instance, have painted their faces in asymmetric makeup specially designed to scramble the facial-recognition software powering cameras while walking through urban areas.

Criminals have more reasons to do the same, from spoofing people’s faces to access the digital wallets on their phones, to getting through high-security entrances at hotels, business centers or hospitals, according to Alex Polyakov, the CEO of Adversa.ai, a firm that researches secure AI. Any access control system that has replaced human security guards with facial-recognition cameras is potentially at risk, he says, adding that he has confused facial-recognition software into thinking he was someone else by wearing specially designed glasses or Band-Aids.

…

Spoofing a facial-recognition system doesn’t always require sophisticated software, according to John Spencer, chief strategy officer of biometric identity firm Veridium LLC. One of the most common ways of fooling a face-ID system, or carrying out a so-called presentation attack, is to print a photo of someone’s face and cut out the eyes, using the photo as a mask, he says. Many facial-recognition systems, such as the ones used by financial trading platforms, check to see if a video shows a live person by examining their blinking or moving eyes.

Most of the time, Mr. Spencer says, his team could use this tactic and others to test the limits of facial-recognition systems, sometimes folding the paper “face” to give it more perceived depth. “Within an hour I break almost all of [these systems],” he says.

So basically, these biometric facial ID systems that are popping up everywhere do not do the thing they are supposed to do at all, as the only people who need to be face-scanned in theory are criminals. The entire claim of the biometrics industry is that it is to prevent fraud.

Of course, this technology was already largely pointless in terms of verifying people’s faces on the internet, as it was advertised as something that was going to prevent hacking, when in fact any hack of the kind they were claiming they were going to prevent bypasses these systems.

The only possible conclusion then is that it is not actually supposed to prevent fraud, but is to gather the information of non-criminals for mass surveillance purposes, acclimate people to submitting to these systems, and to further dehumanize normal people.

All of these technologies they’re coming out with are the same.

Do you think it won’t be easy to bypass the supposed security protections of implantable microchips?

These people are creating a dystopia on purpose – not because it is practical.

All of this technology will eventually be used in the endless and ongoing Hunt for the Great White Terrorist.

The Hill:

Microsoft is facing new pressure from investors over its development and sale of surveillance technologies to law enforcement and its efforts to shape the policies regulating their deployment.

Three separate shareholder proposals filed this week reviewed by The Hill are demanding Microsoft evaluate whether its business model aligns with the tech giant’s stated commitments to racial justice and human rights.

The first, filed by the social-issues-focused firm Harrington Investments, calls on Microsoft leadership to “generally prohibit” the sale of facial recognition technology to all government entities and disclose any exceptions made to that rule.

Microsoft announced last summer that it would not sell the technology that scans faces for the purpose of identifying them to police departments until there is a federal law regulating its use amid renewed scrutiny during protests against police brutality.

That pledge did not make clear whether Microsoft would still sell the tech to other government agencies, like Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). For example, the company repeatedly tried to sell the Drug Enforcement Administration on its tech during 2017 and 2018.

Activists and privacy advocates have raised alarm about deployment of facial recognition by law enforcement both over inaccuracies and the surveillance power it can provide.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology released a study of more than 100 vendors, including Microsoft, in 2019 that found the majority of facial recognition systems have “demographic differentials” that can worsen their accuracy based on a person’s age, gender or race.

The proposal counts the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington among its supporters. Jennifer Lee, the group’s technology and liberty project manager, said in a statement to The Hill that “if Microsoft is truly committed to protecting our democratic freedoms and standing for racial justice, it must permanently divest from selling facial recognition technology to all government entities, including law enforcement.”

It doesn’t work as well on nonwhites because their features are less defined.

But it doesn’t have to work equally well when applied to different racial groups because it will only be used against white people.

Remember: according to the Biden administration, white supremacy is “the greatest security threat to the country.”

We really need to be pushing the issue of FBI involvement in the Capitol Storm.

Related: Tucker Carlson Finally Addressing the Fed Elephant in the 1/6 Room – Lectured by Twitter That Feds are Good

If that issue blow up, it is at least going to pump the brakes on some of this really crazy stuff they’re planning to do to us. It will at least give us some extra time.