[HN Gopher] FBI Child ID App
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       FBI Child ID App
        
       Author : 0xedb
       Score  : 108 points
       Date   : 2022-07-06 13:06 UTC (9 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.fbi.gov)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.fbi.gov)
        
       | pavel_lishin wrote:
       | > _The FBI is not collecting or storing any photos or information
       | that you enter in the app._
       | 
       | So what's the advantage of using this vs. the photos you probably
       | already have of your child, and a notes app for recording height
       | and weight?
        
         | abirch wrote:
         | My only guess is that when your kid is missing, you may not be
         | thinking clearly. It's why we say nine-one-one instead of nine-
         | eleven. This app probably prompts you to take a mugshot of your
         | kid so it'd be easier for the police to recognize.
        
       | idontknowmyacc wrote:
       | It's just me or their logo is cheesy as floor.
        
       | worksonmine wrote:
       | Janie and Johnny Doe don't feel very appropriate as examples in
       | this context.
        
       | can16358p wrote:
       | It says:
       | 
       | We're sorry... The request has been blocked.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | palencharizard wrote:
       | judging by the photo I'm guessing this will be available for the
       | iPhone 5
        
         | mtmail wrote:
         | Version 1 got released June 2011, so it supported iPhone 4.
        
       | tyingq wrote:
       | There's a funny rendering problem with the pdf brochure where
       | their assurance that it's not collecting information is split up
       | and pasted in the wrong places. Making the document start with
       | this sentence: "collecting or storing any photos or information
       | that you enter in the app".
       | 
       | https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/child-id-app-brochure.pd...
        
       | namelessoracle wrote:
       | It says a lot about the FBI that most people's initial reaction
       | is "whats the trick here?". BOTH sides of the political aisle
       | too.
        
         | Silica6149 wrote:
         | I think a lot of people are put off by the fact that the FBI
         | took the time to make this instead of doing more important
         | duties. The app seems to have good intentions, but its
         | execution needs work, so there's not much benefit.
        
           | Tao3300 wrote:
           | It almost _has to be_ a summer intern project.
        
         | fuj wrote:
        
       | SN76477 wrote:
       | News media has driven fear and fear will drive authoritarianism.
        
       | system16 wrote:
       | Going by the version history, this app has been around for over a
       | decade. You'd think in that time they would have changed the
       | exceptionally hideous app icon.
        
       | r3trohack3r wrote:
       | > The FBI is not collecting or storing any photos or information
       | that you enter in the app. All data resides solely on your mobile
       | device unless you need to send it to authorities.
       | 
       | If true, this sounds thoughtfully designed.
        
         | aceazzameen wrote:
         | Maybe they should open source it for third parties to verify it
         | then.
        
           | Dma54rhs wrote:
           | What's the point if you can't verify what they upload to play
           | store / app store anyway? They can publish as code anything
           | but that doesn't mean you run it.
        
           | r3trohack3r wrote:
           | > All data resides solely on your mobile device unless you
           | need to send it to authorities.
           | 
           | Network chatter can be viewed without source code access. If
           | what they're saying is true, this app should not make network
           | requests unless initiated by the user.
        
             | aceazzameen wrote:
             | This is a good point. Still, apps generally get updated
             | frequently. So they could change it at any time, which is
             | why it would be nice if others could audit it at any time.
        
           | Silica6149 wrote:
           | That's a good point, shouldn't the FBI's apps be open source?
        
             | egberts1 wrote:
             | Unless the app software needs to be secured ... for
             | national security reason; read that last part again.
        
       | zanethomas wrote:
       | "The FBI is not collecting or storing any photos or information
       | that you enter in the app."
       | 
       | Anyone in the market for a bridge?
        
       | jeezzbo wrote:
       | Fraudulent bureaucracies leave fossil trails.. and 80 million
       | supporters to harvest.
        
       | celticninja wrote:
       | why does the inner cycnic in my think this is just to get some
       | facial recognition data
        
         | bklyn11201 wrote:
         | I remember being fingerprinted in elementary school. Is this
         | still common practice in USA?
        
           | h2odragon wrote:
           | Yes, AFAIK. It's still "voluntary" in that a child can refuse
           | to do it if they're willing to raise enough stink and make a
           | scene. Of course, one could paint their fingers with nail
           | polish on that day, too...
        
             | Silica6149 wrote:
             | Do the schools have to get the parent's permission somehow?
             | This can't seem like a situation where the child has to
             | make a commotion in order to not consent.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | h2odragon wrote:
               | I believe it's probably covered in the mass of stuff you
               | sign at the beginning of the school year.
        
           | striking wrote:
           | I don't remember anything like that happening to me. I hope
           | that's not common.
        
             | micromacrofoot wrote:
             | Our entire school district did it for decades.
        
             | okwubodu wrote:
             | Very common. I suspect they slowed down post-2020.
             | 
             | https://mobile.twitter.com/search?q=elementary%20(fingerpri
             | n...
        
               | giancarlostoro wrote:
               | I had no idea you could do querying for twitter like
               | that...
        
               | okwubodu wrote:
               | Yep, it has almost the same feature set as the dev API.
               | You can get really specific without knowing what exactly
               | you're searching for.
        
             | drannex wrote:
             | Very, very common.
        
           | Miner49er wrote:
           | I don't think it ever was?
        
             | CompuHacker wrote:
             | It may be regional. Not sure how their marketing worked.
             | See "Ident-A-Kid" (https://identakid.com/)
        
             | commandlinefan wrote:
             | They took ours when I was in third or fourth grade (so
             | early 80's). They took us on a field trip to a police
             | station and everybody lined up to have their fingerprints
             | taken - I don't know if they actually kept them or did
             | anything with them, though.
        
           | Silica6149 wrote:
           | What? Did you ever find out what the fingerprints were used
           | for?
           | 
           | This is like taking a DNA sample from child when they're born
           | nowadays, it seems harmless now, but we can already see
           | companies using this kind of data maliciously.
        
             | micromacrofoot wrote:
             | In the US it was very common. My kids did it at school in
             | the 90s.
             | 
             | The point was that if your child goes missing, you have
             | their fingerprints available so they can be used in
             | investigations. In our case, the fingerprints were given to
             | us to take home in case they were ever needed. At the time
             | I didn't think to ask if the police kept a record for
             | themselves, but I doubt it (just because local PD wasn't
             | very organized).
        
               | 13of40 wrote:
               | I still have my card from the early 80s, in semi rural
               | Oregon. The way I remember it (with a caveat of me being
               | six) was it was the only copy. I don't think my parents
               | would have done it if the government was keeping one.
        
               | jeezzbo wrote:
               | where did you go to school?
        
               | micromacrofoot wrote:
               | New England.
        
               | giancarlostoro wrote:
               | I went to school in the 2000's when I moved to Florida,
               | and I don't remember this, maybe I was too old, I went to
               | school in Puerto Rico prior to this.
        
           | navjack27 wrote:
           | Never did that in NJ in the 90s
        
         | sph wrote:
         | It's an excellent long term plan. Children today are adults
         | tomorrow.
        
         | Silica6149 wrote:
         | That's what I was thinking -- what incentive does the FBI have
         | to develop this?
        
           | mminer237 wrote:
           | To prevent child crimes? That's a big mission of the FBI.
           | 
           | See also ECAP: https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/ecap
        
           | macksd wrote:
           | Some department head got patted on the back, and a bunch of
           | "analysts" burned 10 times what it should have taken to put
           | this together. They're all getting salaries, good retirement
           | benefits, and the satisfying feeling of having ended child
           | exploitation (or at least telling people that).
        
           | bostonsre wrote:
           | I know it seems like a long shot, but could they potentially
           | be trying to do good and help people?
        
             | Silica6149 wrote:
             | The US doesn't have a good track record in that regard,
             | even towards its own people.
        
               | bostonsre wrote:
               | You are really saying the fbi does more bad than good?
        
       | excalibur wrote:
       | Scully: Why would the aliens ONLY abduct people who installed the
       | FBI app on their phones?
       | 
       | Mulder: They must have a mole inside the Bureau!
       | 
       | Skinner: If you go down this road I can't protect you.
       | 
       | Smoking man: _smokes_
        
         | navjack27 wrote:
         | Lol
        
       | Silica6149 wrote:
       | "An important note: The FBI is not collecting or storing any
       | photos or information that you enter in the app."
       | 
       | Thanks for answering the question we all had, FBI.
        
         | namelessoracle wrote:
         | "The FBI" is not collecting is the key weasel word here.
        
         | bayesian_horse wrote:
         | You should have that question no matter the author of the app.
        
           | Silica6149 wrote:
           | Yup. It's just that they went out of their way to answer
           | it... Almost like they're worried people won't download the
           | app if they didn't say it upfront.
        
         | logicalmonster wrote:
         | Surely, the FBI would never tell a lie.
        
       | theden wrote:
       | 2.4/5 on Apple's App store...
       | 
       | The UI needs a lot of work going by the screenshots, it doesn't
       | look appealing and there's some obvious contrast issues
        
       | Pakdef wrote:
        
       | lawgimenez wrote:
       | Can't wait to decompile their Android apk tomorrow. I'm curious
       | how FBI codes Android.
        
         | jwozn wrote:
         | I would be interested to see if you have any intriguing
         | findings!
        
           | lawgimenez wrote:
           | I just hope my house won't get raided before I publish my
           | findings.
        
       | theseobosscom wrote:
       | WTF, literally!
        
       | eckza wrote:
       | Nice try, FBI.
        
         | egberts1 wrote:
         | Perhaps another day, DoHS.
        
         | jerkstate wrote:
         | Not today, NSA.
        
           | [deleted]
        
       | h2odragon wrote:
       | > Please read your mobile provider's terms of service for
       | information about the security of applications stored on your
       | device.
       | 
       | Is this weasel words? Apple already has some terms about being
       | able to scan things locally before "potential upload", no?
        
         | Silica6149 wrote:
         | Interesting... the FBI could ask or already have a backdoor
         | provided by Apple.
        
           | namelessoracle wrote:
           | It makes me wonder if downloading this app gives the FBI a
           | ready made backdoor into your iPhone. (not sure if that's
           | even possible with the iOS infrastructure)
        
             | bbarnett wrote:
             | Apple scans apps, code, as does Google.
             | 
             | But what if an Apple employee works for the FBI? Large
             | firms are known to have moles in them, both from
             | competitors, and from government.
        
               | smoldesu wrote:
               | What if _just one_ employee works for the FBI? We don 't
               | need to guess about that sort of stuff, supposedly Apple
               | has complied with PRISM for nearly a decade now. I'd bet
               | there's a lot more than just one US intelligence officer
               | working at Apple.
        
             | jaywalk wrote:
             | Apple would have to be complicit. And at that point, why
             | tie it to an app that almost nobody will download? Just
             | build it into iOS/iCloud and call it a day.
        
       | N-Krause wrote:
       | Initially I thought that it would be satire, then I recognized
       | the domain. I have a weird feeling about this, but can't put a
       | finger on it.
        
         | eddieroger wrote:
         | There's no way of saying it without sounding sarcastic that
         | yes, this feels like a scam, if not just a bad idea. The fact
         | that they have to come out and say, "no, we're not storing
         | pictures of your kids" doesn't help. The idea of the app is
         | sound, and one would hope you could trust the Federal
         | Government with such information (like they don't have it
         | already), but the iOS6 era screenshots and verbiage feel like a
         | real scam.
        
           | giancarlostoro wrote:
           | I think this might be abandonware.
        
             | Silica6149 wrote:
             | Their news site looks like abandonware.
        
             | andymockli wrote:
             | From page source: <meta name="DC.date.created"
             | content="2018-01-24T18:18:24+00:00">
        
           | Silica6149 wrote:
           | I agree the design is definitely outdated. It's also
           | hilarious that it's exactly the kind of look I would've
           | expected from an app released by the FBI.
        
           | mminer237 wrote:
           | It would be pretty easy to do a packet inspection and see if
           | they're telling the truth about not transmitting the photos.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | bbarnett wrote:
             | And how does one do packet inspection:
             | 
             | * if packets are only sent via carrier, not wifi
             | 
             | * if packets are sent to aws instances, which is very
             | common
             | 
             | * if it all stops when phone is rooted, which is common for
             | many apps
        
               | gzer0 wrote:
               | * deep packet inspection of carrier based communications
               | is a thing [1].
               | 
               | * Gov't is mandated to use AWS Gov instances which are
               | quite easy to distinguish [2].
               | 
               | * there are ways to bypass those rootchecks to make a
               | rooted phone seem not rooted [3].
               | 
               | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_packet_inspection#
               | United_...
               | 
               | [2] https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/aws-govcloud-
               | earns-dod...
               | 
               | [3] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/68661134/root-
               | detection-...
        
               | dragonwriter wrote:
               | > Gov't is mandated to use AWS Gov instances which are
               | quite easy to distinguish
               | 
               | That's not, in fact, true. The certifications that apply
               | to AWS Gov make it easier to meet certain government
               | compliance rules that apply to certain categories of
               | data, but it is possible to meet the standards on a
               | platform that isn't certified or certified to a lower
               | level (but it means more administrative work for the org
               | using the platform) and many Commercial AWS offerings
               | have FedRAMP certifications, anyhow. I work in an org
               | touched by FedRAMP, and which is almost entirely on AWS
               | commercial, not Gov.
        
               | samatman wrote:
               | Consider that AWS Gov can offer a service disguising
               | instances as ordinary.
               | 
               | Consider that they wouldn't have to tell us, indeed,
               | might face criminal penalties for disclosing it.
               | 
               | Conclusion: the FBI can do this.
        
           | bayesian_horse wrote:
           | The app seems like a great idea and there honestly seems to
           | be no particular reason why the FBI had to make it.
           | 
           | In the case of a child disappearing, it could save a lot of
           | time.
        
             | eddieroger wrote:
             | If I was going to download /any/ app from the App Store in
             | which to store pictures and factual data about my kids, I
             | would hope I could trust the FBI more than Joe's App Shack
             | or another anonymous developer. But in this case, if
             | they're not going to tend to their app and it's marketing
             | site, hard pass.
        
         | Akronymus wrote:
         | I personally suspect that it'll be used as training data to
         | generate avatars for the FBI to entrap people with.
        
         | micromacrofoot wrote:
         | Isn't this fairly easy to investigate and find out? If the app
         | never phones home then it really isn't an issue.
        
           | perlgeek wrote:
           | A future update of the app might start phoning home.
        
             | Tao3300 wrote:
             | Installing any kind of channel back to the FBI on an
             | Android device from who-knows-where with who-knows-what
             | malware running on it feels like a disaster waiting to
             | happen.
        
             | UweSchmidt wrote:
             | People who are have the skills to investigate home phoning
             | might get a version pushed that doesn't phone home.
             | 
             | /tinfoil
        
               | perlgeek wrote:
               | You don't even have to assume tinfoil hattery to think
               | that a future update might phone home -- just a change in
               | internal politics / leadership can lead to that.
        
         | game-of-throws wrote:
         | I have that weird feeling too. I'll try to put my finger on it
         | in a non-sarcastic way.
         | 
         | 1. This plays into the US's helicopter parenting culture of
         | fear
         | 
         | 2. Most kidnappings are by someone you already know. The
         | "shopping at the mall" example is again, more fear mongering
         | 
         | https://journalistsresource.org/politics-and-government/chil...
         | 
         | > Parents were the perpetrators in more than 90 percent of
         | kidnappings and abductions
         | 
         | 3. The app is to store photos of your kid? Just use your camera
         | gallery. I guarantee it's easier to use than the FBI's clunky
         | app (inferred from their screenshot of a 10-year-old iOS
         | version)
         | 
         | 4. This is life, you can't solve everything with an app. Get
         | your head out of your phone and open your eyes and look for
         | your kid, they're probably one store down at the arcade
        
         | Tao3300 wrote:
         | Felt off to me too. My guess is that it's a makework project
         | they put a batch of summer interns on to keep them out of
         | trouble.
        
           | bradtheappguy wrote:
           | My guess is some subcontractor got to build it and charge an
           | obscene amount of money for it.
        
       | egorfine wrote:
       | Troll level: FBI.
        
       | alsetmusic wrote:
       | There's a television ad that stands out in my memory from when I
       | was a kid (80s). The camera pans across patrons at a diner and
       | the voiceover is about how a kidnapped child was recovered as the
       | camera stops on a young girl (~8yo). The child is described, but
       | the child the camera landed on has different features (hair dyed,
       | cut, whatever). The explanation for how she was identified is
       | that her fingerprints were on file. The message? Get your
       | children fingerprinted!
       | 
       | In adulthood, I've often thought back to that ludicrous ad. No
       | child's fingerprints are getting checked unless some foul play is
       | already suspected. The likelihood that the child would fall into
       | police custody and get checked is already slim; fingerprints
       | aren't going to help until that happens. We don't have campaigns
       | to fingerprint children as a proactive precaution today (of which
       | I'm aware). Clearly, that wasn't a major breakthrough in
       | reuniting kidnapped children with their parents that endured.
       | 
       | I'm very cynical, but I've always thought that was a campaign to
       | gather biometrics from the population using fear as a motivator.
       | I don't necessarily think this is that, but I can't help
       | wondering the perverse incentives of the FBI as I'm reminded of
       | the ad.
        
         | red_phone wrote:
         | I remember that as well. Just assumed that the unstated reason
         | was to assist in identifying deceased kids.
        
         | Tade0 wrote:
         | Fingerprints aren't even particularly useful here.
         | 
         | Our irises are considerably more information-dense, accessible
         | and stable over time as evidenced by the famous identification
         | of Sharbat Gula: https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~jgd1000/afghan.html
         | 
         | A close-up photo should be enough to reliably identify a person
         | years after they went missing.
        
           | SapporoChris wrote:
           | While most people do have stable iris patterns it is not the
           | case for everyone. Numerous conditions can cause changes in
           | the eyes. Glaucoma being the most obvious one, but there are
           | a whole host of other conditions like lisch nodules, Uveal
           | melanoma, etc.
           | 
           | However, perhaps with training, identification could be made
           | in spite of changes to the iris.
        
             | lwswl wrote:
             | Interesting
        
           | shapefrog wrote:
           | > Our irises are considerably more information-dense
           | 
           | Someone should give you free cryptocurrency for a scan of
           | your iris.
        
             | hugodutka wrote:
             | It's already been done:
             | https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/10/21/sam-altmans-worldcoin-
             | wa...
        
               | sblom wrote:
               | (That was the joke.)
        
               | Dylan16807 wrote:
               | Still worth linking because that is quite an obscure
               | reference.
        
               | JadoJodo wrote:
               | I suspect GP was being facetious.
        
               | klyrs wrote:
               | Poe's law strikes again. Any joke about crypto scams has
               | already been implemented for real...
        
               | kelseyfrog wrote:
               | As someone who wants to enter and profit from the
               | burgeoning underground iris transplantation economy,
               | where do I start? I get the sense that there is an
               | arbitrage opportunity between the cost of eye surgery and
               | crypto returns but exactly how do I capitalize on this?
        
             | thrr0wawayy wrote:
             | Everest uses biometrics to tie your information to your
             | wallet. The tech is actually pretty cool in my opinion -
             | they have the Everest ID coin itself, but I am more
             | interested in the identity management part of it.
             | 
             | I'm not sure I'm 100% on board, but the tech is really
             | interesting and their approach to privacy seems much better
             | than I would expect from an offering like that. The aim is
             | to be able to offer Know Your Customer using their identity
             | platform to a mulititude of services.
             | 
             | Everest.org is their site
        
           | Silica6149 wrote:
           | Did not know that! How easily can irises be identified in
           | person, though? Has a handheld scanner been developed yet?
           | 
           | Fingerprints can also be left on objects, which can be
           | helpful for tracking someone.
        
             | Tade0 wrote:
             | > Has a handheld scanner been developed yet?
             | 
             | Yes - I used one as far back as in 2010 on a science fair
             | where we enrolled people to a research database.
             | 
             | A phone camera close-up should be enough in the right
             | conditions, but additionally Samsung's Galaxy line used to
             | include and iris scanner, which was just a near-infrared
             | LED and a camera.
        
             | NullPrefix wrote:
             | Regular photo camera can take photos of irises
        
             | x86_64Ubuntu wrote:
             | Yes, they were using them to catalog folks in Afghanistan
             | 
             | https://www.wired.com/2010/09/afghan-biometric-dragnet-
             | could...
             | 
             | Of course, the Taliban were able to seize this collection
             | of data.
             | 
             | https://theintercept.com/2021/08/17/afghanistan-taliban-
             | mili...
        
           | lwswl wrote:
           | But your irises don't tend to leave traces everywhere, and
           | are thus only valuable for telling who you are, not where
           | you've been.
           | 
           | Although that depends on the number of cameras around, access
           | to them, and how much they are recording. Fingerprints are a
           | lot simpler and easier to access.
        
         | JTbane wrote:
         | Yep, I remember getting fingerprinted at a mall. Thanks to my
         | folks for preemptively snitching.
        
           | AndyMcConachie wrote:
           | Happened to me as well. Now the FBI has my fingerprints on
           | file even though I've never committed a crime.
           | 
           | I had a discussion with my Mom a couple years about this and
           | she admitted she screwed up. I can't blame her of course.
           | Especially since at the time there was plenty of FBI
           | propoganda about missing kids terrifying parents and claiming
           | this was a solution.
        
             | procombo wrote:
             | In the U.S. we used to collect palm/foot prints on every
             | child within a few days of birth. Newborn fingerprints are
             | difficult to collect, as skin is very delicate. Now we
             | require DNA collection at birth.
             | 
             | https://www.aclu.org/other/newborn-dna-banking
             | 
             | With my youngest I found a clever way to "opt-out".
             | Unfortunately at my child's 6 month pediatric appointment
             | at a private clinic, the nurse charged in and demanded a
             | sample to send in on the spot. She said they couldn't
             | proceed with any services unless they sent the card in, as
             | their license would be revoked unless doing so.
             | 
             | https://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/04/baby.dna.government/i
             | n...
             | 
             | In my state you can REQUEST to have the collection card
             | destroyed after 6 weeks, and before 18 years. But they do
             | not guarantee it gets done. Which is just for the
             | collection card. They make sure to "transfer but not sell"
             | the samples to separate entity between that time, which
             | keeps a copy and digitizes it.
        
               | DrFunke wrote:
               | Tell us how you cleverly opted out?
        
               | upsidesinclude wrote:
               | This is bizarre and should not be legal. There is
               | definitely not any public awareness of this practice.
               | Increasingly people are aware of the very real
               | implications of allowing the government and insurance
               | agencies to have your data. Your genes are your data
        
               | capableweb wrote:
               | I remember reading about a country doing DNA collection
               | of every single person born, since the 80s or something
               | like that, leading to that country now sitting on the
               | most extensive DNA database of its kind. I can't remember
               | which country it was though. Searching for "most
               | extensive DNA database" and similar just leads me to
               | various voluntary databases from the US, but I think this
               | database I'm thinking about was involuntary, and every
               | single person in the country is basically registered in
               | it.
        
             | mc32 wrote:
             | I think most states [edit: apparently only some states] in
             | the US require a fingerprint in order to issue a drivers'
             | license or for a state ID. So I guess you could be somewhat
             | anonymous till you had to get your state ID and then they'd
             | know who it was.
        
               | twunde wrote:
               | Well this sent me down a tangent since I had never heard
               | of this. Per
               | https://www.cga.ct.gov/2001/rpt/2001-R-0858.htm (circa
               | 2001) the only states that require a fingerprint are
               | California, Colorado, Georgia, Texas although apparently
               | Alabama and Florida used to do so. Feels pretty crazy to
               | me
        
               | BrianGragg wrote:
               | Oklahoma requires a thumbprint. Electronically.
        
               | toast0 wrote:
               | IIRC, California just takes a thumbprint, so obviously
               | don't use that thumb while committing crimes and you're
               | fine. OTOH, I got the full set of fingerprints (in ink!)
               | and affirmed an oath to uphold the constitutions of the
               | US and California as a condition of working for a school
               | district, so I'm not available for crimes anymore.
        
               | kevin_thibedeau wrote:
               | I've never had a print taken for a license in four
               | states.
        
             | throwaway0a5e wrote:
             | > I can't blame her of course. Especially since at the time
             | there was plenty of FBI propoganda about missing kids
             | terrifying parents and claiming this was a solution.
             | 
             | So long as we keep giving people a pass for falling for
             | this crap they have no incentive not to fall for this crap.
        
               | autoexec wrote:
               | Let's keep the blame on the government which is meant to
               | serve us, not the people who were only doing what they
               | thought was best after having been deceived by that same
               | government.
               | 
               | Holding your mom accountable for a mistake she made when
               | you were a baby isn't helping anyone, holding your
               | government accountable for building a database of our
               | DNA/fingerprints against our wishes helps everyone.
        
               | throwaway0a5e wrote:
               | >Let's keep the blame on the government which is meant to
               | serve us, not the people who were only doing what they
               | thought was best after having been deceived by that same
               | government.
               | 
               | At some point the people enable the government. People
               | need to feel stupid for falling for that crap or they
               | will keep falling for it.
               | 
               | >Holding your mom accountable for a mistake she made when
               | you were a baby isn't helping anyone, holding your
               | government accountable for building a database of our
               | DNA/fingerprints against our wishes helps everyone.
               | 
               | This is not how it works.
               | 
               | If people cannot find the will to hold the people in
               | their lives accountable then they will never find the
               | will to hold the government accountable.
               | 
               | I'm not saying the dude has to pistol whip his mom and
               | set the house on fire over it but it'd be nice if people
               | would resent those kinds of decisions made by their
               | parents and other people in their lives (like the aunt
               | who submits her DNA to one of those ancestry services
               | that shares it) a little more.
        
         | thayne wrote:
         | I'm not sure that's relevant to this. This app just makes it
         | easier to give police or security the information they ask for
         | if you lose your child (note not necessarily kidnapped), like a
         | photo, age, and height. And they claim the info is only stored
         | locally. Maybe that claim is false, but if it was, then once
         | that was discovered it would probably cause a lot of legal and
         | PR problems for the FBI.
        
         | trey-jones wrote:
         | This was a very big thing in the late 80s apparently. Our local
         | Kiwanis Club had provided IDs for parents in the community who
         | wanted them. They just had a photo of the child with some other
         | physical descriptions like eye color and birthmarks. Still,
         | kind of a local, analog version of this, but without the
         | dystopian bent.
         | 
         | I agree, this feels more creepy than useful/helpful service.
        
           | shadowgovt wrote:
           | There was a moral panic about kidnapped children in the '80s
           | that resulted in parents getting their kids fingerprinted.
           | The macabre side of it is that it wasn't for reuniting
           | _living_ kids... Very many children who can talk (i.e. 8
           | years old) would be able to describe their parents to the
           | cops well enough to track them down from phone book data. It
           | was really useful data for identifying John and Jane Doe
           | corpses though.
        
         | libraryatnight wrote:
         | I remember this! I got finger printed at some event where
         | police had a booth next to the fire dept (who were espousing
         | bike helmets and teaching kids how to properly wear one etc,
         | actually useful safety info). It wasn't until I was a teenager
         | when my first car was broken into and the speakers stolen that
         | I realized how useless that endeavor must be. The officer who
         | responded (my first time calling the police, not running from
         | them!) was pretty upfront with me. As he took finger prints
         | from the area where the door was jimmied, I was like "cool,
         | finger printing!" and he told me this wouldn't likely lead to
         | anything. First he said "You'll never get your speakers back,
         | even if we found them we wouldn't call you, they'd probably be
         | in a lot of all kinds of other stolen stuff and it's impossible
         | to sort through and return stolen items." Bummer number one.
         | Then he explained that the finger prints would only be useful
         | if the thief got picked up for doing something else, he wasn't
         | going to go run the prints and try to find the person etc like
         | I was probably imagining (I was, I admit, thinking that's what
         | happened when they took finger prints - thanks TV). Standing in
         | my driveway I flashed back immediately to that finger printing
         | booth where my parents were told it would help if I got
         | kidnapped, and thought "Oh great, I'm in the system." Not that
         | I had a life of crime in mind, but the internet of the early
         | 90s really gave me a healthy distrust of being tracked, logged,
         | etc. (Oh if we only knew the hellscape ahead.)
        
           | dredmorbius wrote:
           | There's a science-fiction short story I've been trying to
           | remember for quite some time.
           | 
           | I'd all but certainly read it in an anthology during the
           | 1970s or early 1980s, probably one of the award compilations
           | (Hugos, Analog, etc.).
           | 
           | A computer programmer and his boss are working on a large
           | data tracking system that is about to be activated, in which
           | everyone's identification and personal information are
           | entered. The boss gives the programmer the choice of opting
           | out of the system. The programmer opts out.
           | 
           | For the life of me I cannot remember the rest of the story,
           | the author, year, etc. But it's stuck with me, and comes to
           | mind often as a slew of ever-more-invasive online information
           | systems (ISP email, some early LinkedIn-type start-ups,
           | MySpace and Facebook, Google Gmail, Google+, etc.) have come
           | on to the scene.
           | 
           | If anyone can remember what story this was, or others
           | reasonably similar to it, I'd be grateful.
        
           | xg15 wrote:
           | > _" You'll never get your speakers back, even if we found
           | them we wouldn't call you, they'd probably be in a lot of all
           | kinds of other stolen stuff and it's impossible to sort
           | through and return stolen items."_
           | 
           | Wait what? So police simply keeps stolen goods with no option
           | for the original owners to get them back? Because civil asset
           | forfeiture isn't enough I guess?
        
           | xen2xen1 wrote:
           | I suspect running fingerprints is much easier now, depending
           | on how long it's been. It's very automated now.
        
         | gonzo41 wrote:
         | I got bonded (Police background checks with fingerprinting etc)
         | for a job which had a large cash handling component. dealing
         | with > 100K in twenties and fifties in a Casino. My prints were
         | kept for elimination after the process, but the police were
         | very eager to inform me that they don't get kept past two
         | years.
         | 
         | The police had petitioned the government under the guise of
         | privacy laws to make sure they had to throw away the records.
         | Which seems counter intuitive until you realize it'd require me
         | to go through the same process again at a later date. More
         | money for them.
         | 
         | I've less fear of my biometrics being tracked than I do of rent
         | seeking behavior from public officials.
        
           | lazyasciiart wrote:
           | It also means they don't have to deal with the problem of
           | having shit tons of fingerprint data. Depending on the laws
           | around who was responsible for it, that could be quite a
           | hassle.
        
           | dredmorbius wrote:
           | For those of us with an inverted threat model, the profit
           | motive here seems an interesting approach.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | Silica6149 wrote:
         | If it was a ad, was a company involved? Sending biometrics to
         | any company should always make someone think twice.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | rbanffy wrote:
         | > No child's fingerprints are getting checked unless some foul
         | play is already suspected.
         | 
         | A simple way around it is to have the kid fingerprinted and
         | only release the information if the kid needs to be
         | tracked/located.
        
           | GavinMcG wrote:
           | I think the comment is pointing out that if your child is
           | kidnapped and raised elsewhere, there will not be a reason to
           | fingerprint them _then_ for comparison unless there 's
           | already a reason to think they may have been kidnapped.
           | 
           | That is, it might help on the back end, but the comment is
           | suggesting that mass fingerprinting is not likely to move the
           | needle much.
        
             | rbanffy wrote:
             | A small chance is better than no chance. I was answering to
             | the privacy concern, not the effectiveness of the method.
             | It seems like a plausible business model to professionally
             | collect hold biometric data encrypted with the owner's
             | keys, opaque to the party storing the data.
             | 
             | It's a bit like the businesses that store umbilical cord
             | stem cells for the very unlikely chance they'll be useful
             | at some point in the future.
        
               | GavinMcG wrote:
               | Got it. I had thought you were responding to the part you
               | quoted.
        
               | rbanffy wrote:
               | That's a very good point. Sorry for the confusion.
        
           | vanattab wrote:
           | I think thier point was even if you registered your kids
           | fingerprints with the police they are not going to go around
           | to every kid in all the dinners checking fingerprints to
           | compare to.
        
             | rbanffy wrote:
             | My point was to only release the information to the police
             | if and when the kid needs to be located.
        
               | bobkazamakis wrote:
               | release what valuable information here? What information
               | is being "released" that is going to be helpful in a way
               | that if it wasn't for the FBI App, you would be
               | regretting it?
        
               | rbanffy wrote:
               | My suggestion was to have the information with you, and
               | release it to the police if and when privacy concerns are
               | not as relevant in comparison.
        
         | 300bps wrote:
         | My parents were paranoid about kidnappings. It was like perfect
         | social engineering on my parents' generation with TV movies
         | like Adam - the story of John Walsh's son who was kidnapped and
         | beheaded:
         | 
         | https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0085136/
         | 
         | My parents had me and my siblings watch that movie with them -
         | it is still unsettling to me thinking about it.
         | 
         | And then the FBI contacted my school and provided a voluntary
         | program for parents to have their children fingerprinted. From
         | my memory 95%+ of kids all lined up in my school and got
         | fingerprinted to "protect them from kidnapping".
         | 
         | It honestly seems surreal - looking back it sure seems like a
         | black ops campaign to get biometric data on a large portion of
         | the U.S. youth population.
        
           | azinman2 wrote:
           | Or, they actually were thought to be useful for kidnappings
           | and this was an honest attempt. Perhaps largely security
           | theatre, I could imagine there have been a handful of cases
           | where this was enough.
           | 
           | The ever growing mistrust in government and society will
           | become a self fulfilling promise. I worry about our future
           | when no good and honest talent wants to work for the greater
           | good at reduced pay.
        
             | samatman wrote:
             | There is abundant evidence suggesting that arrow of
             | causality between FBI activity and public perception of
             | them as dastardly flows in the opposite direction from the
             | one you have presumed here.
        
         | Markoff wrote:
         | no need for any campaign anymore, most kids in EU have
         | biometric passports, though not sure at what age they start
         | fingerprinting them, which they don't do because their hands
         | are growing too much so fingerprints world be quite useless
         | under certain age
         | 
         | though some countries like Germany issue some simplified
         | passports for kids, Czechia and Slovakia for instance issue
         | same as adult passports, only difference being validity
        
       | yellowapple wrote:
       | > An important note: The FBI is not collecting or storing any
       | photos or information that you enter in the app. All data resides
       | solely on your mobile device unless you need to send it to
       | authorities.
       | 
       | I'd believe that about as far as I can throw it.
        
       | f38zf5vdt wrote:
       | FBI seems to be making the best out of their recent partnership
       | with Clearview AI.
       | 
       | https://iapp.org/news/a/fbi-agrees-to-licensing-contract-wit...
        
       | beeskneecaps wrote:
       | Or just take photos of your child in advance and call 911 if they
       | go missing.
        
       | LinuxBender wrote:
       | I am not a fan of this idea. My preference would be that parents
       | could use an open source application and store-bought kit to
       | gather/store datapoints on their children _fingerprint kit, iris
       | scan, DNA gathering_ and if /when something bad happens the
       | parents can share the data with the appropriate law enforcement
       | agencies that are actually involved in the case. There would also
       | need to be data retention/destruction laws on the books that
       | mandates when the copy of the data must be destroyed by law
       | enforcement and serious consequences for a law enforcement agency
       | should they side step the data retention requirements.
       | 
       | Anything short of this feels like a catch-all extension of ID.me
       | and hospitals now gathering DNA from babies without the parents
       | knowledge or consent. Children can not consent to their data
       | being captured in this manor. This should be a role of parents
       | and they should be securely storing this data in my very less
       | than humble opinion. One copy on-site and one copy in a bank
       | safety deposit box and/or one copy stored off-site with a
       | relative, ideally someone legally designated as an emergency
       | legal guardian.
        
       | giantg2 wrote:
       | You can't remember this info or write it down? The normal photos
       | on your phone can't be sent to authorities?
       | 
       | Seems like an app to fix a nonexistent problem.
        
         | Covzire wrote:
         | Cynically, it seems like a way to normalize an orwellian social
         | credit system in the west where eventually everyone will have
         | something similar on their phones, like China is doing.
         | 
         | "You already keep an app with photos, this just adds a
         | barcode... "
        
       | howmayiannoyyou wrote:
       | Low grade corruption ...and here's why:
       | 
       | The FBI is understaffed, misdirected & underfunded for its real
       | mission, which I would argue must be fighting public corruption,
       | organized crime and counter-espionage. Any objective analysis
       | would conclude the Bureau has been politicized and its resources
       | have been directed at operations, investigations and training
       | that does not fulfill its core mission.
       | 
       | The bad PR and mistrust the FBI has earned in recent years is the
       | public product of what I'm describing, and the solution is not
       | mobile apps of marginal utility made to make the Bureau look
       | good. No, the solution is arrests of corrupt politicians, crime
       | bosses & spies.
       | 
       | Its not just the FBI suffering from feel/look good boondoggles.
       | The Air Force struggles with hypersonics but excels at new
       | uniform design. The DOT is a leader in equity & diversity, but
       | has failed to upgrade & regulate rail infrastructure & procedures
       | that make derailments a regular occurrence.
       | 
       | Tax revenues have been their highest in decades, possibly longer.
       | We deserve better.
        
         | MarkMarine wrote:
         | The FBI and other 3 letter agencies have been vacuuming up
         | every communication between us, warrantless, for so many years
         | it's crazy. That unconstitutional overreach has been used to do
         | what exactly? No I really want to know. It's not keeping us
         | safe, because someone who is basically a cartoon caricature of
         | a school shooter can scare everyone they come in contact with,
         | get a long gun and ammo, and execute a mass shooting, but
         | somehow the panopticon keeps missing it.
         | 
         | If we're not giving up our rights for safety, what are we
         | giving them up for? Cause we have neither.
        
           | davidro80 wrote:
        
           | pwython wrote:
           | > "That unconstitutional overreach has been used to do what
           | exactly? No I really want to know. It's not keeping us
           | safe..."
           | 
           | Unpopular opinion, but you know the old saying: No one hears
           | about the times the FBI, CIA, etc has stopped a terrorist
           | act, you only hear about the disasters that eventually played
           | out.
           | 
           | For every one sick person that went on to do something crazy,
           | hundreds have been caught before anything happened.
           | 
           | I don't understand the upset for "warrantless wire-tapping"
           | unless you have something to hide, especially when these days
           | people are begging the government to protect us from
           | extremists/terrorists and not sit on their hands.
        
             | artificialLimbs wrote:
             | "hundreds have been caught"
             | 
             | [citation needed]
             | 
             | You are going to get flagged to death. Rightfully so.
        
             | throwaway0a5e wrote:
             | >For every one sick person that went on to do something
             | crazy, hundreds have been caught before anything happened.
             | 
             | If their dragnets had even a shred of utility for that
             | purpose they'd be telling you about it at every
             | opportunity.
        
               | [deleted]
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | MarkMarine wrote:
        
             | samatman wrote:
             | For this to be true, the FBI would have to: capture 'sick
             | persons' without charging them with a crime or sending out
             | a press release.
             | 
             | I'm curious. What are the other differences in the parallel
             | universe you come from? Does boot leather taste like
             | strawberry shortcake?
        
             | Taek wrote:
             | Unpopular opinon because its not backed by data. We can use
             | terrist events in countries that don't live under a
             | panopticon as a control group.
             | 
             | Mass surveillance is not improving general safety.
        
             | nobody9999 wrote:
             | >I don't understand the upset for "warrantless wire-
             | tapping" unless you have something to hide, especially when
             | these days people are begging the government to protect us
             | from extremists/terrorists and not sit on their hands.
             | 
             | Okay. Let's assume for the moment that _you_ "have nothing
             | to hide."
             | 
             | Let's go to your house and set up cameras and microphones
             | covering the premises.
             | 
             | Then, let's do the same for your automobile(s).
             | 
             | And for good measure, let's have you wear a microphone 24/7
             | too.
             | 
             | Once that's done, we can set up a website where we can all
             | watch/listen to you.
             | 
             | If you have nothing to hide, that should be no big deal,
             | right?
             | 
             | What's that? You don't consent to such monitoring? Why? Do
             | you have something to hide?
        
             | LordDragonfang wrote:
             | > No one hears about the times the FBI, CIA, etc has
             | stopped a terrorist act
             | 
             | We _should_ be hearing about them, if they actually exist,
             | especially with how rabid the media is in reporting any
             | potential terrorism stories[1]. A policy of not just
             | quietly  "disappearing" people is supposedly what sets us
             | apart from those authoritarian countries that the US likes
             | to paint as boogeymen. If what you're saying was true, it'd
             | be a horrifying breach of ethics and the literal
             | constitutional right to due process.
             | 
             | [1] https://ourworldindata.org/does-the-news-reflect-what-
             | we-die...
        
             | int_19h wrote:
             | They're welcome to tell us all about all those terrorist
             | acts that they have supposedly prevented.
             | 
             | And if you don't understand the upset for having some
             | stranger rife through your private data, may I have a full
             | dump of your email inbox?
        
         | tyleo wrote:
         | I think you are reading a lot into the development of an app.
         | For anything the government does it seems like folks are ready
         | to pop out and say, "the resources would be better spent on X."
         | Maybe true but I'd argue doing slightly wrong things is better
         | than listening to the orchestra of naysayers and doing nothing.
        
           | A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
           | I know it goes against majority of what people think on the
           | subject, but sometimes doing nothing is the absolute best
           | thing to do. Doing something badly at best can keep things as
           | is; not to mention the worst case scenarios.
        
           | Silica6149 wrote:
           | Why does the FBI have to develop an app, though? Shouldn't
           | they focus on what they're good at and able to do, like
           | investigating crimes?
        
         | xnyan wrote:
         | >new uniform design
         | 
         | From unflattering dress blues to incredibly uncomfortably and
         | noisy (yes, noisy as in creates loud sounds) workout clothes,
         | Air Force uniform design is terrible in my experience and
         | subjectively seems to be the worst of all the services (I was
         | always envious of Navy PT gear, looked a lot better than ours).
        
         | maxwell wrote:
         | > its real mission
         | 
         | The FBI's primary objective in practice seems to have always
         | been "maintaining the existing social and political order" [1],
         | with some swaying justification of national security and
         | preventing violence, corruption, espionage, terrorism, cyber
         | attacks, and other vague, broad, non-specific, topical threats.
         | 
         | 1.
         | https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/9475...
         | 
         | > mistrust the FBI has earned in recent years
         | 
         | Do you consider COINTELPRO-BLACK HATE recent?
         | 
         | https://archive.org/details/FBI-COINTELPRO-BLACK/100-HQ-4480...
        
         | ejb999 wrote:
         | couldn't agree more - the things the FBI choses to spend time
         | and money on are mind boggling; most egregious that comes to
         | mind was all the wasted time and resources tracking down and
         | recovering Tom Brady's jersey in Mexico - I don't care how much
         | it was worth, Tom Brady or the Patriots each have hundreds of
         | millions of dollars available to them if they wanted to track
         | it down with their own money.
        
           | Cyph0n wrote:
           | Wow, that is the kind of story you'd expect to see on SNL.
        
         | giantg2 wrote:
         | What you're describing isn't necessarily corruption. It sounds
         | more like incompetence paired with worrying more about
         | appearances than actual results.
        
         | AndyMcConachie wrote:
         | I've read letters from NKVD agents located in the USA in the
         | 1930s talking about how this new guy J Edgar Hoover is using
         | political blackmail so effectively. They were reporting back to
         | the USSR telling their superiors how political blackmail was
         | something that the new USSR needed to perfect and use to its
         | advantage.
         | 
         | I think we can have a long discussion about what the real
         | purpose of the FBI is. And I bet even within the FBI they can
         | have this long discussion. It is many purposed, some of which
         | we may determine to be pro-social, or pro-democratic. While
         | others are probably more anti-social and anti-democratic.
        
         | Dracophoenix wrote:
         | The FBI has seized assets through civil forfeiture for decades.
         | 
         | https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-06-09/fbi-beve...
         | 
         | That's not "low grade" corruption. It's the plainest form of
         | corruption conducted en masse and in a highly organized
         | fashion. When an arm of the government can take your property
         | without due process, any suspicion towards them is warranted.
         | 
         | With regards to this new app, I wouldn't be surprised if this
         | becomes a way to tap into every phone in the country.
        
           | beeboop wrote:
           | The simplest explanation for this really crappy, worthless
           | app is that someone with budget wanted to give some
           | overpriced FBI contract to a friend. I'm sure the FBI paid
           | millions for this app when some college kid could do the same
           | thing in a week.
        
           | bun_at_work wrote:
           | Surely the FBI doesn't need this app that only appeals to
           | people with children to tap every phone in the country.
        
             | lcnPylGDnU4H9OF wrote:
             | Case and point: I get Amber alerts on my phone.
        
         | thrown_22 wrote:
         | The first FBI director had Washington by the balls for forty
         | years. Nixon didn't fire him because he expected him to
         | retaliate with blackmail, neither did Truman or Kennedy.
         | 
         | The FBI is working as intended.
        
           | arminiusreturns wrote:
           | When one learns about who controlled him and how they are on
           | the road to real understanding of the FBI in history. (Hint:
           | Trumps former mentor was involved!) Unfortunately, in my
           | analysis of the various 3-letters, they are so
           | compartmentalized that the top-down corruption is not seen by
           | the generally good intentioned middle and lower men. So the
           | bureaucratic momentum keeps the agencies preserved when in
           | reality they are often the most egregious violators of the
           | constitution and need to be reigned in.
           | 
           | https://www.mintpressnews.com/shocking-origins-jeffrey-
           | epste...
           | 
           | "The connections Roy Cohn built during the 1950s made him a
           | well-known public figure and translated into great political
           | influence that peaked during the presidency of Ronald Reagan.
           | Yet, as Cohn built his public image, he was also developing a
           | dark private life, which would come to be dominated by the
           | same blackmail pedophile racket that appears to have first
           | begun with Lewis Rosenstiel.
           | 
           | One of the "blackmail parties" Susan Kaufman attended with
           | her then-husband Lewis Rosenstiel was hosted by Cohn in 1958
           | at Manhattan's Plaza Hotel, suite 233. Kaufman described
           | Cohn's suite as a "beautiful suite...all done in light blue."
           | She described being introduced to Hoover, who was in drag, by
           | Cohn, who told her that Hoover's name was "Mary" in a fit of
           | barely concealed laughter. Kaufman testified that young boys
           | were present and Kaufman claimed that Cohn, Hoover and her
           | ex-husband engaged in sexual activity with these minors.
           | 
           | New York attorney John Klotz, tasked with investigating Cohn
           | for a case well after Kaufman's testimony, also found
           | evidence of the "blue suite" at the Plaza Hotel and its role
           | in a sex extortion ring after combing through local
           | government documents and information gathered by private
           | detectives. Klotz later told journalist and author Burton
           | Hersh what he had learned:                   Roy Cohn was
           | providing protection. There were a bunch of pedophiles
           | involved. That's where Cohn got his power from -- blackmail."
           | 
           | Perhaps the most damning confirmation of Cohn's activities in
           | Suite 233 comes from statements made by Cohn himself to
           | former NYPD detective and ex-head of the department's Human-
           | Trafficking and Vice-Related Crimes Division, James
           | Rothstein. Rothstein later told John DeCamp -- a former
           | Nebraska state senator who investigated a government-
           | connected child sex ring based in Omaha -- among other
           | investigators, that Cohn had admitted to being part of a
           | sexual blackmail operation targeting politicians with child
           | prostitutes during a sit-down interview with the former
           | detective.
           | 
           | Rothstein told DeCamp the following about Cohn:
           | Cohn's job was to run the little boys. Say you had an
           | admiral, a general, a congressman, who did not want to go
           | along with the program. Cohn's job was to set them up, then
           | they would go along. Cohn told me that himself."
           | 
           | Rothstein later told Paul David Collins, a former journalist
           | turned researcher, that Cohn had also identified this sexual
           | blackmail operation as being part of the anti-communist
           | crusade of the time.
           | 
           | The fact that Cohn, per Rothstein's recollection, stated that
           | the child sex blackmail ring was part of the government-
           | sponsored anti-communist crusade suggests that elements of
           | the government, including Hoover's FBI, may have been
           | connected at a much broader level than Hoover's own personal
           | involvement, as the FBI closely coordinated with McCarthy and
           | Cohn for much of the red scare."
        
             | thrown_22 wrote:
             | Ironically this could well be a brilliant counter
             | intelligence post pretending to be as stupid as it sounds.
             | 
             | What better way to make sure the FBI keeps removing
             | people's freedom than by making it a partisan issue?
             | 
             | Trump, born in 1943, was responsible for Hoovers cache of
             | compromat. A word that entered the Russian lexicon because
             | the KGB was so impressed by what he was doing in Washington
             | in the 1930s.
        
               | int_19h wrote:
               | Is there any evidence that the word has entered the
               | Russian lexicon from English? The Russian "kompromat"
               | feels like a straightforward contraction of
               | "komprometiruiushchie materialy", following the same
               | pattern as many other Soviet neologisms like "narkom" or
               | "kombed".
        
               | thrown_22 wrote:
               | https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/what-does-
               | komp...
               | 
               | >Kompromat refers to materials collected specifically for
               | the purpose of blackmailing the target. It's a Russian
               | portmanteau of komprometiruyushchiy, "compromising," and
               | material, "material," and if those Russian words look
               | familiar, it's because they are; they were borrowed into
               | Russian from English.
               | 
               | The sheer stupidity of two nations borrowing a word from
               | the other to sound smarter and more worldly ought to blow
               | your mind. But it happens so often that anyone who is
               | polylingual just has to deal with it.
               | 
               | The worst example is Latinx. Americans who wanted to
               | cosmopolitan in the 90s decided that Latin wasn't good
               | enough since everyone knew what Latin meant. So they
               | started saying Latino instead. With the 10s craze of
               | gender neutrality Latino was now problematic so it was
               | changed to Latinx only in the way someone who has never
               | passed high school Spanish could. Now instead of the
               | English word Latin we have the abomination Latinx being
               | forced on Spanish speakers by English speakers in the
               | name of progress.
        
               | int_19h wrote:
               | Merriam-Webster is certainly not a reliable source when
               | it comes to etymology of non-English words.
               | 
               | I'm Russian myself, and I find it extremely dubious that
               | either of the constituent parts of the word was borrowed
               | into Russian from English. Russian Wiktionary gives 1720
               | for the first known use of "material" (material), and
               | illustrates "komprometiruiushchii" (compromising) with a
               | Dostoyevsky quote from 1846. Both predate the time when
               | English was the primary source of borrowings, so they're
               | far more likely to have been borrowed from French or
               | German.
               | 
               | This M-W article is wrong about other things, too - e.g.
               | "propaganda" (propaganda) is from German.
        
               | arminiusreturns wrote:
               | Merely mentioning Trump doesnt make the post partisan at
               | all. On the contrary, I think its obvious compromise
               | operations target everyone, in both parties (and
               | business, etc) So Im not sure what you are getting at.
               | Seems like you are strawmanning (things I didnt say)
               | unless Im misunderstanding your point.
        
       | Managor wrote:
       | The words FBI and Child so close together make me a bit
       | squeamish.
        
       | nly wrote:
       | What's the point in this app? Surely most mothers/fathers have
       | pictures of their kids on their phone these days anyway
        
         | stonemetal12 wrote:
         | After the July 4 mass shooting a 2 year old was found wondering
         | the scene unattended. He was safely returned to relatives. Sure
         | I have pictures of my kids but am I alive to display them?
         | 
         | https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62047223
        
           | pavel_lishin wrote:
           | > _Sure I have pictures of my kids but am I alive to display
           | them?_
           | 
           | So how does this app help?
        
           | giancarlostoro wrote:
           | A lot of people have social media, or send photos to their
           | family. My wife and myself send photos of our baby to close
           | relatives across the country all the time. I know every
           | situation is different though. It's an unmaintained app is
           | another issue.
        
           | ceejayoz wrote:
           | Doesn't that demonstrate the app _isn 't_ needed?
        
             | ct0 wrote:
             | Security theater
        
           | bad416f1f5a2 wrote:
           | Who is going to unlock your phone to open the app when you
           | are dead?
        
             | kuramitropolis wrote:
             | Face ID
        
               | fortuna86 wrote:
               | Grim.
        
               | ceejayoz wrote:
               | From some of the photos of the scene, that's... not gonna
               | work on some of the victims.
        
         | vorpalhex wrote:
         | The same reason the government produces actually half decent
         | financial literacy courses aimed from kids to adults. The same
         | reason the CDC has instructions on how to brush your teeth. The
         | same reason why the FDA will literally give you cooking tips
         | for peas.
         | 
         | There is some class of people out there who don't understand or
         | aren't capable and the government is acting as a gap filler.
        
       | ren_engineer wrote:
       | when's the FBI going to start charging Epstein's clients? I'll
       | use their app when they start arresting those people instead of
       | hiding their identities
        
       | pettycashstash2 wrote:
       | While i understand the skepticism, at least they are trying to
       | streamline a process. a quick search reveals the startling
       | statistic:
       | 
       | Every 40 seconds, a child goes missing or is abducted in the
       | United States. Approximately 840,000 children are reported
       | missing each year. having access to rapid id/photo. Minutes are
       | precious. I'm no expert but + for fbi, minus for the cynics. Just
       | my 2 cents
        
         | johnbellone wrote:
         | I do not think that access to digital photos and measurements
         | has been a limiting factor in finding abductees. In fact, with
         | the ubiquity of cameras on nearly every device nowadays along
         | with social media we routinely see amateurs dig up information
         | faster than authorities are able to put it out officially.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | ceejayoz wrote:
         | That stat isn't as startling as it seems when you dig in; most
         | of those are custody disputes.
         | 
         | https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/most-kidnapped-childr...
         | 
         | > But contrary to the dominant narrative, nearly all child
         | abductions are perpetrated by family members. Stranger
         | abductions -- certainly alarming and tragic -- actually occur
         | with "lightning-strike rarity," as a report in the journal
         | Criminal Justice Studies put it, in contrast to the more than
         | 200,000 parental abductions committed each year that meet the
         | criminal criteria and are not merely delayed visitations or
         | misunderstandings.
         | 
         | And the 840k number massively overstates actual active cases;
         | reports can be solved in a matter of minutes/hours, like a lost
         | kid at an amusement park.
         | 
         | https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-us-missing/fact-ch...
         | 
         | > Therefore, of the 365,348 missing children (between the age
         | of 0 and 17) reports recorded in 2020, only 30,396 - or about
         | 8% - were still active cases at the end of the year.
         | 
         | (Good luck explaining that to a QAnoner, though.)
        
           | usrn wrote:
        
             | ceejayoz wrote:
             | I don't think "prevent divorced couples from hating each
             | other afterwards" is all that high on the QAnon priority
             | list.
        
               | Akronymus wrote:
               | I find it sad that nowadays it seems that divorce is
               | pushed for, rather than trying to reconcile/rebuild a
               | healthy relationship.
               | 
               | A LOT of problems are caused by a lack of at least one
               | parent/parental role.
        
               | usrn wrote:
               | 1) How many QAnon followers do you know? I know quite a
               | few IRL.
               | 
               | 2) Preventing divorce in the first place certainly is.
        
               | ceejayoz wrote:
               | > Preventing divorce in the first place certainly is.
               | 
               | Via which specific policies?
               | 
               | Simply bemoaning "urban" people's "broken families"
               | doesn't count, and they might start with their favorite
               | President's marriages.
        
           | TrueGeek wrote:
           | That stat is shared among parents so much. "840,000 missing a
           | year" in a nation of 73 million children is interpreted as
           | meaning in any given year you have a 1 in 87 chance of never
           | seeing your child again at any given time.
           | 
           | My brother won't return his shopping cart to the shopping
           | cart return area because, in those 30 seconds where his back
           | is turned, someone is likely to take his children. One parent
           | told me they take it one step further and they won't use
           | passenger door to put their children in the car. Instead,
           | they reach through the car from the driver's door. This way
           | they don't have to walk around the car which would allow
           | someone to take their child.
           | 
           | I've suggested just locking the children in the car but it
           | seems like solving the wrong problem, really.
        
             | rlt wrote:
             | > One parent told me they take it one step further and they
             | won't use passenger door to put their children in the car.
             | Instead, they reach through the car from the driver's door.
             | This way they don't have to walk around the car which would
             | allow someone to take their child.
             | 
             | This is borderline mental illness.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | ComputerCat wrote:
       | Interesting idea. Not sure how well it will be adopted by the
       | public though...
        
       | photochemsyn wrote:
       | Clearly the optimal solution is RFID subdermal microchipping for
       | all children, isn't it? Technology exists for boosted RFID
       | (basically a tiny battery and solar PV linked to the RFID tag)
       | which should work under the skin fairly well. Then install
       | scanners at all public venues and schools, and link to the NSA
       | database out in Utah, so that everyone can be safely location-
       | tracked at all times. Removing the chip would of course be a
       | felony.
       | 
       | Why stop there? Facial recognition, retina scan, DNA marker
       | databases... a personalized AI minder for each troublesome human
       | being (oh, that's your Alphabet/Meta tracker & recommendation
       | algorithm, isn't it)?
       | 
       | This of course is all for the safety of the children and the FBI
       | would never dream of using it to spy on citizens for political
       | reasons, or implement a Chinese style social-credit system, or to
       | ensure you're watching your daily dose of Orwellian positivity
       | content.
        
         | azinman2 wrote:
         | This kind of attitude takes all the oxygen out of the room and
         | makes it impossible to actually do good.
        
         | buscoquadnary wrote:
         | Exactly finally someone gets it, and for all you people who are
         | opposed you're probably just a drug dealer or a terrorist,
         | after all only drug dealers and terrorists have something to
         | hide, every good citizen should want something like that.
         | 
         | I mean what's more important you're imaginary freedom, or being
         | able to bring porch pirates to justice?
        
       | whoomp12342 wrote:
       | is this a joke?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-07-06 23:02 UTC)